Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 10:02:45 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SISON Asylum (fwd)



---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 14:00:51 BST
From: John Hutnyk <MSRDSJH-AT-fs1.ec.man.ac.uk>
Subject: SISON Asylum

Hi

I am reposting various documents relating to the campaign of the
Jose Maria Sison, of the National Democratic Front of the
Philippines, to avoid deportation from the Netherlands. All the usual
issues here - red baiting, Governments bowing to pressure from TNCs
(Shell and Unilever), deceit, double-dealing, favours - Sison is in
danger as under Ramos the campaign of terror by the Philippines
Government against the revolutionary forces of the Filipino peoples
has been worse than under Marcos.

John
Manchester


>From ASA - Asian Students Association - Hong Komg.
__________________________________________

International Campaign for the Sison Family
31 July 1996

We are inviting you and your friends to join our protest against the
decision of the Dutch Ministry of Justice of June 4, 1996, ordering the
expulsion of asylum-seeker Professor Jose Maria Sison and his family. The
Sison have been ordered to leave the Netherlands within four (4) weeks from
July 18, ending on August 15, 1996, when the expulsion is to be carried out.
In the spirit of solidarity, we are requesting you to participate in our
INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN FOR THE SISON FAMILY by:

1.     Signing and mailing the enclosed "Appeal for the Grant of Asylum to
Prof. Sison and Family". Please
reproduce the appeal and collect more signatures.

2.     Organizing a picket in front of the Dutch embassy or consulate in
your country, preferably on August 13 or 14. Your picket will be part of an
internationally coordinated DAY OF PROTEST, which we expect to have
significant impact on the Dutch government.

3.     Fund raising for the solidarity fund for the Sison Asylum Campaign.
Your donation will help sustain our asylum campaign. Please remit your
donations to:

     Stichting Piglas-Bayan
     t.a.v. Sison Solidarity Fund
     Giro 672.77.88, Amersfoort, The Netherlands

4.     Organizing a "Committee for the Sison Asylum Campaign". Through this
committee we can draw in more organizations, movements, institutions,
parties and individuals to participate in our campaign in a planned and
sustained way.

5.     Writing articles for newspapers in your country about our campaign.
Prof. Sison and his lawyer are available for interviews. You can contact
Prof. Sison through telephone number +31-30-2870249 or +31-30-2310431; and
his lawyer Robert van As, tel. +31-30-6032922.

Our campaign makes the following calls:

Stop the Expulsion of the Sison Family!
Political Asylum for the Sison Family Now!
Protect and Advance the Rights of All Political Refugees!
Justice for the Sison Family and All Political Refugees Now!
Clinton, Ramos, Keep Out of the Sison Asylum Case!
Stop the US-Ramos Terrorism Against the Filipino People!
No to the Sacrifice of the Sisons' Rights for Dutch TNC Profits in the
Philippines!

With the firm determination of the Sison family to struggle for their right,
with the justness of their cause and with our solidarity, we are confident
of the victory of our campaign!

Please keep us informed of whatever actions you have taken in response to
our solidarity call.

Truly yours,

Cesar T. Taguba
Coordinator, International Campaign for the Sison Family
c/o P.O. Box 2041, 3800 Amersfoort, The Netherlands
Tel: +31-30-2368722 (from August 6-9 only) or Tel/Fax
+31-33-4723084.

You may also contact Ms. M.M. Castillo of FREN (Filipino Refugees in the
Netherlands), tel. +31-30-2368722 and fax. +31-30-2322989. We can be reached
by email at: ndf-AT-antenna.nl

****************************************************************************
*************

To: Office of the Prime Minister
c/o Dutch Parliament
Postbus 20018
2500 EA s'-Gravenhage

Ministry of Justice
Postbus 30127
2500 GC s'-Gravenhage

Appeal for the Grant of Asylum to Prof. Jose Maria Sison and Family

We hereby appeal to the government of the Netherlands to respect and follow
the February 1995 and 21 February 1996 decision of the Raad van State on the
asylum case of Prof. Jose Maria Sison and family. The decision lays down the
following points:

1.   Prof. Sison is a political refugee with a well-grounded fear of
persecution in the sense of the Refugee Treaty of Geneva.

2.   He cannot be sent back to the Philippines and is entitled to protection
under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental
Freedoms.

We protest the 04 June 1996 negative decision of the Dutch justice ministry
which seeks to violate or circumvent the above decision of the Raad van
State. If the justice ministry is allowed to overturn the Raad van State
decision, who else can qualify for asylum status in the Netherlands?

The negative decision of the Dutch justice ministry pays lip service to the
decision of the Raad van State but repeats the same false accusations and
false arguments which the Raad van State has already heard and considered;
and denies asylum to Prof. Sison in the Netherlands in particular.

What seems to be the only new argument of the Dutch justice ministry is its
own argument that Article 3 of the European Convention does not necessarily
mean the grant of asylum. But the justice ministry conveniently forgets that
Prof. Sison has already been recognized as a political refugee by the Raad
van State. We demand that the Dutch justice ministry cease to obscure the
Raad van State decision that Prof. Sison is a political refugee by endlessly
repeating false claims and false arguments already considered worthless by
the Raad van State.

At this point in time, the Dutch justice ministry must realize that while it
continues to slander Prof. Sison, who is already adjudged a political
refugee, the high officials of the Manila government which has fed
defamatory information against him are publicly offering high positions to
him in a futile attempt to lure him back to the Philippines under their terms.

The Dutch justice ministry must also realize that Prof. Sison has been
active in the ongoing peace talks between the National Democratic Front of
the Philippines (NDF) and the Philippine government. It is ridiculous that
while the Dutch foreign ministry hosts these talks, the Dutch justice
ministry is trying to undermine the talks by expelling the NDFhief political
consultant who has been fulfilling a crucially important role in the talks.
It is a matter of justice that asylum be granted to Prof. Sison in the
Netherlands.

It is also a matter of general interest that the Dutch government fulfill
its obligations under the Refugee Treaty and the European Convention on
Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. This general interest concerning
political refugees is even higher than the narrower political and economic
interests involved in bilateral relations between the Dutch government and
the Philippine government or even with the U.S. government.

It is totally reprehensible for the Dutch justice ministry to convert the
asylum procedure from a juridical process to a political process in the case
of Prof. Sison. The justice ministry has blocked his asylum request for
nearly eight years. It must cease to delay or even try to deprive him of his
right to asylum, which has been decided as duly belonging to him by the Raad
van State.

Stop the expulsion of the Sison Family!
Protect and advance the rights of all political asylum-seekers!

Name:			Signature:		Address:			Date:

Press Statement
By Jose Maria Sison
August 5, 1996

I wish to thank Karapatan (the largest human rights center inthe
Philippines) and SELDA (the association of former political prisoners) as
well as Atty. Romeo T. Capulong, chairman ofPhilippine Peace Center, and
Rev. Irineo Gordoncillo, Karapatan chairperson, for issuing statements of
support on my asylum case in the Netherlands.

I am deeply pleased that they have pointed out the dangers that I face were
I to return to the Philippines and have  protested the unjust decision of
the Dutch justice ministry to expel me and my family from the Netherlands on
political grounds in violation of the Refugee Treaty of Geneva and the
European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

I am also thankful to all organizations and individuals that are planning to
hold mass protest actions against the decision of the Dutch justice ministry
to deny my application for asylum and expel me from the Netherlands on
August 15, 1996, together with my wife Julie and son Jasm.

I have been informed that a mass protest action is going to be held on
August 14 from 13:00 to 15:00 hours in The Hague, Netherlands, from
Malieveld to the Dutch justice ministry building.

This protest action is organized by the International Campaign for the Sison
Family, the Filipino Refugees in the Netherlands (FREN), the Dutch Committee
for Political Asylum for the Sisons Now, Bayan International and PRIE
(Participating Refu gees in Europe).

Mass protest actions are also slated to be held before Dutch embassies in
Manila and other capitals of the world. BAYAN International and the
International Campaign for the Sison Family are coordinating these mass
actions.#

Sgd. Jose Maria Sison
For authentication, please call the NDF International Office at tel. no.
31-30-2310431.

U.S. GOVERNMENT IS THE STRONGEST POWER INTERVENING IN MY ASYLUM CASE
Press Statement
By Jose Maria Sison
August  4, 1995

By bending to the pressures of Manila and Washington to deny me asylum in
the Netherlands, the Dutch justice ministry violates not only the 21
February 1995 decision of the Dutch Council of State but also the treaty
obligations of the Dutch  state under the Refugee Treaty of Geneva and the
European Convention on Human Rights on Human and Fundamental Freedoms.

In order to continue treating my asylum case as a political case rather than
as a juridical case, the Dutch justice ministry uses unfounded and malicious
claims already abandoned by the Manila government and repeatedly nullified
by the Dutch Council of State.

The Dutch government is overeager to please the Manila government because of
the enormous interests of such Dutch monopoly firms as Shell, Unilever,
ING-Barings and Philips in the Philippines.  But the strongest power
unlawfully intervening in my asylum case is the US government, which has far
larger interests in the Philippines than the Dutch government.

1.  In 1989 and 1990, US diplomatic sources in Manila and The Hague made
press leaks to the effect that the US government had advised the Dutch
government to deny my application for asylum in the Netherlands.

2.  The main supplier of derogatory information against me  in the secret
dossiers compiled by the Dutch intelligence service (BVD) is the US Central
Intelligence Agency.

3.  In the hearing of my asylum case before the Dutch Council of State on
October 29, 1992, the representative of the Dutch justice ministry openly
declared that a government friendly to both the Dutch and Manila governments
would be displeased or offended if I would be granted asylum in the
Netherlands.   He was clearly referring to the US government.

4.  In 1991 an agent of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and  an
officer of the Dutch intelligence service (BVD) jointly approached a
Filipino asylum-seeker, Nathan Quimpo, and asked him to become an
intelligence asset of the CIA with the principal task of spying on me in
exchange for a monthly salary in US dollars, approval of his application for
asylum in the Netherlands and a US travel grant.

At that time, Quimpo refused to become a CIA asset and cooperated with
journalists of a Dutch TV news program in videotaping and exposing his
meeting with the CIA and the BVD agents in Amsterdam.   However, he started
to write articles against me personally and against the National Democratic
Front of the Philippines (NDFP) in early 1992.

In 1993 Quimpo was able to travel to the US despite his participation in the
exposure of the CIA and BVD agents, which  had caused quite a stir in the
Netherlands and merited an inquiry in the Dutch parliament.  In early 1994
he was able to get his status as political refugee in the Netherlands.  His
anti-Sison and anti-NDFP articles were used as attachments to the brief
submitted by the Dutch justice ministry to the Dutch Council of State in 1994.

One of the false claims made by the Dutch justice  ministry against me is
responsibility for Kampanyang Ahos, a bloody witchhunt, which took place in
Mindanao in 1985 and 1986 when I was still under maximum security detention
by the US-Marcos regime.  It is widely known in the Philippines and abroad
that I have strongly condemned this crime and those chiefly responsible for it.

It is preposterous that the Dutch justice ministry would blame me for this
crime and at the same time grant Quimpo with asylum in the Netherlands.
Quimpo is notorious in the Philippines for having been a member of the
so-called caretaker committee which launched and carried out Kampanyang Ahos
in Mindanao from 1985 to 1986.  #

(Sgd.:)  Jose Maria Sison
For authentication, please call the NDF International Office at tel. no.
31-30-2310431; fax 31-302322989; email:ndf-AT-antenna.nl

STATEMENT OF ASYLUM-SEEKER PROF. JOSE MARIA SISON ON THE  4 JUNE DECISION OF
THE JUSTICE MINISTRY
18 July 1996

I wish to respond to the decision of the Dutch justice ministrysigned by the
state secretary of justice, E.M.A. Schmitz dated 4 June 1996 and handed down
to me only on 18 July 1996 by the Utrecht Aliens Police, denying my request
for admission as refugee in the Netherlands and ordering me to leave this
country.

This negative decision contradicts itself by also declaring that: "The
concerned is not going to be deported to the Philippines so long as he has
well-grounded fear of persecution in the sense of the Refugee Treaty of 28
July 1951, as amended by the Protocol of New York of 31 31 January 1967, or
for a treatment that will
cause a violation of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights
and Fundamental Freedoms."

In simple language, the Dutch justice ministry admits, in accordance with
the decision of the Afdeling Bestuursrecht of the Raad van State dated 21
February 1995, that I have well-grounded fear of persecution and that I am a
political refugee under the Refugee Treaty.   Sending me back to the
Philippines would also
be violative of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms.

But to throw the aforesaid decision of the Raad van State to the waste
basket, the Dutch justice ministry does the following: It endlessly repeats
false claims against me, which have already been heard by the Afdeling
bestuursrecht of the Raad van State. It continues to cite against me events
occurring in  Mindanao in 1985, when I was under maximum security detention,
and those in 1989 and 1991, when I was abroad.  The justice ministry is
veritably more malicious than the Manila government because the latter has
never used these events  to file any formal complaint against me before any
court. It cites an unpublished ruling of
the European Commission for human rights dated 13 July 1990 in a certain
case, Number 12847/87 in order to admit that Article 3 of the European
Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedom protects me from being
sent back to the Philippines but at the same time  to argue gratuitously and
with utmost sophistry that the same article does not give me the right to
stay in the Netherlands.  It is utterly foolish for the justice ministry to
argue that the said article protects me and at the same time does not
protect me.  In effect, the ministry is inventing in my case the category of
a "political refugee in orbit", one considered as
such and protected by the European Convention but barred from acquiring the
status of political refugee specifically in the Netherlands, where I have
been since 1988 as an asylumseeker. It repeats the old and unfounded
argument that my asylum status in the Netherlands would damage the general
interest of the Dutch state, particularly in relation to responsibilities to
other countries, as if responsibilities of the same state under the Refugee
Treaty and the European Convention pertaining to political refugees were of
no importance.  In fact, the pertinent international law prohibits any
foreign government from meddling with my asylum case in the Netherlands.

The Raad van State has firmly established that I have well-grounded fear of
persecution and that I am a political refugee.  What is absolutely unfounded
is the false claim of the justice ministry that I am a terrorist or that I
have criminal relations with terrorists.  It is malicious and unjust for the
justice ministry to throw around such false claims.

It has become a scandal among social lawyers, human rights activists,
supporters of refugees and all other people of goodwill in the Netherlands
that the Dutch justice ministry is imposing political reasons, including
hidden ones, on what is supposed to be a strictly juridical case such as my
asylum case. Said ministry has echoed false claims against me from some
foreign governments and has indicated that it is under advice from one or
several governments, in violation of the international law pertaining to
refugees.

The Dutch justice ministry has also taken so long to make a new negative
decision on my asylum case since the Raad van State decision dated 21
February 1995.  There is rank incompetence and inefficiency.  In dragging
its feet and trying to render inutile the decision of the Raad van State,
the flimsy and silly excuse, given by the justice ministry in its 23
November 1995 letter to the Arrondissementrechtsbank in The Hague, Sector
Bestuursrecht, is that the ministry has been looking for a country to which
I can be transferred.

May I know the result of the search for an alternative country? If I am
deemed good enough to reside in another European country, which accepts the
valid and binding character of the European Convention, why should I not be
deemed good enough to reside in the Netherlands in the first place? May I
know the result of the search for an alternative country?

Why should any other country in Europe take me as refugee when in the first
place the Dutch justice ministry refuses to grant me asylum status in
violation of the Refugee Treaty and the European Convention?  In refusing to
grant me asylum in the Netherlands and trying to keep me out, the Dutch
justice ministry is violating my right to asylum and is in fact trying to
force me back to the Philippines.

The justice ministry has made a new negative decision only after being
compelled by the Arrondissementrechtsbank in The Hague, Sector
Bestuursrecht, in a court decision dated 29 April1996,
ordering said ministry to make a new decision within six weeks thenceforth
and nullifying the argument of the ministry that its failure to make a
decision on my appeal for reconsideration dated 6 August 1990 is equivalent
to a decision.

The Dutch justice ministry is acting unjustly and incompetently in dealing
with my asylum case.  In being unjust and incompetent in my case, said
ministry has deprived me of asylum status  in the Netherlands since 1988.
This ministry has the outstanding record of having its negative decisions
being repeatedly nullified, twice by the Raad van State on 17 December 1992
and 21 February 1995 and once by the Arrondissementrechtsbank of The Hague,
Sector Bestuursrecht, on 29 April 1996.

Will my asylum case ever be decided finally according to the juridical
process?  Or will it be  decided by the political motivations and shadowy
processes of the justice ministry in the name of "general interest" and
"relations with foreign governments"? #

Nota Bene:  If you wish to get further information about the asylum case of
Prof. Jose Maria Sison, please contact  his lawyer, Mr Robert van As, Tel.:
030-6032922.



     --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---



     --- from list marxism2-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---