Post on 07-Feb-2023
Running head: KIDNAPPING IN THE SOUTHERN PHILIPPINES 1
Kidnapping in the Southern Philippines
Sean O'Connor
American Military University
Research Methods
NSEC 500
Dr. William Hanson
September 23, 2014
KIDNAPPING IN THE SOUTHERN PHILIPPINES 2
Kidnapping in the Southern Philippines
Introduction
Kidnapping and slavery have a long history in the Philippines. The Moros in the
Southern Philippines engaged heavily in piracy, slavery, and were known to capture and ransom
Spanish missionaries. By the 1800s there was already an established scale for how much ransom
should be paid for an individual. However, in the 1990s there was a surge of kidnapping
incidents and by the mid-1990s the Philippines had been labelled the “kidnapping capital of
Asia”. In spite of the rise of kidnappings, over the last 24+ years there has only been a limited
study of the event. As of 2009 kidnapping had not been listed among the Philippine National
Police (PNP) list of index crimes “which are serious enough in nature and which occur with
sufficient frequency and regularity such that they can serve as an index to the crime situation” 1.
To put this in perspective; cattle rustling is included as an index crime. Another thing that
happened that contributed to the rise in kidnappings over time was the creation of the Abu
Sayyaf Group (ASG) in 1991. In 1993, they carried out their first kidnapping and eventually
became so successful at executing kidnappings and making a profit that it inspired the creation of
multiple other kidnapping groups.
1. Verzosa, Jesus A., April 22, 2009, Philippine National Police, Letter of
Instruction 02/09, Unit Crime Periodic Report, Camp Crame, Quezon City,
Philippines
KIDNAPPING IN THE SOUTHERN PHILIPPINES 3
To further add to the kidnapping problem is that the Southern Philippines has
become a conflict region with four separate insurgent groups. Because of this, the state is not
able to adequately enforce the rule of law in the region. The proliferation of illegal firearms and
groups of armed men anxious for money provide a steady pool of recruits for kidnapping groups.
Finally, the weak economy and widespread poverty provide motivation for individuals to engage
in the illicit economy and involvement in criminal activities.
Research method
This study examines what determines kidnapping targets, motives, and the outcome of
the kidnapping victim in the Southern Philippines. This was done by doing both content analysis
of documents and collection and analysis of archival data.
Hypothesis:
1. That foreigners are less likely to be subject to kidnapping in the Southern
Philippines than a local national
2. Unlike kidnappings in Iraq and Syria, kidnapping in the Philippines (even if done
by a terrorist group) is done primarily for financial/economic reasons
3. Most kidnapping victims in the Philippines are returned alive after a ransom is
paid.
Dependant variable: The likelihood of being kidnapped
The motive for kidnapping
The result of the kidnapping
KIDNAPPING IN THE SOUTHERN PHILIPPINES 4
Independent variable: The nationality of potential victims
The ideology of kidnap groups
The violence of the group
Review of Literature
There is no shortage of literature discussing kidnappings. However, most of this literature
mentions it in passing when discussing the big picture of terrorism or travel safety and very little
of it focused directly at the problem in the Philippines. If someone is looking for a specific case
or statistics, it is difficult to track these numbers and there seem to be extremes and inconsistency
in reporting. Even the Philippine government has no clear guidelines for counting kidnappings: if
a group is kidnapped together is it 1 case of mass kidnapping, or multiple individual cases? (Lara
and Schoofs, 2013). To add to the inconsistent data, not all kidnapping cases are reported. Many
times the case is resolved privately without police involvement. This skews the results of any
study significantly.
Probably the best look at kidnapping in the Philippines from other than the perspective of
“terrorism” is in a work edited by Fransisco Lara and Steven Schoofs called Out of the Shadows:
Violent Conflict and the Real Economy of Mindanao. This book is a compilation of work from
several researchers regarding the illicit economy of Mindanao; the largest island in the Southern
Philippines. In this book Eric Gutierrez contributed a very thorough chapter about kidnapping in
the Southern Philippines. In his work, Gutierrez breaks kidnappers into three distinct groups:
Bandits, Villain’s, and Bosses. The significance of this is that it looks at kidnapping in Mindanao
as something other than terrorism or conducted by terrorist organizations. Rather, he ties
KIDNAPPING IN THE SOUTHERN PHILIPPINES 5
kidnapping to other factors such as instability caused by conflict that feeds an illicit economy
and the economic and political gains achieved from it.
A fairly good “middle of the road” look at kidnapping in the Philippines is a journal
article by McKenzie O’Brian entitled “Fluctuations Between Crime and Terror: The Case of Abu
Sayyaf's Kidnapping Activities” that describes kidnapping by the Abu Sayyaf Group (an Islamic
separatist group that is the most active kidnapping group in the Philippines) as fluctuating
between crime and terrorism. With the blurring of lines between terrorist groups and
transnational criminal organizations, this is an important look at how these lines blur in regards
to kidnapping in the Southern Philippines. This work is unique because, while others have
written about the broad subject of the crime-terror nexus (Makarenko, 2004), O’Brian applies it
to a specific group. His work reviews the history of the Abu Sayyaf Group from inception to the
time the paper was published in 2012 giving special consideration to the times when the group
transitioned from a terrorist group with a political agenda to a criminal organization seeking
wealth.
When discussing the motivations of kidnappings by terrorist it is important to note
ideological motivations. James J.F. Forest’s work “Kidnapping by Terrorist Groups, 1970-2010:
Is Ideological Orientation Relevant?” is a study in ideological motivations. He looks at ethnic,
political, and religious motivations. While he does address the Philippines specifically, it is a
small part of the big picture he is trying to achieve. It is important because he notes how
communists, ethnic separatist, and Islamic extremist groups justify the act of kidnapping and
seeks to explore whether or not ideology effects propensity. The report offers some very good
hints at motivations, but finds that the size of the group has a greater effect on whether or not a
group will kidnap that ideology does.
KIDNAPPING IN THE SOUTHERN PHILIPPINES 6
In his work “The Social Organization of Violence Toward Hostages: Does
Violence in Captivity Indicate Which Kidnappers Will Kill?” by Everard M. Phillips operates on
the assumption that how a hostage is treated may indicate the hostage’s likelihood to survive. His
research suggest that the intensity of violence during captivity is more important to whether a
hostage will be killed than the criminal or radical orientation of the kidnappers. Phillips takes his
study a step further in “How Do Kidnappers Kill Hostages? A Comparison of Terrorist and
Criminal Groups”. Here Phillips divides homicides that occur in kidnapping into three
categories: execution, manual, and slaughter. The intent of the study was to determine whether
the criminal or radical orientation of the kidnappers related to the rationality of killing hostages,
and the methods used to commit the murder. At the conclusion of the study it revealed that
kidnappers appear rational in releasing hostages when a ransom is paid, but that a portion of
kidnappers may be emotionally unstable and capable of violent outburst. Both of these findings
could be important in attempting to determine the potential outcomes for a kidnapping victim.
The U.S. State Department releases crime and terror safety warnings through the
embassy of each country. This is a quick guide to let travellers know what risk to be aware of
while visiting a country. For the Philippines, the State Department warns of high risks of
kidnapping by terror groups (notably the Abu Sayyaf Group) in the Southern Philippines.
However, sometimes it appears that there is a hint of political bias when looking at kidnappings
in the Philippines and that both the U.S. government and the Philippine government may have an
interest in reporting kidnappings as a terrorist activity or conducted by a terrorist group.
The primary issue with most literature pertaining to kidnapping in general, and in
the Philippines and other “hot spots “particularly, is that after 9/11, there has been a push to tie
state or regional terror/insurgent groups to kidnapping and other crimes. While there is no doubt
KIDNAPPING IN THE SOUTHERN PHILIPPINES 7
that there are links between terror groups and criminal groups, it sometimes confuses the issue.
Without a clear understanding of contributing factors and motivations, it is difficult to combat
this crime. Further by putting all kidnapping at the foot of radical elements and disregarding the
role of economic kidnapping it prevents awareness and prevention. This paper will attempt to
identify how kidnapping victims are targeted, the motivations of kidnapping groups, and the
potential outcomes for kidnapping victims with a focus on the Southern Philippines.
Findings and Analysis
The Targets
In order to effectively combat kidnapping and ensure the safety and security of the
population we must understand how kidnappers target their victims. With the high levels of
poverty and little chance to move up economically, the illicit economy such as drugs,
kidnapping, and various entrepreneurs of violence is sometimes seen as a favourable option. In
1993, there were reportedly 42 kidnapping groups operating in the country with 23 of those
operating in Mindanao (Shadows). The most notorious terrorist group in the Philippines is the
Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG) operating mostly on the islands of Jolo, Basilan, and Mindanao. They
have turned kidnapping into a highly lucrative business conducting 137 documented kidnappings
from 1991 through August 2011 and is believed to have raised over $35 million from kidnapping
activities. (O’Brian, 2012). While they have not been shown to be especially selective on their
choice of victims (they have targeted both foreigners and locals) it would appear that they prefer
to kidnap locals. While members of the state population may not be able to leverage as high of a
ransom as foreigners, they can be ransomed more quickly with less attention from security
forces.
KIDNAPPING IN THE SOUTHERN PHILIPPINES 8
Locals that are kidnapped are usually either wealthy enough to be able to pay the ransom
quickly in cash or ordinary people that government officials can ransom. Among the wealthy, it
has been the successful Chinese-Filipino business owners that have been targeted for kidnapping
the most. The communities of the Southern Philippines that support the kidnapping business
(provide victims) are those that typically possess enough local economic prosperity to support it.
School teachers and nurses tend to be the most commonly targeted of the ordinary population of
Mindanao and Jolo. The other members of the local population that have been occasionally
targeted are those that can be used to influence local elections by causing embarrassment to a
political rival. This is a fairly vague percentage of the population and very difficult to calculate
what percentage of kidnapping victims may fall into this category.
Locals may not bring as much ransom, but the risk involved are significantly less. Only
about 20% of kidnapping victims are foreign (Briggs, 2014). Though no particular foreign
nationality seems to be preferred, the kidnappers have shown that they prefer “soft targets” for
the locations to conduct kidnappings and much of the kidnapping of foreigners has spilled over
across the border to soft targets in Malaysia. An example of this would the 21 kidnapping
victims taken from a resort in Sipadan, Malaysia in 2000 and then moved to an ASG safe area on
the island of Jolo in the Southern Philippines (Briggs, 2014). A review of multiple news sources
indicates that from 2000-2014 there have been approximately 43 kidnappings from the East
Coast of Sabah, Malaysia that have been strongly linked to the Abu Sayyaf Group in Jolo.
The Motivations
There are four separate insurgent groups operating in the Southern Philippines following
three separate ideologies (religious, communist, and ethnic). However, as far as motivations are
concerned, ideology has very little to do with the group’s decision to engage in kidnapping
KIDNAPPING IN THE SOUTHERN PHILIPPINES 9
(Forest, 2012). While the kidnapping itself may not be driven by ideology, the motive for the
kidnapping may be to extort a change in policy related to the group’s ideology. Though the ASG
has become the most significant kidnapping threat in the Southern Philippines, they have not
resorted to kidnapping as an act of terror as seen in recent news regarding Iraq and Syria. In
2007, the ASG was implicated in the beheadings of 10 Philippine Marines on the island of
Basilan. While this was done as an act of terror, it was done following an insurgent combat
operation and not while engaged in the criminal act of kidnapping.
However, there appears to be a grey area between economic kidnappings and those to
influence policy. In the past what has started out as a political motivation has been resolved
economically. In the case of the 2000 kidnapping of 21 hostages from Sipadan, Malaysia, the
ASG originally demanded political concessions and attempted to coerce policy (O’Brian, 2012).
Eventually the case was settled by payment of a ransom. Blurring the border between political
and economic kidnappings even more are the string of kidnappings that may occur around the
time of local elections. These may be conducted to embarrass or intimidate a rival politician in
hopes of influencing the election or as a method of “fund-raising” to support their own
campaigns.
Kidnapping in the Philippines sky rocketed in the 1990s prompting the country to be
named the “kidnapping capital of Asia”. In 1997, it was estimated that approximately 310
million Philippine Pesos in ransom money were paid to various groups (Lara and Schoofs, 2013).
That would amount to billions of Philippine Pesos paid in ransom over the last 24 years since the
kidnapping rate first began to escalate. The ASG has become so adept at profiting from
kidnapping that it has inspired multiple other groups that only engage in the business of kidnap
for ransom. According to Control Risk Group, the median ransom settlement in the Philippines
KIDNAPPING IN THE SOUTHERN PHILIPPINES 10
in 1999 was $78,000 U.S. dollars (Briggs, 2014). In a mostly rural economy based upon
sustenance farming, it is understandable why the illicit economy and kidnapping in particular can
be appealing.
Another way that kidnapping gives an economic reward is by serving as a form of start-
up capital. The conflict and instability along with significant property rights issues has created a
unique market in Mindanao. Armed groups are often hired to guarantee ownership of property by
landowners and by squatters to secure access to land they do not own. The instability, economic
insecurity, and the weak local and central government have created conditions were the ability to
strike back has become the best guarantee of security (Gutierrez & Borras, 2004). In order to
gain a reputation in providing these services someone in the business of violence first has to have
a reputation for violence and the ability to earn fear and respect. Kidnapping and extortion have
often served as start-up capital for such business ventures.
Survival Outcome
There are several factors that affect whether or not a hostage survives the kidnapping
incident. Taking the ransom completely out of the equation, factors that decide a hostage’s
survivability may include the ideology of the group, the size of the organization, how well
organized the organization is, and the intensity of violence displayed during the kidnapping.
Though there has been no information or statistics specific for violence and survival in the
Southern Philippines, an analysis of general available data would suggest that geography and
culture have less to do with survivability than with other factors.
When looking at how different ideological groups view outsiders the term “othering” is
used. This term simply differentiates between “us” and “them”. The more “othering” that occurs
KIDNAPPING IN THE SOUTHERN PHILIPPINES 11
the less human the “them” are in the eyes of the kidnapper and it becomes easier to inflict harm.
Religious and ethnic groups have been found to have strong “othering” components to their
ideology and can become indiscriminately violent. On the other hand, groups like the New
People’s Army (NPA) that have a Marxist ideology tend to display less “othering” (Forest,
2012). The NPA may be less likely to become violent with a local hostage because of fear it
would have a negative impact on their ability recruit and mobilize the masses in pursuit of the
utopian vision. Political insurgents are more likely to consider political implications than a group
that is motivated by religion. Though this is a factor that must be taken into consideration, it does
not appear to be among the prime reasons that a hostage may be killed.
The size of the group seems to play a factor in the outcome of a kidnapping situation. The
larger the group the greater their capabilities and the likelihood that they will have people
capable of great violence and murder. Research has shown that how lethal a terrorist
organization is has more to do with their capability than to how radical their ideology is (Forest,
2012). However, ASG involvement with kidnapping is when there is a peak in membership. Part
of this is because members are drawn by the potential for income that is available through
kidnapping. When the ASG focuses less on criminal activity and more on terrorist activity is
when membership is typically at its lowest and the group has a more radical ideology. Another
reason for this increase in size is because of the infrastructure that needs to exist in order to keep
a hostage for long durations (sometimes over a year) on an island as small as Jolo.
Experience and organization of a kidnapping group appear to be key for a favourable
outcome for a kidnapping victim. Groups that come together to perform a kidnapping suddenly
to take advantage of an opportunity can be very dangerous for the victim. They typically do not
plan on conducting future kidnappings so have little to lose by killing a hostage. Common
KIDNAPPING IN THE SOUTHERN PHILIPPINES 12
criminal groups kill their hostages in 52% of the kidnappings. These common criminals are also
more prone to violence and are more likely to express frustration and anger through violent
outburst. If the ransom is not paid this violence extends to how the hostage is murdered in that
the majority were either strangled or beaten to death (manual) and a small percentage had their
throats cut (slaughter style) (Phillips, 2004). Organized criminal and radical groups, especially
groups that are in the business of kidnapping, are more likely to release a hostage after the
ransom has been paid. Organized groups release their hostages in 69.6% of cases after the
ransom had been paid (Phillips, 2004). Killing a hostage after the ransom is paid makes it more
difficult for their business to continue. When a hostage had been killed, it was usually in an
execution style with the slaughter style of killing seldom used. The level of organization appears
to be tied to the intensity of violence the hostage suffers during captivity, but also in their odds of
release and the method used in their murder.
Conclusion
Local nationals are kidnapped more often than foreigners and the majority of foreigners
are kidnapped from “soft targets”, often from Malaysia. Though foreigners may be able to fetch
a higher ransom it brings unwanted attention from security forces and the group may be forced to
hold the hostages for a long period of time. Though usually the cost of holding hostages can be
passed on to who-ever is paying the ransom, holding a hostage longer increases the risk.
The usual reason for kidnapping in the Southern Philippines is for economic benefit.
Foreigners will typically be kidnapped only for economic reasons while local nationals may also
be kidnapped for various political reasons. The lack of a legal economy, large groups of
unemployed armed men, and the inability of the government to provide security and rule of law
create an environment where economic kidnappings provide the ability for social advancement.
KIDNAPPING IN THE SOUTHERN PHILIPPINES 13
Though it appears that terrorist organization with rumoured Al Qaeda ties is responsible for the
majority of the kidnappings, there have been no cases of kidnapping as a terrorist tactic.
Individuals kidnapped by a professional kidnapping group have a higher chance of
survival than those abducted by common criminal groups or those kidnapped as a crime of
opportunity. It is common for the ASG to conduct kidnapping operations while they have a large
membership to facilitate the infrastructure needed, large groups tend to increase the chances of
harm coming to a hostage. More information would need to be gathered to determine if the ASG
falls victim to this rule as well.
Unfortunately, there is not sufficient information available for a comprehensive
collection and analysis due to the very nature of the crime. In the future, research interviews
should be conducted with kidnap victims after release to determine other aspects of how they
may have been targeted and levels of violence and overall treatment during captivity. An attempt
to account for variables such as environment, culture, leadership, competition, etc. should be
made in future research. It is likely that case studies based upon specific kidnapping groups in
the region would create a better understanding the problem.
References
Briggs, Rachel. The Kidnapping Business. (London, Foreign Policy Center, 2001) Accessed:
September 13, 2014. EBSCO Database
Forest, James J.F., “Kidnapping by Terrorist Groups, 1970-2010: Is Ideological Orientation
Relevant?” Crime & Delinquency 58, no. 5 (2012): 769-797. Accessed: September 13,
2014. DOI: 10.1177/0011128712452962
KIDNAPPING IN THE SOUTHERN PHILIPPINES 14
Gutierrez, E., & Borras, Jr., S. (2004). “The Moro Conflict: Landlessness and Misdirected State
Policies” [Entire issue]. Policy Studies, 8
Lara, Francisco and Steven Schoofs eds. Out of the Shadows:Violent Conflict and the Real
Economy of Mindanao. (n.p: International Alert, 2013). Accessed February 2014.
http://international-alert.org/news/out-shadows
Makarenko, T. (2004, February). The Crime–Terror Continuum: Tracing the Interplay between
Transnational Organised Crime and Terrorism. Global Crime, 6(1), 129-145. Retrieved
from http://www.silkroadstudies.org/new/docs/publications/Makarenko_GlobalCrime.pdf
O’Brian, McKenzie. (2012) Fluctuations Between Crime and Terror: The Case of Abu Sayyaf's
Kidnapping Activities, Terrorism and Political Violence 24, no.2 (2012): 320-336.
Accessed: August 25, 2014. DOI: 10.1080/09546553.2011.648679
Phillips, Everard M. “The Social Organization of Violence Toward Hostages: Does Violence in
Captivity Indicate Which Kidnappers Will Kill?” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 28,
no. 6 (2012): 1314-1337. Accessed September 14, 2014. DOI:
10.1177/0886260512468249
Phillips, Everard M. “How Do Kidnappers Kill Hostages? A Comparison of Terrorist and
Criminal Groups”, Homicide Studies (February 2014): 1-26. Accessed: September 14,
2014. DOI: 10.1177/1088767914522466
Turner, Mark, “The Kidnapping Crisis in the Philippines 1991--1993: Context and
Management”, Journal of Contingencies & Crisis Management 3, no. 1 (March 1995): 1
– 11. Accessed August 19, 2014.
http://web.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/ehost/detail/detail?vid=4&sid=2f5ddf92-
65a0-48bb-8422-
1ce12fca32c0%40sessionmgr110&hid=123&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY2
9wZT1zaXRl#db=bth&AN=10478964
United States Department of State Bureau of Diplomatic Security. Philippines Crime and Safety
Report 2012. Accessed August 30, 2014.
https://www.osac.gov/Pages/ContentReportDetails.aspx?cid=12026
KIDNAPPING IN THE SOUTHERN PHILIPPINES 15
United States Department of State Bureau of Diplomatic Security. Philippines Crime and Safety
Report 2013. Accessed August 30, 2014.
https://www.osac.gov/pages/ContentReportDetails.aspx?cid=13574
United States Department of State Bureau of Diplomatic Security. Philippines Crime and Safety
Report 2014. Accessed August 30, 2014.
https://www.osac.gov/pages/ContentReportDetails.aspx?cid=15294
Criteria Exemplary 19-20
Accomplished 16-18
Developing 13-15
Beginning 1-12
Unacceptable 0
Total
Synthesis of Knowledge
19
Foundation of Knowledge
20
Application of Knowledge
20
Organization of Ideas/Format
20
Writing and Research Skill
20
Total 99
Sean, this was an extremely good paper, which met all assignment requirements. Your
paper was logical, and well-written. Your writing was strong throughout. Super work.
Dr. Bill