Politics in Subic rape case

I SAID before that whether Malacañang likes it or not, the Subic rape case is just as much a political case as well as it is a legal one, and I have been proven right. Nicole won the legal battle when Daniel Smith was convicted but politics won over when her own government handed her rapist over to the US Embassy. Such a travesty of justice perpetrated by our own countrymen. It’s no wonder other countries have little respect for Filipinos.

Critics of the VFA are expected to once again argue for its abolition in light of what happened, and they are not out of line in doing so. In the first place, Nicole’s rape would not have occurred if there was no VFA (Visiting Forces Agreement). The rape happened because US military personnel were in the country participating in joint military exercises sanctioned by a political agreement.

During its hearings in the Senate (being a treaty it required the approval of two-thirds of the Senate’s membership) the VFA was a very controversial issue that aroused nationalist sentiments because its provisions were thought to be broader than the former US military bases agreement whose extension was rejected by the Philippine Senate in 1991. While the former bases agreement clearly defined the base area limits of the US government in the Philippines and the rights of US personnel within them, the VFA opens the entire country to the stationing of US forces with no apparent limitations to troop strength, mobilization or duration of stay.

One of the main contentions of the anti-VFA protests was the possibility of US personnel committing criminal offenses in the Philippines against Filipino citizens. Under the former bases agreement, Ame­rican servicemen stationed in the Philippines who committed such offenses were shielded from prosecution under Philippine laws.

Cristina Palabay, Gabriella Women’s Party secretary-general, called attention to the 82 cases of sexual abuse against women (aged 16 and above) and 15 cases against children perpetrated by US soldiers stationed in the Philippines before the US bases agreement was terminated. Palabay only listed sexual-abuse cases but there have been other documented crimes committed by US soldiers here, which were not sexual in nature.

Of course, in asserting our country’s sovereignty and independence, any judicial acquiescence by the Philippines to the US government would not be acceptable. But what happened in Nicole’s case is not judicial but political acquiescence. I said before that this rape case would be the first true test of whether the VFA is really a treaty between countries who regard each other of equal status. It is obvious now that this administration deems our country as subservient to the US government, and this will only further fuel the nation’s anger toward it.

There is no guarantee that US servicemen will not commit another crime here on Philippine soil. Maybe not in the near future, but once Nicole’s rape is forgotten, who knows?

Cases of sexual abuse and other crimes seem to follow US servicemen whenever they are deployed in foreign countries. In Okinawa, Japan, alone, where the US Marines Futenma Air Base is located, more than 4,500 cases of crimes were committed by US servicemen, including 12 murders. The last headline-grabbing crime was the brutal rape of a 12-year-old Japanese girl by three US Marines on September 4, 1996. Partly or perhaps due to the public outcry over that rape, Japan and the US agreed to relocate the US base in Okinawa. By the way, the Marines who raped that poor Japanese girl were able to serve their sentence under US custody, too.

One rape committed by foreign troops on Philippine soil is one too many. And since our own government cannot seem to rightly enforce justice, we might as well abolish the VFA.
POLICY PEEK By Ernesto F. Herrera