It must have been a tough decision for a former secretary general of Karapatan-Quezon to expose an organization she worked for for more than 20 years.
More than two years after her surrender, Genelyn Dichoso, alias Gemma, now 54, reiterated her revelations in April 2021 that Karapatan is a potent front organization of the Communist Party of the Philippines-New People’s Army-National Democratic Front, or CPP-NPA-NDF, that provides legal assistance to combatants who were either captured or perished in military encounters.
She grew tired of being used to make things happen for her so-called comrades and wanted a new life.
For several years, she said it was a life full of problems, and sleepless nights over guilt that those she recruited were led to danger.
What she wants now is to enlighten the public about the harmful influence of Karapatan on public safety and security. In a recent media conference, Dichoso refuted claims that two armed hardcore NPA rebels (Miguela Peniero, alias Migs, and Rowena Dasig, alias Rian) arrested in Atimonan town were “health workers.”
When she spoke, her words carried a sense of unwavering belief.
“Migs is not a health worker. She’s a political officer, a cadre of the Komiteng Tagapagpaganap ng Probinsiya ng Quezon,” Dichoso said, adding that she worked with her in the underground in 2009.
In the domain of strife and rebellion, where conflicting ideologies collide and allegiances are put to the test, the choices made by individuals carry great significance. Every so often, amid the disorder and upheaval, a person like Dichoso arises who courageously reveals the truth, even if it entails betraying former comrades.
Dichoso chose to expose them, shedding light on the duplicity of communism, complexities of loyalty, morality, and the pursuit of justice.
Like all other rebels who returned to the government fold, exposing former colleagues carries immense weight and could be influenced by various factors — disillusionment, personal ethics, and a quest for justice.
Whether driven by a desire to correct past errors in the movement or a belief in a brighter future, the act challenges loyalty and requires strong conviction.
I can imagine the ethical dilemma. Balancing loyalty to the cause and comrades with responsibilities to justice and the greater good forces individuals like Dichoso to ponder the morality of their actions. They weigh whether the desired outcomes, potential positive change, and adherence to higher principles justify the betrayal of trust.
The exposès of Dichoso and the thousands of returnees carry significant ramifications, both personally and within the communist organization. Although they risk alienation, retaliation, and psychological distress, it catalyzes uncovering hidden truths and promoting justice.
As this may inspire others to speak up and challenge oppressive ideologies, exposès like this provide valuable lessons and reflections. One, we are reminded of the complexities of loyalty, the fragility of ideology, and the importance of individual autonomy to make choices, take action, and shape their own lives.
Ultimately, it highlights the significance of critical thinking, moral courage, and the pursuit of truth, even in challenging circumstances.