This report examines the multifaceted experiences of Indigenous Peoples (IPs) and Indigenous Cultural Communities (ICCs) in the Philippines—particularly the Igorot of the Cordillera and the Lumad of Mindanao—as environmental defenders facing violent state repression. It foregrounds the disproportionate vulnerability of Indigenous Peoples (IPs) and Indigenous Cultural Communities (ICCs) who resist destructive development projects encroaching on their ancestral domains.
Background
The Philippines remains one of the most dangerous environments globally for environmental and human rights defenders. Recent data show a pattern of systematic and large-scale human rights violations, including extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, arbitrary arrests, forced surrenders, bombings, and mass displacement. Environmental defenders, particularly Indigenous Peoples (IPs), are disproportionately targeted. The Indigenous Peoples (IPs) and Indigenous Cultural Communities (ICCs) face a complex and challenging human rights landscape with significant concerns regarding extrajudicial killings, human rights violations, militarization of their communities, land dispossession, and violence. They are disproportionately affected due to their resistance to destructive development projects like mining and dams. Under President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., at least 119 extrajudicial killings, 14 enforced disappearances, and over 46,000 incidents of indiscriminate bombings were recorded, alongside the harassment and intimidation of over 3.7 million individuals. These figures underscore the state’s active role in criminalizing dissent. The Philippines remains the deadliest country in Asia for environmental defenders, with 17 recorded killings in 2023 alone, according to Global Witness.
A central mechanism of repression is red-tagging—the deliberate labeling of individuals or groups as communist insurgents or terrorists without substantial evidence. Once labeled as terrorists, they are denounced as potential targets, followed by disinformation on social media platforms, and are often killed or threatened. This is enabled by national laws like the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 and enforced by government bodies such as the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC), red-tagging often precedes threats, arrests, and violence. This was amplified by technology, with social media platforms (notably Facebook) used for smear campaigns, online harassment, and digital surveillance.
Literature Review
Indigenous Peoples, Environmental Defense, and Structural Marginalization
Existing literature situates Indigenous Peoples as both critical environmental stewards and among the most marginalized populations globally. With over 476 million Indigenous Peoples across more than 90 countries, their relationship with land is deeply rooted in cultural identity, subsistence, and ecological knowledge (United Nations, n.d.; Amnesty International, 2024). This relationship positions them at the forefront of climate change mitigation, as Indigenous-managed lands significantly contribute to biodiversity conservation and carbon storage (Amnesty International, 2024).
However, this same relationship exposes them to systemic violence. Historically, Indigenous communities have faced dispossession, displacement, and exploitation, stemming from colonial and postcolonial development paradigms (United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2007). Contemporary literature highlights that such marginalization persists through the criminalization of Indigenous defenders, which manifests both in the failure to legally recognize Indigenous rights and in the misuse of state mechanisms to suppress resistance (United Nations, 2024). Globally, this is reflected in the disproportionate targeting of Indigenous environmental defenders, who accounted for a significant percentage of killings documented in recent years (Global Witness, 2024).
Development Aggression and Indigenous Resistance in the Philippines
Within the Philippine context, literature emphasizes how global patterns of marginalization are intensified by resource extraction and state-led development projects. Indigenous communities, particularly in the Cordillera and Mindanao, inhabit resource-rich territories targeted for mining, dams, and agribusiness expansion (Global Witness, 2024). These development interventions often result in displacement, militarization, and environmental degradation, undermining both livelihoods and cultural survival.
Empirical accounts document repeated instances of forced evacuations, aerial bombardment, and encroachment on ancestral domains (United Nations Human Rights Council, 2024). Historical struggles, such as resistance to large-scale dam projects in the Cordillera, illustrate the enduring nature of Indigenous opposition to development aggression. Despite these efforts, extractive industries continue to expand, leading to persistent conflicts between Indigenous communities and state or corporate actors
Red-Tagging as Mechanism of Criminalization
A central theme in the literature is the role of red-tagging as a tool of repression. Defined as the act of labeling individuals or organizations as communists, terrorists, or subversives, red-tagging functions as a mechanism to delegitimize dissent and justify state action (Simbulan, 2011). In the Philippine setting, this practice is often directed at environmental defenders, Indigenous leaders, and civil society organizations.
Scholarly and legal discussions emphasize that red-tagging is not merely rhetorical; it has material and often lethal consequences, including surveillance, arbitrary arrest, enforced disappearance, and extrajudicial killing (Karapatan, 2024). Its institutionalization is reinforced by legal frameworks such as the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 and operational bodies like the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC), which expand the state’s capacity to criminalize activism (Amnesty International, 2024).
Recent jurisprudence further recognizes red-tagging as a violation of fundamental rights, underscoring its impact on the rights to life, liberty, and security. This aligns with broader findings that criminalization operates as a systematic strategy to suppress environmental and human rights advocacy.
Gendered Dimensions of Violence
The literature also highlights the gendered nature of violence against environmental defenders, particularly Indigenous women. Studies indicate that women environmental defenders (WEDs) are disproportionately subjected to sexual violence, coercion, and targeted intimidation, especially in militarized and resource-conflict areas (Tran, 2023).
Gender-based violence functions not only as an act of harm but also as a mechanism of control. By targeting women, such violence restricts participation in collective resistance and reinforces patriarchal norms. Empirical findings further show that many women defenders belong to rural, low-income, and Indigenous communities, placing them at the intersection of multiple vulnerabilities (Tran, 2023).
Technology-Facilitated Violence and Digital Repression
An emerging body of literature examines the role of technology in amplifying violence against defenders. Technology-facilitated violence refers to acts that are committed, assisted, or intensified through digital platforms, including online harassment, surveillance, and disinformation (United Nations Population Fund, n.d.). In the Philippines, social media, particularly Facebook, plays a central role in disseminating red-tagging narratives and targeting activists (Amnesty International, 2024). Digital platforms enable: widespread circulation of manipulated images, coordinated harassment campaigns, and normalization of defamatory labeling.
Despite its growing importance, literature on technology-facilitated violence in the Philippine context remains limited. Existing studies point to a significant gap in understanding how digital and physical forms of violence intersect, particularly in relation to Indigenous environmental defenders.
Research Objectives and Methodology
This qualitative study aimed to document and analyze the lived experiences of Indigenous environmental defenders who experienced violent repression in both physical and digital spaces. A total of 34 participants—all Indigenous Peoples and Indigenous Cultural Communities (ICCs) actively engaged in environmental advocacy—were interviewed through structured interviews, focus group discussions (FGDs), and participant observation. Participants were selected via purposive and snowball sampling methods based on criteria such as active engagement in environmental defense, Indigenous identity, and personal experience of violence.
Key Findings
The findings of this study reveal that Indigenous environmental defenders in the Philippines experience violence as a systematic, multi-layered, and continuous process, rather than as isolated or sporadic incidents. Across both the Cordillera and Mindanao case sites, participants consistently described a pattern in which legal, physical, gendered, and digital forms of violence intersect and reinforce one another. This pattern reflects what may be understood as a continuum of repression, where different modalities of violence are deployed sequentially and strategically to suppress Indigenous resistance. Central to this continuum is the role of red-tagging, which emerges as a structuring mechanism that enables and legitimizes subsequent forms of violence. The Cordillera Peoples Alliance (CPA) and Lumad schools emerged as focal points of resistance and, consequently, as primary targets of state repression. CPA key informants reported sustained labeling as terrorists or insurgents, both online and offline, which was consistently followed by surveillance, harassment, and legal persecution. These processes escalated into more severe forms of violence, including abduction and extrajudicial killings, with at least seven (7) documented killings within CPA networks. Similarly, Itogon communities in Benguet reported widespread online red-tagging, false accusations of terrorism, and smear campaigns that extended to implicate family members. These experiences demonstrate that red-tagging functions not merely as rhetoric but as a gateway mechanism, transforming legitimate advocacy into perceived criminality and exposing individuals and their networks to heightened risk.
Closely linked to red-tagging is the use of legal mechanisms as instruments of control, where the filing of trumped-up charges, such as rebellion or terrorism, serves to delegitimize Indigenous resistance while entangling defenders in prolonged legal processes. This form of criminalization constrains mobility, diverts resources, and produces a chilling effect within communities. As reported by CPA informants, legal harassment operates alongside physical threats, reinforcing a system in which the law itself becomes a tool of repression rather than protection.
The findings further highlight the pervasive role of militarization in enforcing development agendas, particularly in areas targeted for resource extraction. In Itogon, participants described experiences of military surveillance, house raids, and the imposition of unjust stoppage orders in response to resistance against large-scale mining activities within ancestral domains. In Mindanao, Lumad communities reported more intensified forms of militarization, including military encampments within civilian spaces, threats of aerial bombardment, and repeated forced evacuations. Ten (10) Lumad key informants from various organizations described systemic displacement and harassment, illustrating how militarization disrupts not only physical safety but also the social and economic foundations of community life. Notably, Lumad schools, central to Indigenous education and cultural preservation, were subjected to occupation, intimidation, and eventual closure, particularly during the administration of President Rodrigo Duterte. These actions reflect how militarization operates as both a coercive force and a mechanism for facilitating extractive and state-led development interests.
A significant dimension of the findings is the prevalence of gender-based violence, which emerges as both systemic and underreported. CPA and Lumad informants reported incidents of rape, sexual harassment, and exploitation perpetrated by military personnel. These violations are frequently resolved informally or remain unreported due to fear of retaliation and social stigma, indicating the presence of structural barriers to justice. Among Lumad communities, women and young girls were particularly vulnerable, with accounts highlighting patterns of sexual violence and coercion in militarized environments. Gender-based violence thus functions not only as an act of harm but also as a mechanism of social control, reinforcing power asymmetries and deterring women’s participation in resistance movements.
The study also identifies technology-facilitated violence as an increasingly significant component of repression, extending the reach of violence into digital spaces. CPA, Itogon, and Lumad informants described experiences of Facebook-based disinformation campaigns, online harassment, edited or manipulated images, and digital surveillance. Government-affiliated platforms were also reported to participate in red-tagging, publicly branding individuals as terrorists and legitimizing hostile narratives. These digital practices amplify existing forms of violence by enabling rapid dissemination of defamatory content, expanding surveillance capabilities, and normalizing public hostility. The targeting of family members through online smear campaigns further demonstrates how digital violence extends beyond individuals, producing broader social and psychological impacts.
Importantly, the effects of these intersecting forms of violence are experienced not only at the individual level but also collectively across families and communities. Participants described how red-tagging, militarization, and digital harassment create a pervasive climate of fear that shapes everyday life, restricts movement, and undermines social cohesion. This cumulative impact produces a form of collective trauma, where entire communities are subjected to sustained insecurity and uncertainty.
Taken together, these findings demonstrate that violence against Indigenous environmental defenders in the Philippines is structural, interconnected, and adaptive, operating across legal, physical, gendered, and digital domains. The convergence of red-tagging, criminalization, militarization, gender-based violence, and technology-facilitated repression reflects a coordinated system through which dissent is managed and suppressed. Understanding these dynamics requires a shift from fragmented analysis toward a holistic framework that recognizes the interdependence of these forms of violence and their grounding in broader state, economic, and technological systems.
Conclusion
This study demonstrates that violence against Indigenous environmental defenders in the Philippines is not incidental, but rather structural, patterned, and systemically produced. Through a qualitative examination of the lived experiences of Indigenous communities in the Cordillera and Mindanao, the findings reveal that repression operates as a continuum of interrelated practices, where red-tagging, legal harassment, militarization, gender-based violence, and technology-facilitated attacks converge to suppress dissent and secure control over ancestral lands.
At the center of this system is red-tagging, which functions as a foundational mechanism that redefines legitimate environmental and human rights advocacy as a threat to nationalsecurity. While red-tagging has long been embedded in the Philippine political landscape, most notably during the administration of Ferdinand Marcos, Sr., its use has persisted and intensified in more recent periods, particularly under the administration of Rodrigo Duterte. The findings show that this practice continues to operate as a tool of political repression, enabling surveillance, criminalization, and physical violence against Indigenous Peoples (IPs) and Indigenous Cultural Communities (ICCs). The experiences of the Cordillera Peoples Alliance, Itogon communities, and Lumad groups illustrate how red-tagging translates into concrete and often lethal consequences, embedding fear and insecurity not only among individuals but across entire communities.
The study further underscores how the confluence of militarization, legislation, and digital technologies is weaponized as part of a systemic approach to silence Indigenous environmental defenders. Militarization operates as the enforcement arm of development and state interests, particularly in resource-rich Indigenous territories, where resistance to extractive projects is met with surveillance, displacement, and violence. Legal frameworks, including the use of counterinsurgency and anti-terror mechanisms, provide institutional legitimacy to these actions, transforming dissent into criminality. At the same time, digital platforms amplify and extend repression, enabling disinformation campaigns, online harassment, and continuous monitoring of activists and their networks.
A critical contribution of this study is its identification of technology-facilitated violence as an integral and expanding dimension of repression. Digital tools not only reinforce existing forms of violence but also reshape them, allowing threats to persist across both physical and virtual spaces. This convergence reflects the evolving nature of control in the digital era, where narratives, visibility, and information are as central to repression as physical force.
The findings also highlight the gendered dimensions of violence, where women environmental defenders face compounded risks of sexual violence, exploitation, and silencing within militarized contexts. These experiences reveal how systems of repression intersect with patriarchal structures, reinforcing inequalities and limiting women’s participation in collective resistance.
Taken together, the study calls attention to the urgent need for accountability for state actors, particularly in relation to the misuse of legal and security frameworks that facilitate human rights violations. It also points to the necessity of deeper inquiry into the digital dimensions of abuse, an area that remains underexamined despite its growing significance. Finally, the findings emphasize the importance of amplifying the voices of Indigenous communities, whose experiences and resistance are central to advancing both environmental protection and human rights.
Ultimately, this study affirms that Indigenous environmental defenders are not only subjects of violence but also agents of resilience and resistance, asserting their rights to land, culture, and self-determination in the face of systemic repression. Their struggles underscore the broader imperative to confront the structural conditions that enable violence and to support pathways toward justice, accountability, and sustainable futures.
References
Amnesty International. (2024). “I turned my fear into courage”: Red-tagging and state violence against young human rights defenders in the Philippines. Amnesty International.
Global Witness. (2024). Missing voices: The violent erasure of land and environmental defenders. Global Witness.
Karapatan. (2024). Year-end report 2023: On the continuing human rights violations in the Philippines. Karapatan Alliance for the Advancement of People’s Rights.
Lapniten, K. (2021, June 15). The river will bleed red: Indigenous Filipinos face down dam projects. Mongabay.
Simbulan, R. (2011). Red-baiting as a tool of repression in the Philippines. In Human rights and democracy in the Philippines (pp. xx–xx). [Publisher not specified].
Tran, T. (2023). Gendered violence against women environmental defenders: A global perspective. Journal of Environmental Studies, xx(x), xxx–xxx.
United Nations. (n.d.). Indigenous Peoples at the United Nations. https://www.un.org/development/desa/indigenouspeoples
United Nations Human Rights Council. (2024). Situation of human rights in the Philippines (Report No. xx/xx). United Nations.
United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. (2007). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. United Nations.
United Nations Population Fund. (n.d.). Technology-facilitated gender-based violence. https://www.unfpa.org