Why Mayor Isko’s calling out of natdem activists’ March 8 protest is on point

MANILA—Manila Mayor Francisco “Isko Moreno” Domagoso publicly criticized national democratic (ND) activists this week who vandalized the Lagusnilad Underpass during the March 8 protest marking International Women’s Day. Viewed beyond the political noise, however, the mayor’s remarks reflect the widening gap between activist messaging and public accountability.

During the March 9 flag-raising ceremony at Kartilya ng Katipunan, Mayor Isko condemned the spray-painting of slogans across the newly cleaned underpass, describing the act as disrespectful to the city and its residents.

“Lagusnilad… punong-puno ng kadugyutan ng mga so-called na ipinaglalaban tayo,” he said, referring to the rallyists who claimed to be fighting for the public. “Habang pinaglalaban kayo, okay lang na dumihan nila ang kapaligiran ng Maynila… baboy na baboy ang Lagusnilad.”

His criticism was blunt and pointed, saying that activism that damages public infrastructure ultimately harms communities it says it defends.

The contradiction of “fighting for the people”

Mayor Isko also called out ND or natdem groups that frame their protests as struggles on behalf of ordinary citizens. He questioned whether the public ever authorized them to act in that role.

“Ako, Pilipino… hindi mayor ha. As Filipino, hindi ko sila in-authorize ipaglaban ako,” Domagoso said. “Ewan ko kung in-authorize niyo sila ipaglaban kayo.”

The point resonates beyond the incident itself. Protest movements often claim to speak for “the masses,” yet their tactics sometimes impose costs on the same public, whether through damaged property, disrupted transport, or strained local resources needed for cleanup.

“I'm going to spend money, acquire paint, not for donation anymore because hindi naman dapat lagi donate lang ng donate. Sa mga mamamayan ng Lungsod ng Maynila, o gagastusin ko po yung salapi ninyo. Bibili po ako ng balde baldeng pintura at roller. At imbis na yung mga empleyado ng engineering at DPS ay patuloy na linisin yung sunog sa Parola, sa Pandacan, sa Intramuros, ibibigay namin yung panahon sa kanila para linisin ito.” he said in a March 9 Facebook post.

Mayor Isko’s point explains that for city governments like Manila, these costs are not abstract. They translate into taxpayer-funded repairs and diverted public funds.

Courtesy of Mayor Isko Moreno Domagoso's Facebook account.

A pattern, not a one-off incident

The Lagusnilad vandalism also echoes a similar controversy in 2019, when a youth group defaced the same underpass after the city government had just restored it. At the time, Mayor Isko also slammed Panday Sining, the cultural arm of the Anakbayan, and rejected the group’s apology and criticized their methods.

“Gusto niyo ng real talk? Hindi kayo dadami… Tama ang layunin ninyo pero mali ang pamamaraan ninyo,” he said in a video message then.

He also questioned the assumption that activist groups automatically represent the poor.

“Sino ba ang humingi ng tulong sa inyo para ipaglaban ninyo sila? You volunteered yourself para ipaglaban niyo daw sila.”

The repetition of the same location and tactic underscores why the mayor’s frustration now carries added weight. From the perspective of city governance, the issue is no longer just protest, but repeated damage to public spaces.

Public perception matters

Another reason Mayor Isko’s remarks strike a chord is the growing disconnect between activist rhetoric and public perception.

Netizens online quickly circulated photos of the vandalized walls after the March 8 rally, with many criticizing the behavior of protesters.Mayor Isko captured this sentiment in 2019 in a remark that cut to the political consequences.  

“Hindi kayo dadami… kinamumuhian kayo ng tao. Tama ang layunin ninyo pero mali ang pamamaraan ninyo.”

For movements that rely heavily on public legitimacy, this is not a minor problem. Messaging that alienates ordinary citizens risks shrinking the very constituency activists claim to mobilize.

Love-and-hate relationship?

Interestingly, Mayor Isko’s criticism cannot easily be dismissed as coming from a long-time opponent of the national democratic movement.

In 2017, after losing his senatorial bid, he  served as a consultant for the government peace panel in negotiations with the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP). That role placed him within the broader ecosystem of engagement between the state and national democratic organizations, which consistently supported the talks between the GRP and the NDFP.

FRIENDLIER TIMES. Mayor Isko (back row, third from right) standing beside Satur Ocampo, former Bayan Muna Partylist representative, in 2017 amid National Democratic Front of the Philippines' consultants during the peace negotiations between the NDFP and the Government of the Republic of the Philippines.

His current criticism, therefore, appears less ideological and more practical, focused on governance and civic responsibility rather than political alignment.

To be sure, none of this diminishes the importance of protest in a democratic society. Demonstrations have historically been essential tools for raising awareness about injustice and mobilizing social change. But Mayor Isko’s remarks highlight a line that activists often struggle to navigate, that of differentiating the line between assertive protest and destructive spectacle.

Spray-painting public infrastructure or heckling authorities may generate dramatic images for social media and protest documentation. Yet it also creates tangible consequences for the communities where those acts occur. For local governments tasked with maintaining public spaces, that distinction matters.

Ultimately, Mayor Isko’s comments resonate because they raise a simple but uncomfortable question: Who really benefits from protest tactics that natdem activists are known for? If movements seek broader public support, the answer may lie not in louder slogans and graffitis, but in methods that align their advocacy with the everyday interests of the people.

Mayor Isko, like many other politicians across the country who seem to have lost interest in “playing nice” with national democratic organizations, reflects the denudation of the popular support that these groups once enjoyed.