21/05/2026
๐ฅ๐๐น๐ถ๐ป๐ด ๐ผ๐ป ๐๐๐ฅ๐ก๐๐ง ๐ถ๐ ๐ป๐ผ๐ ๐ฏ๐น๐ฎ๐ป๐ธ๐ฒ๐ ๐ถ๐บ๐บ๐๐ป๐ถ๐๐ ๐ณ๐ผ๐ฟ ๐ฒ๐ป๐ฎ๐ฏ๐น๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐ฎ๐ฟ๐บ๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐น๐ฒ๐ป๐ฐ๐ฒ
The National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict respects the recent ruling of the Regional Trial Court in Cebu City which dismissed the terrorism financing case filed against the Community Empowerment Resource Network (CERNET), its officers, staff, and council members. Our courts remain independent institutions of our democracy. Whether favorable or unfavorable to government cases, their decisions must always be respected within the framework of the rule of law. That is how our institutions are supposed to function.
At the same time, the public deserves clarity on what this dismissal actually means. Based on available information regarding the ruling, the case was dismissed because of legal and procedural questions involving the applicability of certain provisions of the anti-terror financing law of 2012.
It must be made clear that the ruling did not settle the larger historical question of whether support networks for the CPP-NPA-NDF existed. It also did not invalidate the Stateโs responsibility to investigate allegations related to terrorism financing when warranted by evidence.
For decades, the country confronted an armed communist insurgency that did not survive on armed encounters or underground networks alone. It also relied on aboveground recruitment structures, logistical support, resource generation both here and abroad, and mainstream political machinery. Even former cadres, organizers, and rebels who have returned to mainstream society openly testified to these realities over the years. These accounts came from people who once operated inside the movement itself, and they are not mere inventions of the government or the security sector.
We must see through the current noise being peddled by those who celebrate the dismissal so that discussions will remain balanced and honest. The taskforce holds these fundamental truths regarding the nationโs continued fight against the communist insurgency: that activism is not terrorism, that humanitarian work is not a crime, and that criticism of government policies is part of democratic life and should remain protected.
But here lies the rub: it is equally irresponsible to insist that all investigations involving insurgency financing are automatically harassment or political persecution. A democratic state cannot simply ignore allegations because the personalities involved belong to NGOs, advocacy groups, or legal organizations.The CPP itself has consistently claimed it utilizes the democratic spaces of non-government work, advocacy, and legal fronts to further its aim to topple the Philippine state.
In the face of this recent dismissal, the danger now is the CPP-NPA-NDFโs attempt to turn this temporary setback into an absolutist political narrative. Some groups are already portraying the ruling as proof that every counterterrorism financing case filed by the government is fabricated, malicious, or illegitimate from the beginning.
That conclusion is both devoid of legal merit and common sense. Cases are dismissed for many reasons, including procedural defects, jurisdictional questions, weak evidence, or evolving legal interpretations. That is part of due process of justice.
And the interest of justice, the experiences of communities that suffered through decades of conflict, the millions of farmers subjected to revolutionary taxation, indigenous peoples exploited in the name of self-determination, civilians and barangay officials threatened or assassinated, former rebels who endured internal purges, and young Filipinos recruited into violence must also be highlighted. Their stories should not disappear simply because public discourse has become polarized between โsecurityโ and โrightsโ camps.
The government remains confident that as more communities continue to reject the CPP-NPA-NDF, including its hardline legal and political mouthpieces, and as its armed capability steadily deteriorates from repeated battlefield defeats, internal disillusionment, desertions, and the continuing surrender of its cadres and leaders, the law will eventually catch up with those who enabled, sustained, or justified decades of armed violence under the guise of revolutionary struggle.
The NTF-ELCAC also reiterates that abuses, fabricated evidence, and violations of human rights have no place in a democratic society and must always be investigated properly.
Accountability applies to everyone. That includes state actors, armed groups, and organizations that operate within legal democratic spaces.
Ultimately, the Filipino people deserve both democratic freedoms and protection from armed violence. These are not opposing principles. They must exist together if we are serious about building a peace that is lawful, just, and lasting.
Usec. Ernesto C Torres Jr.
Executive Director
NTF-ELCAC
๐ฅ๐๐น๐ถ๐ป๐ด ๐ผ๐ป ๐๐๐ฅ๐ก๐๐ง ๐ถ๐ ๐ป๐ผ๐ ๐ฏ๐น๐ฎ๐ป๐ธ๐ฒ๐ ๐ถ๐บ๐บ๐๐ป๐ถ๐๐ ๐ณ๐ผ๐ฟ ๐ฒ๐ป๐ฎ๐ฏ๐น๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐ฎ๐ฟ๐บ๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐น๐ฒ๐ป๐ฐ๐ฒ
The National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict respects the recent ruling of the Regional Trial Court in Cebu City which dismissed the terrorism financing case filed against the Community Empowerment Resource Network (CERNET), its officers, staff, and council members. Our courts remain independent institutions of our democracy. Whether favorable or unfavorable to government cases, their decisions must always be respected within the framework of the rule of law. That is how our institutions are supposed to function.
At the same time, the public deserves clarity on what this dismissal actually means. Based on available information regarding the ruling, the case was dismissed because of legal and procedural questions involving the applicability of certain provisions of the anti-terror financing law of 2012.
It must be made clear that the ruling did not settle the larger historical question of whether support networks for the CPP-NPA-NDF existed. It also did not invalidate the Stateโs responsibility to investigate allegations related to terrorism financing when warranted by evidence.
For decades, the country confronted an armed communist insurgency that did not survive on armed encounters or underground networks alone. It also relied on aboveground recruitment structures, logistical support, resource generation both here and abroad, and mainstream political machinery. Even former cadres, organizers, and rebels who have returned to mainstream society openly testified to these realities over the years. These accounts came from people who once operated inside the movement itself, and they are not mere inventions of the government or the security sector.
We must see through the current noise being peddled by those who celebrate the dismissal so that discussions will remain balanced and honest. The taskforce holds these fundamental truths regarding the nationโs continued fight against the communist insurgency: that activism is not terrorism, that humanitarian work is not a crime, and that criticism of government policies is part of democratic life and should remain protected.
But here lies the rub: it is equally irresponsible to insist that all investigations involving insurgency financing are automatically harassment or political persecution. A democratic state cannot simply ignore allegations because the personalities involved belong to NGOs, advocacy groups, or legal organizations.The CPP itself has consistently claimed it utilizes the democratic spaces of non-government work, advocacy, and legal fronts to further its aim to topple the Philippine state.
In the face of this recent dismissal, the danger now is the CPP-NPA-NDFโs attempt to turn this temporary setback into an absolutist political narrative. Some groups are already portraying the ruling as proof that every counterterrorism financing case filed by the government is fabricated, malicious, or illegitimate from the beginning.
That conclusion is both devoid of legal merit and common sense. Cases are dismissed for many reasons, including procedural defects, jurisdictional questions, weak evidence, or evolving legal interpretations. That is part of due process of justice.
And the interest of justice, the experiences of communities that suffered through decades of conflict, the millions of farmers subjected to revolutionary taxation, indigenous peoples exploited in the name of self-determination, civilians and barangay officials threatened or assassinated, former rebels who endured internal purges, and young Filipinos recruited into violence must also be highlighted. Their stories should not disappear simply because public discourse has become polarized between โsecurityโ and โrightsโ camps.
The government remains confident that as more communities continue to reject the CPP-NPA-NDF, including its hardline legal and political mouthpieces, and as its armed capability steadily deteriorates from repeated battlefield defeats, internal disillusionment, desertions, and the continuing surrender of its cadres and leaders, the law will eventually catch up with those who enabled, sustained, or justified decades of armed violence under the guise of revolutionary struggle.
The NTF-ELCAC also reiterates that abuses, fabricated evidence, and violations of human rights have no place in a democratic society and must always be investigated properly.
Accountability applies to everyone. That includes state actors, armed groups, and organizations that operate within legal democratic spaces.
Ultimately, the Filipino people deserve both democratic freedoms and protection from armed violence. These are not opposing principles. They must exist together if we are serious about building a peace that is lawful, just, and lasting.
Usec. Ernesto C Torres Jr.
Executive Director
NTF-ELCAC
