On the Recognition of the Ancestral Domain of Indigenous Cultural Minorities

          The incident that occurred in the Municipality of Siocon, Zamboanga del Norte concerning the rights of Subanens, an indigenous cultural community, on the ancestral domain over an area of almost 6, 000 hectares, has prompted the Commission on Human Rights to issue this Human Rights Advisory. The Commission on Human Rights, Region IX, which took cognizance of the complaint of the Subanen people, found that Toronto Ventures, Inc., a Canadian mining corporation, was operating in the area claimed to be within the ancestral domain of the said tribe without their prior consent as required under Section 16 of the Mining Act of 1995 (Republic Act 7942) and Section 3 of Republic Act 7381, known as the "Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997 (IPRA)." A number of the picketeers and demonstrators who opposed and resisted the mining operations in the area suffered physical injuries caused by police authorities who forcibly dispersed the picket and even placed them under detention.

          The rights of indigenous and tribal peoples have been recognized in the Convention of the International Labor Organization (ILO), Convention 169, dated June 27, 1989, setting a general policy recognizing the right of indigenous and tribal peoples to enjoy the full measures of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Among the rights mentioned in said Convention are the rights of ownership and possession of the peoples over lands, which they traditionally occupy. Article 14 of the Convention reads:

          Accordingly, the Philippines declared among its State Policies in Section 22, Article II of the Philippine Constitution, which reads:

          Implementing said state policy is Republic Act No. 8371 entitled, " An Act To Recognize, Protect, and Promote the Rights of Indigenous Cultural Communities, Creating a National Commission on Indigenous Peoples, Establishing Implementing Mechanisms, Appropriating Funds Thereof, and for Other Purposes." The said law defines ancestral domains, which covers not only the physical environment but also the total environment including the spiritual and cultural bonds to the areas, which the ICCs/IPs possess, occupy and use and to which they have claim of ownership. (Section 4, RA No. 8371)

          Republic Act No. 8371 recognizes, among others, the right to ownership of land, bodies of water traditionally occupied by the International Cultural Communities (ICCs). They have the right to develop lands and natural resources and the right to stay in said territories. (Section 7, RA No. 8371)

          The constitutional validity of ancient domains has been sustained by the Supreme Court of the Philippines in CRUZ, et. al. vs. NCIP, G.R. No. 135385, promulgated on December 6, 2000. The petitioners in said case have questioned the constitutional validity of RA No. 8371 and its implementing regulations.

          The Commission on Human Rights, pursuant to its constitutional function of monitoring Philippine government's compliance with international treaty obligations in human rights (Art. XIII, Sec. 18[7]), issues this human rights advisory to remind all concerned, especially government authorities and agencies, to respect the aforesaid international instruments on human rights and the constitutional policy and its implementing legislations, RA No. 8371, including its rules and regulations, for their information and guidance.

          Quezon City, 13 September 2001

 

On International Terrorism and Biological Warfare

          The terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C. on September 11, 2001 as well as the commission of international crimes in several parts of the world has become a major policy consideration for the Philippine government. The United States and its allies have embarked on a military solution, attacking Afghanistan with sophisticated warfare, causing the death of civilians and the destruction of non-military targets as a means of retaliation for the attacks as well as a strategy in combating terrorism. These developments raised much concern among peace loving people the world over. More violent and destructive measures have been resorted to meet the threat of terrorism. There is fear everywhere that military measures may be applied to other countries.

          Terrorists are ideologically motivated, believing in the justice of their cause. Many of them are well financed and have a mass base in many countries, with the network of unidentified supporters. Certainly, terrorism is not an ordinary crime and its perpetrators are not ordinary criminals. The threat they pose to world peace has become more serious and widespread with the use chemical warfare. Already, anthrax sent through mail has injured and killed innocent civilians. Introduction of gasoline in the reservoir of Basilan was reported. Unscrupulous criminals may commit similar acts of terrorism. Such acts are crimes against humanity, which all peace loving nations should cooperate in its eradication. Current laws may not suffice to meet the threat.

          The Commission on Human Rights, as a national institution for the promotion and protection of human rights, supports the international efforts of counter-terrorism, as mandated in United Nations Resolutions. Specifically, it favors the adoption of all measures for strictly monitoring the movement of funds from terrorist organizations of identifying suspected terrorists that stage attacks and restricting the movement of suspected terrorists.

          All these acts of counter-terrorism, however, should be consistent with the respect for human rights, especially of the innocent individuals. Specifically, these measures should conform with all international instruments on human rights and respect the dignity of every human person.

          We urge the Philippine Senate to immediately ratify the Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court. The said Court has jurisdiction to try all crimes against humanity including international terrorism, as a peaceful solution to the problem. This development thus behooves the Commission to take the stand that the case of international terrorism linked to Osama Bin Laden and the Al-Qaeda be submitted to the International Criminal Court for its peaceful resolution.

          Quezon City, 24 October 2001

 

On the Corporal Punishment of Children

          The United Nations Commission on Human Rights, during its 60 th Session in Geneva, with the support of the High Commission for Human Rights, members of the Committee on the Rights of the Child, child focused non-governmental organization (NGOs), as well as individuals prominent in the promotion and protection of children's human rights, have launched a global initiative towards ending all corporal punishment of children.

          The Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines, as a constitutional institution mandated to carry out the state policy guaranteeing full respect for human rights, fully supports the aforesaid movement.

          The Philippines, as a matter of fact, since 1974, has enacted legislation and several executive issuances prohibiting corporal punishment of children and providing for penalties for persons or institutions. The Philippines has prohibited all forms of physical and mental violence on children. Article 59 of Presidential Decree No. 603, known as the "Child and Youth Welfare Code", penalizes any person who will inflict cruel and unusual punishment upon the child or will deliberately subject him to indignities and other excessive chastisement that embarrass or humiliate him (Article 59 [8]) . Republic Act No. 7610, enacted on June 17, 1992, declared as the policy of the state to provide special protection from all forms of abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation and discrimination, and other conditions prejudicial to their development, provide sanctions for their commission and carry out a program for prevention and deterrence of and crisis intervention in situations of child abuse, exploitation and discrimination. (Section 2, RA 7610)

          In October 1993, the Secretary of Justice promulgated rules and regulations for the protection of children in situations in armed conflicts. Likewise, the Department of Education, Culture and Sports has issued rules prohibiting corporal punishment in schools and imposing disciplinary actions on school authorities violating said rules and regulations.

          The Commission on Human Rights issues this Human Rights Advisory to remind all government offices and officials, and individuals concerned to strictly, comply with these laws and regulations prohibiting corporal punishment of children. Any incident of corporal punishment of children must be reported to the Commission on Human Rights or any law enforcement agency for appropriate action.

          Quezon City, 25 October 2001

 

On the Sexual Abuse and Torture of Women in Custody

          Cases of rape, sexual abuse and torture committed against women detainees by the police, military and prison officials/personnel in the country have been brought to the attention of the Commission on Human Rights. Women in police custody have been reported being subjected to other forms of torture or ill treatment, including threats, slaps, punches, kicks and sexual assault, such as groping of breasts. The male officers had been allowed access to female detainees without the presence of female prison officers.

          Most of the victims belong to the socially disadvantaged groups, including suspected prostitutes, street children, drug addicts and the poor. Often, they were arrested for minor crimes, such as petty theft or on suspicion of violating anti-vagrancy laws. Usually, in majority of the arrests incidents, the police apprehended the suspects without a warrant of arrest.

          The anti-vagrancy law has been used as a pretext for arbitrary arrest and detention of women, who have subsequently complained of rape, sexual abuse and other ill treatment by police officers. Women as sex workers are among the most marginalized and discriminated group in Philippine society. They are particularly very vulnerable to human rights violations because of their low status.

          To cite one instance, which is quite common in many prisons and detention centers, is the data revealed in the independent survey conducted by health professionals in 1997 at the Correctional Institute for Women (CIW) in Mandaluyong City that of the 1,000 detained women interviewed, 10% had sexual contact with guards at the provincial, city or municipal jail prior to their transfer to the CIW.

          By virtue of its constitutional function "to monitor the Philippine Government's compliance with international Rights finds the aforesaid reports as violations of the following:

          To prevent or at least minimize the aforesaid abuses, the Commission on Human Rights suggests the following measures:

          This human rights advisory is addressed to all government authorities and agencies concerned, especially the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Bureau of Corrections (BUCOR), the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP), the Philippine National Police (PNP), and the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) to protect the human rights of women in custody.

          Quezon City, 31 October 2001

 

On Purchased Power Adjustments

          This refers to the 3 December 2002 letter of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines (CBCP), the National Secretariat for Social Action-Justice and peace (NASSA) and the Caritas-Philippines for "x x x a human rights advisory on the ground that the PPA ( Purchased Power Adjustments ) arise from onerous contracts." It is their contention " x x x that the PPA violates human rights enshrined in the following national and international laws, among others:

Article 25(1) of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights that stresses every individual's right "to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social service,,,"

          According to MERALCO, "Purchased Power Adjustment or PPA represents increases in the cost of power purchased from the National Power Corporation (NPC) and other suppliers called independent power producers or IPPs. The PPA is a cost adjustment mechanism approved by the then Energy Regulatory Board (ERB) to reflect changes in the cost of power bought from the NPC and private producers."

          It is a matter of public knowledge that the Supreme Court of the Philippines ruled to compel MERALCO to refund its costumers some billions of Pesos perceived to be PPA payments of its consumers and to abide by the Court's decision with respect to payment of taxes which formed part of MERALCO's operating expenses. This is now the subject of a motion for reconsideration. Thus, the Commission on Human Rights in this document will not deal with the issue for being sub judice.

          The issue submitted before the Commission, however, is whether the imposition of the purchased power adjustment is a violation of human rights. This is the core of the request of the CBCP, the NASSA and Caritas. In looking into the matter, the Commission finds it proper to look into the social effects of the said imposition on the lives of all the Filipinos.

          The PPA is an additional monthly cost being shouldered over and above the daily consumption of electricity and expenses to meet the needs of every member of the family such as food and clothing, education, health and transportation expenses, water and shelter. For an ordinary Filipino, the PPA is an unnecessary burden on account of the increase in the cost of power, just so to enjoy some convenience brought about by electricity. It cannot be denied that the amount of PPA paid for by consumers may be utilized to augment daily expenses or other costs to uplift the welfare of every Filipino.

          The imposition of the PPA has its far-reaching effect, not only to the ordinary consumer dependent on electricity.

          Agencies of government also bear the burden of paying the PPA as an additional cost. Like the ordinary Juan de la Cruz, agencies of government shell out some amount from their coffers representing a bigger chunk from their budget in payment of PPA. This imposition to agencies of government means a reduction of allowable expenses to upgrade their respective direct programs and services for the benefit of the Filipinos.

          The private sector is also affected by the imposition of the PPA. This sector, because of the PPA, may be prevented from improving its products and services because its budget is reduced to cover its payment. The amount in payment for PPA may also have other uses to ameliorate employee's benefits and privileges. However, the imposition of the PPA can be the cause to sacrifice the quality of products and services and welfare of the employees and, further, the reason for their retrenchment and/or the close down of business establishment/entities.

          Simply put, the PPA has its negative effects. Its imposition is the source of deprivation of what is due the Filipinos. Now, the question is: What is being deprived?

          Under the Constitution, Filipinos are entitled "x x x to adequate social services . . . rising standard of living, and improved quality of life." The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights is clear to state the right of individuals " x x x to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services . . ."

          Arguments have been submitted to favor the sustained imposition of the PPA, but ultimately for the efficient delivery of the electric public utility.

          The query posed, however, is whether the public at large should suffer by this imposition.

          Several circumstances prevailing in the Philippines were the reasons for the imposition of the PPA, among them are:

1. The economic slump in this part of the Asian region affecting the purchasing power of the Philippine Peso.
   
   
2. The high interest rates imposed on loans, guaranteed by government to assist the state of economy.
   
   
3. The serious power outages.

          Thus, to support the industry providing and distributing the electric power, the PPA was imposed to the consumers.

          To an already suffering Filipino citizenry, it bears the burden of ensuring that the delivery of electric services are carried out efficiently by paying an additional sum to cover the PPA. Nobody shares with that single Filipino family the task of paying the PPA of every kilowatt-hour of power consumed, so that he may enjoy the efficient delivery of electricity. The Filipino is the recipient of the imposition and he alone bears the burden of paying the PPA.

          When this was imposed on him was he consulted to make him agree to pay an additional cost when he subscribed for electric consumption? This question needs to be answered by government policy-makers as the Filipinos have the right to information relating to matters directly affecting them.

          For the past seven (7) or eight (8) years of its imposition, the PPA has been the cause of deprivation to Filipinos, not only because they were not consulted in its ordination in the statements of accounts of electric consumption, but more so because the rights enshrined in the Constitution and Universal Declaration of Human Rights have been curtailed when the amount paid for the PPA may have been the same amount that may be utilized to alleviate the lot of the Filipinos for the period past.

          These are pressing issues that need to be responded to and revisited by the Government and the entities charged with the distribution of power supply, since it is a State obligation to regulate non-state actors in their impositions that affect the lives of the ordinary people.

          In the meantime, more deprivation may occur and the long years of PPA imposition may reach to a decade prolonging the Filipino's sufferance. This should somehow be tempered by the suspension of the PPA imposition in the meantime that other measures are being resorted to ensure sustained and efficient delivery of the electricity.

          Quezon City, 10 December 2002