Four Cordillera Peoples Alliance leaders have asked the Court of Appeals to overturn their designation as terrorists, arguing that the process used by the Anti-Terrorism Council violated their constitutional right to due process.

Windel Bolinget, Sarah Abellon-Alikes, Jennifer Awingan-Taggaoa and Stephen Tauli filed an 84-page Joint Memorandum on Appeal on 23 September seeking the reversal of an April 30 ruling by Baguio Regional Trial Court Branch 78 that denied their challenge to the designation.

The four are officers and members of the Cordillera Peoples Alliance, which advocates Indigenous peoples’ rights, regional autonomy, ancestral domain and environmental protection.

The Anti-Terrorism Council designated them as terrorist individuals through Resolution No. 41 dated 7 June 2023. The government has alleged that they were linked to the Communist Party of the Philippines-New People’s Army.

The four have denied the allegations and challenged the designation before the courts. The Baguio RTC denied their petition on 30 April 2026, prompting their appeal to the CA.

In their memorandum, the petitioners argued that Section 25(3) of Republic Act 11479, or the Anti-Terrorism Act, was unconstitutional as applied to them because they were not given prior notice or an opportunity to contest the allegations before the designation took effect.

They said they learned of the designation only after the resolution was published and after bank accounts linked to them and the CPA were frozen.

The petitioners also questioned the freezing of their assets, arguing that the Anti-Money Laundering Council should have independently evaluated the evidence rather than relying on the ATC designation.

They further challenged the trial court’s reliance on the Supreme Court’s 2021 ruling in Calleja v. Executive Secretary.

According to the petitioners, Calleja involved a facial challenge to the Anti-Terrorism Act, while their case is an “as-applied” challenge concerning how Section 25(3) was actually enforced against them.

They also argued that the presumption of regularity in the performance of official duties could not substitute for evidence showing that the ATC’s findings were supported by substantial evidence and that constitutional safeguards were observed.

The petitioners likewise questioned whether there was sufficient evidence to establish probable cause for their designation.

They cited the dismissal or resolution in their favor of previous criminal cases involving some of them as part of their argument that the government had failed to establish alleged links to the CPP-NPA. At least one of the petitioners, Abellon-Alikes, was acquitted in a separate terrorism-financing case in 2026, while an earlier rebellion complaint involving several Cordillera activists had been dismissed for lack of probable cause.

The four asked the Court of Appeals to declare the third paragraph of Section 25 of the Anti-Terrorism Act unconstitutional as applied to them, annul ATC Resolution No. 41 and lift the asset-freezing orders arising from their designation.