Human rights groups, as well as indigenous peoples and lawyers, sharply condemned the Regional Trial Court of Baguio City for dismissing the petition of Cordillera People’s Alliance (CPA) leaders that questioned the legality of their designation as terrorists under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) of 2020.

The Anti-Terrorism Council tagged Windel Bolinget, Sarah Alikes, Jennifer Taggaoa, and Stephen Tauli as terrorists in June 2023. They were maliciously accused of being Communist Party of the Philippines leaders in Cordillera and Ilocos. The case relied on the testimony of alleged former rebel Kenjie Leciones.

The accused filed a petition for certiorari at the RTC on November 23, 2023, to assert that the designation violated their constitutional rights and that certain provisions of the ATA are unconstitutional as applied to their case.

A petition for certiorari allows parties to seek judicial review of legal issues that may have major implications or involve important questions of law. It is commonly filed to have a higher court examine the decision of a lower court.

The Baguio RTC Branch 78 decision upheld the validity of the ATA provisions on April 30, 2026. It ruled that the designation and the freeze order did not violate due process, claiming these were measures to prevent the use of funds for terrorist activities. It also deemed existing safeguards such as publication and the delisting process sufficient. The court gave weight to Leciones’ testimony and said the petitioners failed to present evidence to counter his statements.

According to Katribu, the decision is a grave injustice against indigenous leaders and communities defending their rights and land. The group said there is clearly no credible basis to label defenders of indigenous peoples’ rights as terrorists.

“We were tagged as terrorists without due process, without basis, and suffered from unjust and arbitrary designation,” CPA secretary general Windel Bolinget explained. He said the case filed against them violates their rights and fundamental freedoms. “This is clear proof that the Anti-Terrorism Act must be immediately declared unconstitutional,” he said.

“It sends a chilling message, that those who openly denounce the prevailing conditions and advance their advocacy and struggle…may be left without effective remedy even as their fundamental rights are under attack,” Karapatan secretary general Cristina Palabay explained.

The National Union of People’s Lawyers (NUPL) expressed grave disappointment over the court’s decision.

“The decision denies the petitioners effective judicial review despite clear evidence of serious constitutional violations… it fails to recognize the profound implications of terrorist designation, including the suppression of legitimate advocacy, restrictions on fundamental freedoms, severe reputational damage, and the continuing threat of criminal liability,” the NUPL said.

The group also questioned the court’s reliance on the testimony of Leciones, a military witness, whose accusations lack independent or supporting evidence.

“What is at stake is whether our constitutional order will tolerate a standing mechanism of repression—one cloaked in the language of counterterrorism but untethered from meaningful safeguards, due process, and judicial accountability,” the group said.