Aside from resolving the issue of whether the CPP-NPA are terrorist organizations, what is further notable in the Judge Magdoza-Malagar Resolution was its extensive and deep discussion of CPP-NPA history, its inner workings, its strategy and tactics, and its operational and organizational aspects and problems, including revolutionary dual tactics in the recruitment process, front organizations and red-tagging.

In the course of a long discussion assessing whether the CPP-NPA was a terrorist organization under Section 17 of the HSA 2007, the Judge Magdoza-Malagar Resolution at p. 123 relevantly stated, among others:

That the CPP-NPA is a political organization with political goals is further

evidenced by its 3-tiered recruitment process – from NDMO [national democratic mass organizations, the legal fronts], to the UGMO [underground movement or mass organizations] and finally to the CPP-NPA. As testified to by the petitioner’s witnesses who were former members of the respondent organizations, unlike a common bandit in a band of gun-wielding brigands, an average NPA member is steeped in ideology. Specific courses have to be undertaken and completed before one progresses to the next level of recruitment. Thus it can be said that an NPA member engages in violence and employs force, not for violence’s sake but in pursuit of the higher ideals contained in the Constitution of the CPP. (underscoring supplied)

But we are not concerned in this article with the terrorism issue (this is to be dealt with in, as it deserves, a whole other article). Our concern is more particularly with revolutionary dual tactics in the recruitment process, front organizations and red-tagging. It is remarkable that the Judge Magdoza-Malagar Resolution deals with revolutionary dual tactics and front organizations in its section V.C.1. “Dual Tactics in the Recruitment Process” (pp. 37-48), and with red-tagging in its part “IX. The Dangers of Red-Tagging” (pp. 129-133).

 Revolutionary Dual Tactics and Front Organizations

The Judge Magdoza-Malagar Resolution’s section V.C.1 section on the CPP-NPA’s “Dual Tactics in the Recruitment Process” (pp. 37-48) is based mainly on the testimonies of petitioner DOJ’s witnesses Noel Minoto Legaspi, Joy James Alcoser Saguino, and Jeffrey Luces Celiz. They are all former CPP-NPA cadres who once operated at increasingly high levels in the movement aboveground and underground in the Visayas and Mindanao. Celiz claimed to have gone up to the level of deployment by the CPP Panay Island Regional Party Committee on assignment to the NPA National Operational Command under the CPP Military Commission, specifically working with the National Intelligence Unit thereunder. To quote the Resolution: (boldface and italics in the original)

Legaspi elaborates on the inseparable link among the CPP-NPA-NDF by connecting it to the inseparable link between the armed struggle espoused by the underground movements (UGMOs) and the unarmed urban revolutionary mass movements espoused by the unarmed movements, the National Democratic Mass Organizations (NDMOs) or the “open” or “above-ground organizations”… Unarmed parliamentary or legal struggle[1] has a symbioltic relationship with the NPA’s armed struggle. Legal fronts or NDMOs have the component tasked to organize UGMOs such that these legal forms usually have an urban core force that supports the armed struggle. The “symbiotic relationship” or “mutualism” between the armed struggle and the unarmed urban revolutionary mass movements complement each other as they share the same end of seizing control of the government and establishing the People’s Democratic Republic of the Philippines.

As a basic principle, armed struggle is the primary and decisive form of struggle to overthrow the government. In essence, it is illegal. This is not to say however, that the field of unarmed struggle can be classified as primarily “legal;” arguably, it can still be classified as illegal because it implements the revolutionary dual tactics, defined as the combination of both “legal” and “illegal” tactics of the CPP. Moreover, within legal organizations or NDMOs or front organizations are secret organizations or UGMOs that support the first form of struggle of the CPP, i.e., the armed struggle….

x x x

Witness Joy Sanguino corroborated Legaspi’s testimony and further identified the NDMOs targeting specific groups or sectors and their corresponding UGMOs as follows:

Sector	UGMO	NDMO
Youth and Student	Kabataang Makabayan (KM)	- Anakbayan - League of Filipino Students (LFS) - National Union of Students of the Philippines (NUSP) - College Editors Guild of the Philippines (CEGP) - Student Christian Movement of the Philippines (SCMP)
Women	Malayang Kilusan ng Bagong Kababaihan (MAKIBAKA)	- Gabriela Youth - Gabriela Women’s Party
Farmers, Fisher folks and Peasants	Pambansang Katipunan ng Magbubukid (PKM)	- Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP) - Unyon ng Magsasaka sa Agrikultura (UMA) - Pambansang Lakas ng mga Mamamalakaya (PAMALAKAYA)
Workers	Revolutionary Council of Trade Unions (RCTU)	- Kilusang Mayo Uno (KMU)
Urban Poor	Katipunan ng mga Samahang Manggagawa (KASAMA)	- Katipunan na Damayang Mahihirap (KADAMAY)
Transport	Pambansang Samahan ng mga Makabayang Tsuper (PSMT)	- Pinagkaisang Samahan ng mga Tsuper at Opereytor Nationwide (PISTON)
Teachers	Katipunan ng mga Gurong Makabayan (KAGUMA)	- Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT) - Congress of Teachers and Educators for Nationalism and Democracy (CONTEND)
Government	Makabayang Kawaning Pilipino (MKP)	Confederation for Unity and Advancement of Government Employees (COURAGE)
Health	Makabayang Samahang Pangkalusugan (MASAPA)	- Alliance of Health Workers (AHW) - Health Alliance for Democracy (HEAD)
Lawyers	Lupon ng Manananggol para sa Bayan (LUMABAN)	- National Union of People’s Lawyers (NUPL)
Scientists	Liga ng Agham para sa Bayan (LAB)	AGHAM
Church	Christians for National Liberation (CNL)	- Promotion of Church Peoples’ Response (PCPR)
Artists	Artista at Manunulat ng Sambayanan (ARMAS)	- National Union of Journalists in the Philippines (NUJP) - Concerned Artists of the Philippines - Musika Alay sa Bayan

[Author’s note: AGHAM refers to Alyansa ng Agham para sa Mamamayan, while Concerned Artists of the Philippines goes by the acronym CAP. The above listing of NDMOs does not appear to be exhaustive or complete, in terms of sectors and organizations, and any such listing is bound to be contested. Manila Times columnist Rigoberto D. Tiglao for example writes of “the party’s over a hundred front organizations.”[2]]

In the recruitment process, the members of the NDMOs are recruited to join the UGMOs. Members of the UGMOs are recruited to become cadres and members of the CPP-NPA….

x x x

… there is no direct recruitment into the CPP from the “open organizations” or NDMOs. Each possible recruit is first recruited into the NDMOs before being considered for membership in the UGMOs and ultimately in the CPP-NPA. Arguably, it can be said that underneath the seemingly legal status of NDMOs is a hidden process of recruitment into the armed struggle to overthrow the government.

The indispensability of the UGMOs and NDMOs to the recruitment process of the CPP-NPA and to the armed struggle to overthrow the GRP [Government of the Reoublic of the Philippines] is pursuant to the strategic political line of the CPP-NPA-NDF which has remained unchanged for more than five (5) decades…

Note that this above-quoted passage with table is from the findings of fact of the unappealed and thus final Judge Magdoza-Malagar Resolution in the process of her deciding on the DOJ Petition to declare the CPP-NPA as terrorist organizations, based on an assessment, among others, “That the CPP-NPA is a political organization with political goals is further evidenced by its 3-tiered recruitment process – from NDMO to the UGMO and finally to the CPP-NPA.” (p. 123) This is as close to it comes to “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth” that the CPP does create or infiltrate with a view to control aboveground open and legal organizations, thus being front organizations, to undertake legal struggle as part of its revolutionary dual tactics, including for recruitment purposes, to advance its strategy of protracted people’s war, in particular to support the armed struggle as its main form of struggle. AND it is part of no less than a judicial decision that, according to the Civil Code, “shall form a part of the legal system of the Philippines.”[3] As such, its above-quoted discussion and table naming certain “front organizations” of the CPP-NPA, cannot be considered as red-tagging.

Now, it would not also be amiss to ask: if say, contents identical or similar to the just above-quoted passage — exposing “a hidden process of recruitment into the armed struggle to overthrow the government” — in the Judge Magdoza-Malagar Resolution are found in newspaper opinion columns, investigative journalism pieces, academic journal articles and other academic discussions, legislative inquiry reports, amnesty guidelines, election counter-campaign materials, and even intra-Left/ intra-progressive polemical manifestoes, would the same be validly considered as red-tagging?

No, based on our analysis and synthesis of the pronouncements relevant to red-tagging in two recent Supreme Court (SC) Decisions in Deduro vs. Vinoya[4] and in two consolidated Badoy-Partosacases,[5] that those normally legitimate exercises of constitutional freedoms, rights and duties should not be considered red-tagging IF the “labelling” or naming of persons or organizations as connected with, or as “front organizations” of, the CPP-NPA-NDFP is done absent three crucial elements or aspects:

1. Most crucial, accompaniment by “threats to a person’s right to life, liberty or security,” including but not limited to “intimidation, harassment and surveillance”

2. Malicious purpose or motive to “silence,” “discourage” or “delegitimize” the legitimate exercise of various constitutional freedoms, especially of political dissent, critical discourse and human rights advocacy

3. Unfounded, “without showing any factual basis,” “not grounded in truth and facts”

Incidentally, the Judge Magdoza-Malagar Resolution was a central part of the factual situation in the Badoy-Partosa Decision where broadcast journalist Dr. Lorraine Marie T. Badoy red-tagged Judge Magdoza-Malagar for her said Resolution but found her guilty of indirect contempt of court, not red-tagging per se, there also being no law (only bills) defining and penalizing/ criminalizing red-tagging.

 The CPP’s Say and Reaffirmation

Interestingly, the CPP welcomed and even endorsed the Judge Magdoza-Malagar Resolution in a statement no less than on the day right after it was issued:

… we welcome the September 21, 2022 decision of the Manila RTC dismissing the said petition of the DOJ in which it failed to establish any basis for declaring the CPP and NPA as terrorists….

On initial reading, we found the 135-page decision penned by Judge Marlo Magdoza-Malagar reasonable and fair. We see that the judge took a historical point-of-view and situated the revolutionary movement from the perspective of the Filipino people’s struggle against oppression and exploitation. It is gratifying that the judge took effort to read the constitution and program of the CPP, the provisions of which she declared to be “reasonable aspirations of any civilized society.” We urge everyone, lawyers, judges, academics, teachers, students, journalists, workers, peasants and all other sectors, to follow the example of Judge Malagar and read and study for yourselves the constitution and program of the CPP. (underscorings supplied)

We will make a more comprehensive review of the decision in the coming days. At this point, however, it is important to underscore how the decision concluded that the CPP and NPA are not terrorists….[6]

We are not aware of any CPP “more comprehensive review of the decision in the coming days” since September 2022. Nor particularly of any CPP denial, correction or clarification of the decision’s findings of fact on the CPP’s “revolutionary dual tactics” as above quoted from the Judge Magdoza-Malagar Resolution, including its detailed and largely substantiated sections on “Dual Tactics in Peace Negotiations” (pp. 48-57), “Internal Purging” (pp. 60-71), “The Plaza Miranda Bombing (1971) [pp. 72-74], and “More recent attacks against civilians” (pp. 74-90).

The above-quoted passage on the CPP-NPA “(Revolutionary) Dual Tactics in the Recruitment Process” in the Judge Magdoza-Malagar Resolution would appear to have been even reaffirmed in this passage from the high policy-level CPP 54^th Anniversary Statement on December 26, 2022, just about three months after that Resolution and10 days after the passing of CPP Founding Chairman and ideological-political-organizational (I-P-O) guru Jose Maria Sison,[7] which Anniversary Statement reaffirmed his protracted legacy: (underscorings supplied)

From its current strength, we must aim to qualitatively expand and develop the capacity of the mass movement in the national capital region and in all regions within a definite period of time. This can be measured in terms of the bigger number of factories, campuses, offices, communities, and sectors that our work encompasses. Further, we must measure our success in terms of a substantial increase in the number of active Party branches and members, unions and mass organizations, as well as in terms of the widening reach of our propaganda and cultural activities. The highest metric of our success in developing the mass movement in the cities is the increase in material and political support to the NPA, and the number of forces deployed to the countryside and other fields of work.

In the countryside, our success is measured in terms of developing company-sized guerrilla fronts in contiguous areas… and advancing wave upon wave within a medium-term time-frame in order to steadily widen and strengthen the people’s war.

We must increase the strength of the Party’s organization. We must build mass organizations and link up with existing organizations, conduct widespread national democratic propaganda, and wage mass campaigns and struggles, in order to identify and recruit the advanced elements among the masses. On the basis of the growth of the revolutionary mass movement, let us continue to boldly increase the Party membership without letting a single undesirable in, while maintaining the reasonable standards set by the Party Constitution.[8]

It does not take much to “add one plus one” to see here what the Judge Magdoza-Malagar Resolution was speaking about as “the ‘symbiotic relationship’ or ‘mutualism’ between the armed struggle and the unarmed urban revolutionary mass movements” and “the indispensability of the UGMOs and NDMOs to the recruitment process of the CPP-NPA and to the armed struggle to overthrow the GRP.” It was like Judge Magdoza-Malagar saying, “The Emperor has no clothes.”

 Red-Tagging and Its Dangers

The Judge Magdoza-Malagar Resolution contains a significant part X on “The Dangers of Red-Tagging” (pp. 129-133) – even though red-tagging is not really an issue in assessing whether the CPP-NPA was a terrorist organization, which was actually one of Dr. Badoy-Partosa’s criticisms against the Resolution. In fact, being “terrorist”-tagged or red-tagged does not by itself make or establish that the tagged individual or organization is “terrorist.” Just the same, the Resolution does some service in red-flagging (pun intended, to mean warning on) the dangers of red-tagging, especially when done carelessly or indiscriminately. And interestingly, the Resolution relies much on the testimonies of DOJ witnesses Legazpi, Saguino and Celiz – ironically, former CPP cadres whom Judge Magdoza-Malagar apparently found to be credible but whom the CPP has tagged (pun intended) as among “the top Red-taggers.”[9] Here follows her Resolution’s relevant discussion in pp. 129-130:

During the proceedings in this Petition, the Petitioner has sought to establish, through the testimonies of Joel Minoto Legaspi, Joy James Sanguino and Jeffrey Celiz that among the dual tactics that are employed by the CPP is the utilization of above-ground (legal) movements (NDMOS) which espouse unarmed urban revolutionary mass movements as “fronts” for underground (illegal) movements (UGMOs) which espouse armed struggle.

The undisputed link between, and the identity of, the above ground (legal) organizations (NDMOs), the underground (illegal) organizations (UGMOs), and ultimately, the CPP-NPA is best illustrated in how the NDMOs provide a fertile ground for potential members of the underground movements which in turn, are a recruitment ground for the CPP-NPA. The personal experiences of Legaspi, Sanguino and Celiz however, reveal a common trend – they are first recruited to the above ground movements or activist groups such as the League of Filipino Students (LFS) and, while members of the above ground movement, they are further recruited to join the underground movement Kabataang Makabayan (KM). Later, as KM members, they are recruited to join the CPP-NPA. According to Legaspi, one of the purposes of above ground organizations is to prepare their members for a more radical membership in the underground organizations.

Notably, however, Legaspi, Sanguino and Celiz have made it clear that as members of underground organizations who are also recruiting students to above ground student organizations, they have been careful not to mention to their potential recruits their affiliation with the KM, presumably to avoid putting them off. It is only when a member of an “above ground” organization has been radicalized enough that he or she is regarded as sufficiently “ripe” for recruitment to an underground organization. Moreover, only members of an underground organization are finally recruited to the CPP-NPA.

It can be deduced from these witnesses’ accounts that while a member of the CPP-NPA may be a member of both UGMO and NDMO, this is not necessarily true for all members of NDMOs who, more often than not, may have joined an organization which they think is an activist organization, with no affiliation to any underground organization, much less to the CPP-NPA. Based on the testimony of Legaspi, Sanguino and Celiz, not every member of an aboveground organization is recruited to the UGMOs. Legaspi specifically recounts that during his time, only 15% to 20% of LFS members are recruited to the KM. This is later increased to 30% to 60% when reforms are undertaken to do away with conservatism within the Regional Youth Bureau.

In summary:

1. A member of an organization which is identified to be an NDMO is not always a member of any of the UGMOs, much less, of the CPP-NPA;

2. Not all members of an organization identified to be an NDMO espouse the radical view of overthrowing the present government by armed struggle;

Implied in Legaspi’s use of the term “recruitment” is the recruitee’s exercise of free, informed choice. “Recruitment” carries with it the presumption that the entire recruitment process – that of the recruiter getting the recruitee’s consent, presumably with the recruitee’s full knowledge of the nature of the organization that he or she was being recruited into – has been undertaken. It also implies that not all those who are recruited have consented to join a UGMO or the CPP-NPA.

And here lies the danger of “red-tagging.”

Red-tagging, defined as the malicious blacklisting of individuals or organizations critical or not fully supportive of the actions of a sitting government or administration as members of CPP-NPA is a pernicious practice that poses a threat to the security of activists. Members of NDMOs espouse valid societal change, without necessarily giving thought to “armed struggle” or “violence” aimed at overthrowing the government, as a means to achieve the same. To automatically lump activists, mostly members of the above ground organizations, as members of the CPP-NPA invariably constitute red-tagging.

To that definition of red-tagging in the Judge Magdoza-Malagar Resolution, we would qualify it by reiterating the three afore-mentioned crucial elements or aspects that make for red-tagging drawn from the more recent Deduro and Badoy-Partosa Decisions of the SC: “the use of threats and intimidation” to personal security; the malicious purpose or motive to “discourage” the legitimate exercise of various constitutional freedoms; and being unfounded i.e. “without showing any factual basis,” “not grounded in truth and facts.”

The Resolution speaks of “the recruiter getting the recruitee’s consent, presumably with the recruitee’s full knowledge of the nature of the organization that he or she was being recruited into.” There is the basic principle or right to know what [is the true and full nature of the organization that] one is getting into (or being made to get into). The right to know the truth because it “is the only ground upon which their [humankind’s] wishes can be safely carried out.”[10] Thus, we have the constitutional “right of the people to information on matters of public concern”[11] under a “regime of truth.”[12] Corollarily, we might say the right for these matters of public concern not to be hidden (or covered up) contrary to the public accountability principle of transparency, and more so the right not to be deceived.

“Consent” must be informed by “full knowledge” which in turn must be based on “the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.” Speaking of “dangers,” it may be dangerous to “presume[e]… the recruitee’s full knowledge of the nature of the organization that he or she was being recruited into” – given the “insider witness” testimony that “as members of underground organizations who are also recruiting students to above ground student organizations, they have been careful not to mention to their potential recruits their affiliation with the KM, presumably to avoid putting them off. It is only when a member of an ‘above ground’ organization has been radicalized enough that he or she is regarded as sufficiently ‘ripe’ for recruitment to an underground organization. Moreover, only members of an underground organization are finally recruited to the CPP-NPA.”

At the same time, the Judge Magdoza-Malagar Resolution rightfully warns against the “automatic lump[ing of] activists, mostly members of the above ground organizations, as members of the CPP-NPA.” And so, when there is any legitimate naming (truthfully “calling a spade a spade”) of CPP “front organizations” or NDMOs like say LFS, it should be clear that not all of its members are also members of the corresponding UGMO like KM, much less are they also members of the CPP, which is “the force at the core leading our cause forward.”[13] There are several organizational levels involved here, making it complicated, including the involvement of individual persons aside from organizations. To be sure, being clear on all this is easier said than done, but it must be done. Better restraint and carefulness must be exercised by all sides concerned because lives, liberty and reputations are at stake.

To just round this out for now, perhaps the best guidance for all concerned (on all sides) is the basic human relations principle of “doctrine of abuse of right”[14] codified in the Civil Code’s Article 19 cited in p. 17 of Badoy-Partosa: “Every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the performance of his duties, act with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith.”[15] — #

Soliman M. Santos, Jr.

Naga City, 17 December 2024

Footnotes

---

[1] An early martial law first mainly Leninist theorizing on legal struggle as part of the national-democratic revolution was the paper “Hinggil sa Legal na Pakikibaka” (4 Enero 1974) by the Samahang Demokratiko ng Kabataan (SDK). SDK was a NDMO pre-martial law that became a UGMO during martial law. See Patricio N. Abinales, “Fragments in History, Silhouettes of Resurgence: Student Radicalism in the Early Years of the Marcos Dictatorship,” Southeast Asian Studies, Vol. 46, No. 2, September 2008, at pp. 181-188.

[2] Rigoberto D. Tiglao, Manila Times opinion column pieces: “The Communist Party and Sison’s greatest trick” (November 9, 2020); and “Stop exposing communist fronts? That’s nuts” (July 13, 2022).

[3] Civil Code of the Philippines, Art. 8.

[4] G.R. No. 254753, July 6, 2023, uploaded May 7, 2024, penned by Associate Justice Rodil V. Zalameda; Concurring Opinion by Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen.

[5] A.M. No. 22-09-16-SC and G.R. No. 263384, August 15, 2023, uploaded February 28, 2024, penned by SAJ Leonen.

[6] Marco Valbuena, Chief Information Officer, Communist Party of the Philippines, “On the Manila RTC dismissal of terrorist proscription against the CPP and NPA,” September 22, 2022, accessible thru the CPP-NPA-NDFP website www.philippinerevolution.nu.

[7] Jose Maria Sison “died peacefully after a period of confinement in a hospital in Utrecht, The Netherlands [on December 16, 2022]… He was 83,” according to CPP Chief Information Officer Marco Valbuena shortly thereafter. Then, on December 23, 2022, Valbuena released what he referred to as Sison’s “valedictory address” entitled “The Filipino People’s Democratic Revolution is Invincible” and dated December 26, 2022. The was finalized days before Sison’s death, according to his wife and editor Julieta de Lima, who requested that it be released “a day or two before you publish the 54^th anniversary statement of the CPP Central Committee.” An “Early Edition” of the latter dated December 26, 2022 was released by Valbuena on December 25, 2022. All these documents and information appeared in the CPP-NPA-NDFP website www.philippinerevolution.nu.

[8] Central Committee, Communist Party of the Philippines, “Consolidate and further strengthen the Party! Frustrate the US-Marcos regime’s counterrevolutionary war and state terrorism!,” Comprehensively advance the people’s democratic revolution!,” December 26, 2022, accessible thru the CPP-NPA-NDFP website www.philippinerevolution.nu.

[9] “Who are the top Red-taggers?,” Ang Bayan, May 21, 2024, accessible thru the CPP-NPA-NDFP website www.philippinerevolution.nu, naming others: “Hermogenes Esperon Jr., Colonel Harold Cabunoc, Mocha Uson, Lorraine Badoy, … , Salvador Panelo and many others. Recently, Bato de la Rosa led wholesale Red tagging in the senate along with traitors like… Kate Raca and others who now serve the AFP. The SMNI Network, owned by Duterte’s henchman and now fugitive Apollo Quiboloy…”

[10] As quoted in p. 19 of Badoy-Partosa from The Diocese of Bacolod vs. Commission on Elections, 751 Phil. 301, 361-362 (2015). The original Justice Holmes pronouncement was in his Dissenting Opinion in Abrams vs. United States, 250 U.S. 616, at 630 (1919). See also Eric T. Kasper and Troy A. Kozma, “Absolute Freedom of Opinion and Sentiment on All Subjects: John Stuart Mill’s Enduring (and Ever-Growing) Influence on the Supreme Court’s First Amendment Free Speech Jurisprudence,” University of Massachusetts Law Review, Vol. 15 Issue 1, 2020, Article 1, pp. 21-22.

[11] 1987 Philippine Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 7.

[12] Ibid., Preamble, phrase “a regime of truth, justice, freedom, love, and peace.”

[13] Mao Zedong, “Strive to Build a Great Socialist Country” (September 15, 1954), Selected Works, Vol. V, First Edition 1977, p. 149.

[14] See J. Cezar S. Sangco, Philippine Law on Torts and Damages (Quezon City: JMC Press, Inc., Rev. Ed. 1978), particularly pp. 363-366 of Chapter IX “Special Torts (Human Relations).”

[15] This Article 19 has been the main legal basis for several civil damages for red-tagging suits against Badoy-Partosa and Jeffrey Celiz, including one recently decided in favor of plaintiff GMA7 television news broadcaster Alfonso Tomas “Atom” P. Araullo by RTC Quezon City Branch 306 Judge Dolly Rose R. Bolante-Prado in her Decision of 12 December 2024 in Civil Case No. R-QZN-23-08237.

---