On the Conditions of Prisons, Jails, and Detention Centers

          Pursuant to its constitutional functions of visitorial powers over jails, prisons, or detention facilities, and monitoring the Philippine Government's compliance with the international treaty obligations on human rights, the Commission on Human Rights has conducted investigation and received reports on the inhuman condition of jails and prisons in many parts of the country.

          A recent mission report, as confirmed by the media, showed the deplorable conditions of the Manila City Jail as unfit for human habitation. The City Jail, which is supposed to accommodate one thousand (1,000) prisoners has now over three thousand four hundred (3,400) inmates. The lack of space force the inmates to ration the time for their hours of sleep. The dimly lit place stinks that no matter how hard the area is cleaned, the foul smell cannot be eradicated as the dirt is embedded in the cracks. The building itself is in the state of disrepair. Such conditions have contributed to the incidents of violence among inmates who have become short-tempered and emotionally unstable.

          The Medical Division of the jail has stated that there are 27 inmates should be confined to a mental hospital. Convicted persons are mixed with persons still waiting for trial.

          The substandard and inadequate penal facilities generally exist throughout the country.

          Article 10 of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights reads:

          Likewise, Art. III Sec. 19 Par (2) of the Philippine Constitution reads:

          The Commission on Human Rights accordingly renders this Human Rights Advisory as a reminder to all appropriate national, city, provincial and municipal authorities of their compliance with the aforesaid international instrument on human rights and the Philippine Constitution. The maintenance of the penitentiary system is for the treatment of prisoners with the aim of their reformation and social rehabilitation.

          Let copies of this Human Rights Advisory be sent to the Secretary of the Department of Justice, the Director of Bureau of Corrections, the Director of Bureau of Jail Management and Penology, and the City and Provincial Governments and the Secretary of the Department of Social Welfare and Development for their appropriate action.

          Quezon City, 20 July 1999

 

On the Death Penalty for Minors

          We are issuing the following Human Rights Advisory on the proposal to lower the age of majority from 18 years to 16 years old, with the intention of imposing the death penalty to minors.

          1. The said plan will violate at least two (2) international instruments on human rights, which the Philippines is a party, the Philippine Constitution enacted legislation concerning children.

          Article 6(5) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights reads:

 Likewise, Article 37(a) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child reads:

"No child shall be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Neither capital punishment nor life imprisonment without possibility of release shall be imposed for offenses committed by persons below eighteen (18) years of age." (underscoring supplied)

          Under our present law, all persons below the age of 18 are considered children (Republic Act No. 6809) . Article 1 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child states that a child means every human being below the age of 18 years. Article XV, Section 3(2) of the Philippine Constitution reads:

          2. Due to their age and mental immaturity, children need special protection and care. Instead of               terminating the lives of minors, by applying the death penalty for special offenders, they should               be given special protection for their development.

          3. It is the duty of the State to exercise its role as " Parens Patriae " to provide special                protection to children against all forms of neglect, abuse, cruelty and exploitation and other                conditions prejudicial to their development unable as they are to take of what concerns them.                The political community of the State should look after their welfare. (Nery vs. Lorenzo, 44                SCRA 431 (1973).

          4. Children who may have committed offenses or find themselves in conflict with the law should be               given special attention under the Child Welfare Code (Presidential Decree No. 603) . If a               minor is found guilty of an offense, the sentence will be suspended to give him opportunity for               his rehabilitation.

          5. The Commission on Human Rights reiterates its position that it is against any law imposing                death penalty. The Commission also reiterates the Resolution submitted to the Senate to ratify                the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,                appealing to all states to abolish the death penalty in their statutes. The majority of the nations                have already abolished the death penalty, which is consistent with the protection and                promotion of human rights. The International Criminal Court, approved in Rome , and the UN                Special Tribunals in trying more serious cases with genocide and crime against humanity do not                impose death penalty.

          Quezon City , 13 September 1999

 

Pornography and Obscenity

          The Charter of the United Nations reaffirms the States' recognition of the dignity and worth of the human person and the equal rights of men and women. The inherent dignity of the human person is reiterated in Article II paragraph 11 of the Philippine Constitution, which reads:

          The said principles are also reiterated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, of which the Philippines is a party to.

          Recent events have shown a proliferation in the movies and the media of offensive materials obviously considered as pornography. Naked bodies of women and passing shots of sexual acts are repeatedly shown. Women are thus treated as non-human beings or as objects of exploitation which are completely violative of the dignity of women.

          The Philippines is also a signatory to the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women which reaffirms faith in the fundamental rights in the dignity, and worth of the human person and emphasizing the rights of women who are usually discriminated against. The said Convention emphasizes the contribution of women in the procreation and upbringing of children and the preservation of the family as a social institution.

          The Commission on Human Rights is fully aware of the freedom of opinion and expression guaranteed by the Philippine Constitution. While Article 19(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guarantees that everyone shall have the right to hold opinion without interference and the freedom of expression, said rights are subject to restrictions as may be provided by law as necessary for the respect of the rights or reputation of others and protection of morals.

          The CHR views with concern the exhibition of films and publication in the media depicting women as mere subjects of exploitation and degrades their human dignity, which are all incompatible with the aforesaid principles. They seriously harm not only women but also the whole society itself giving wrong signals especially to the youth of our country.

          The exploitation of women also endangers the sanctity of marriage and family life as guaranteed in the Philippine Constitution (Article II, paragraph 12 and Article XV, Section 1-4).

          Pursuant to its advisory authority in respect to human rights and its constitutional function of monitoring Philippine Government compliance with international instruments on human rights, the CHR reminds the appropriate state authority as " Parens Patriae " and all sectors of society especially the movie industry and the media on the observance of the aforesaid principles.

          Quezon City, 08 November 1999

 

On the Philippine Position on the East Timor Atrocities

          The Philippines voted against an international inquiry into atrocities in East Timor amid reports that Indonesian troops had massacred hundreds of people including church workers, nuns, and priests in the island.

          The report said that in an emergency session of the 53 members of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, 32 voted in favor and 12 against, with 6 abstaining on the inquiry. The Philippines was one of those who voted against said inquiry.

          The Commission on Human Rights, as a constitutional body mandated to protect and promote human rights is gravely concerned with the vote of the Philippines on the issue. The acts which Indonesian troops and Indonesian supported-militia have committed and are still committing gross violations of human rights, which amount to genocide. The Philippines is a party to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

          Under said Convention, genocide includes those that involve 1) killing, maiming, physical or mental harm; 2) creation of deleterious living conditions; 3) imposing birth control; 4) forcibly removing their children from their families.

          It is the position of the Commission on Human Rights that the Philippines must seriously consider its position on the atrocities in East Timor if only to show its sincerity in its national policy on the protection of human rights as provided for in the Philippine Constitution. While it is true that the ASEAN members follow a policy of non-interference among its members, the matter of human rights violation is more vital and fundamental, as it is one of the basic objectives of the United Nations Charter.

 

 

On the Deployment of Marines in Public Places

          The Commission on Human Rights is informed through news reports that 500 Marines will be deployed in shopping malls, airports and business establishments in Metro Manila to assist the Philippine National Police (PNP) in maintaining peace and order and to prevent criminals from doing their activities. For the purpose, Director General Panfilo M. Lacson, chief of the Philippine National Police, has made representations to the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines.

          The Commission on Human Rights manifests its grave concern on said plan as it might affect civil and political rights. In accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the ideal of freedom from fear and want can only be achieved if conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy his civil and political rights, as well as his economic, social and cultural rights.

          Article II, Section 3 on the Declaration of Principles and State Policies of the Philippine Constitution provides that:

           The maintenance of peace and order is basically a police function. To deploy the Marines who are trained more on military discipline than purely police matters might contravene this principle of civilian supremacy in the country. The marines who are not trained for civilian and police duties are likely to commit excesses. The plan to assign military officers will create an atmosphere in the general public of the militarization of the country.

          Article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides that "it is only time of public emergency which threatens the life of the entire nation and the existence of which is officially proclaimed that the State may take measures required by the exigency of the situation." No such emergency situation exists and the mere presence of military men in public places might cause grave concern and unduly alarm the people.

          Further, the police measure runs smack of our established system of order and governance.

          Under Republic Act No. 6975, otherwise known as the Department of Interior and Local Government Act of 1990, the DILG-PNP assumes primary responsibility on matters affecting internal security, including the suppression of insurgency effective January 1, 1995 (Sec. 12) and the DND-AFP only undertakes support role except in insurgency-affected areas which lists often change upon assessment y the National Peace and Order Council (Sec. 4, Executive Order No. 216, December 16, 1994). Where the situation demands for the AFP to assume a primary role in internal security concerns, the law requires that the President issue the pertinent executive fiats upon recommendation of the Peace and Order Council (Sec. 12, RA 6975).

          Needless to state, such police measure is of far-reaching implications. In the interests of good governance and in the pursuit of democratic ideals, the PNP leadership should have consulted with the peace and order council before making such an alarming move, but there was none.

          From all indications and with the sheer number of Marines in Metro Manila in the campaign against criminality, said DND-AFP role in purely police matters could not pass off as "one of support role" but "an inordinate intervention " in police work. While criminal elements may abound in Metro Manila and the crime index may reach alarming proportions, it does not necessitate for its suppression through "the employment of bigger tactical forces and the utilization of higher caliber armaments and better-armored vehicles " from the AFP, to quote the language of the law (Ibid).

          The law requires the use of such firepower and the intervention of the AFP in situations where, to emphasize, "insurgents have gained considerable foothold in the community" (Ibid) which condition does not obtain in Metro Manila much less in shopping malls.

          Indeed, the Commission is amused to no end at the deployment of these marines in shopping malls in Metro Manila after the Christmas season and the New Year when criminal elements who ply their trade therein are provided lesser opportunities as people in the malls considerably thin out.

          The PNP leadership may do well to reflect on the spirit and wisdom of the law and reconsider its strategies in the campaign against criminality in Metro Manila even as they keep their zest to protect the public from harm. Particularly, the Commission urges the PNP leadership and all concerned to drop the police measure, as it is inimical to the promotion of a human rights friendly environment in the country.   

     Quezon City, 10 January 2000