In the newly convened 20th Congress, we are immediately confronted with two sharply contrasting legislative proposals. One seeks to disarm the State at the height of our gains against communist armed insurgency, and another seeks to fortify our democratic processes against infiltration.

On one hand, the Makabayan bloc is pushing to repeal the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 through House Bill 1272. They claim it is being weaponized against activists, journalists, and dissenters. On the other, Senator Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa has filed a bill to amend the Partylist System Act to disqualify groups linked to violence and designated terrorist organizations from entering Congress.

But it is no coincidence that these two developments intersect. They expose a long-standing tension in our democracy in carefully straddling between genuine activism and armed insurgency, between representation and radicalization, between reform and subversion.

The Makabayan bloc wants the public to believe that the Anti-Terrorism Law undermines democracy. But what they fail to mention is that no one has been convicted under this law for merely protesting or speaking out. What the law actually does is equip the State with tools to respond to evolving terrorist threats—tools that come with built-in safeguards, court oversight, and constitutional compliance, as affirmed by the Supreme Court.

This law is not about silencing dissent. It’s about preventing bombings, assassinations, and the systematic recruitment of children and youth into armed violence. It is about protecting Lumad students from being turned into foot soldiers, and communities from being exploited as logistical corridors, and the country’s economic programs from being hijacked under the guise of “revolutionary taxation.”

Meanwhile, Sen. dela Rosa’s proposal reminds us why this debate matters. The partylist system was created to give voice to the voiceless. It was not enacted to give cover to those who refuse to denounce the atrocities of the CPP-NPA-NDF, or worse, quietly enable it. This is not theoretical. Long before the NTF-ELCAC was even created, former rebels had already testified how the so-called national democratic partylist organizations in Congress served as political shields for armed insurgency, giving the revolution a legal face while their comrades waged war in the mountains.

The NTF-ELCAC welcomes reforms that protect the integrity of our democratic institutions. But the truth is that democracy cannot defend itself when its legal pathways are commandeered by those who reject peaceful change in favor of armed revolution.

The Makabayan bloc and their allied organizations say the Anti-Terror Law instills fear. But what instills more fear, especially in communities who have become victims of the communist armed conflict, is a Congress that seems to be oblivious on the distinction between sectoral advocacy and subversive machinery.

The NTF-ELCAC stands by its mandate, which includes protecting our civic spaces and exposing those who abuse it. There is nothing democratic about tolerating duplicity in the name of representation. There is nothing oppressive about drawing the line between engagement and exploitation.

We have been here before. We know the cost of silence. Let us make sure we do not repeat the same mistake of allowing subversion to hide behind democratic protections until it is too late.

(Undersecretary Ernesto C Torres Jr., Executive Director NTF ELCAC/PR)