ON
HOUSE BILL NO. 2730

"An Act Providing For The Rights Of The Accused And Persons Under Investigation For The Commission Of A Crime, Providing For Civil And Criminal Penalties In Case Of Violation Thereof And For Other Purposes"(Introduced by Congressmen Edgar R. Lara and Roan I. Libarios)

==========================

          This House Bill seeks to consolidate provisions of existing legislation on the subject. There is already an existing legislation on the matter, namely, Republic Act No. 857 and amended by Republic Act No. 7438 enacted on 07 July 1992 concerning the rights of the individuals who are arrested and subjected to custodial investigation. The bill in general provides in more detail, Article III, Sections 12-22 of the Philippine Constitution and Rules 112-114 of the Rules of Court.

          As stated in Article 2 on Declaration of Policy, the bill seeks to complement anti-crime campaign with the comprehensive set of safeguards on the rights of the accused. On this score, the Commission on Human Rights strongly supports this proposed legislation subject to the following comments:

1)  Article III, Section 2 of the bill providing for a warning of the arrested person is more effective implementation of the Article III paragraph 12 of the Constitution, commonly called the "Miranda Doctrine." It is suggested, however, that the warning must be written in big letter and displayed on the wall of the room where the custodial investigation is conducted so the detained person can easily read them. This is the practice on the police precincts in the United States. The words should also be clearly explained to the detained person in cases where the person being interrogated is not sufficiently educated in the language or dialect he understands.

2)  The second paragraph of Article IV Section 1 which includes mere invitation as part of custodial investigation is too sweeping and might be contrary to Supreme Court decisions on the matter. Please see Kimpo vs.Sandiganbayan, 232, SCRA 53; Navarro vs. Sandiganbayan, 234 SCRA 175, Aniog vs. COMELEC, 237 SCRA 424 which ruled that Persons merely invited to shed light on the commission of a crime without being informed that they are respondents were not deprived of the rights as accused. This rule also applies to right of counsel (People vs. Marra, 236 SCRA 565; People vs. Macarin, 238 SCRA 236).

3. Article V, Section 9 should also spell out Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code as to the maximum periods of detention for corresponding crimes.

4. The proposed bill does not provide safeguards on arrests by private persons. Arrest by private persons can be abused.

5. Article VII, Section 2 should include among the rights not to be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs and aspirations as provided in Article III, Section 18 of the Philippine Constitution.

6. Article X, Section 2 should spell out the remedy against undue publications of criminal cases which may be the subject of a petition for contempt of court for violators of said provision,

          In view of the foregoing, the Commission sought for the early passage of H.B. No. 2730 into           law.

          Quezon City , 1 March 1999

ON
HOUSE BILL NO. 5345

entitled
"An Act Requiring the Statement Of Assets, Liabilities And Networth As Of December 31, 1997 "

          Introduced by Congressmen Briones, Fajardo, Nieva, Calalay, Libanan, Liban, Gonzales (R), Congw. Loreto-Go, Cong. Aumentado, Cong. Recto, Congw. Lorenzo-Villareal, Cong. Cagas, Quimpo, Suarez, Salcedo, Ortega, Dumpit, Congw. Antonino, Cong. Ponce, Jr., Vicencio, Silverio, Lozada, Jr., Monfort, Congw. Villaroso, Cong. Lara, Teves, Lapus, Suplico, Lopez, Dy, Dequina, Candazo, Perez (A), Jr., Congw. Singson, Cong. Garcia (E), Jr., Nepomuceno, Bueser, Madrona, Nantes , Orola, Villanueva, Paras, Yapha, Congw. Locsin, Cong. Alvarez, Sarmiento, Dilangalen, Tammang, Cosalan, Lanot, Congw. Ocampo, Cong. Osabel, Pilapil, Congw. Sarenas, Cong. Tuazon, Syjuco, Jala, Fuentebella, Macarambon, Abad, Veloso, Banaag, Abayon, Reyes Jr., Tulagan, Jaafar, Angping, Tañada, Acosta, Aquino, Cruz, Arroyo, Alvarez, Apostol, Bunye, Datumanong, Echiverri, Gunigundo, Moreno, Sandoval, Fortuno, Jacob, Gullas, Frentes, Roxas, Congw. Angara-Castillo, Cong. Gonzales (N), Belmonte, Jr., and Golez is House Bill No. 5345 which requires the Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Networth as of December 31, 1997 .

          Section 5 of the said bill states the purpose of the statement of the assets and liabilities, which reads:

"Purpose Of The Statements Of Assets, Liabilities, And Networth. The Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Networth filed pursuant to Section 2 hereof shall be considered as true and correct for purposes of determining future tax liabilities for the taxable year 1998 onwards of the taxpayer." (Italics supplied)

          The proposed bill has good purposes which is to enable the government to determine the correct tax liabilities of persons. We have no question about the beneficial purposes of the law which is intended to tax individuals and juridical entities based on their income to raise funds for the government. The Commission on Human Rights, however, has reservations on some provisions of the proposed bill which may be violative of the right of privacy which is a fundamental human right, namely:

          DOJ is an executive body under control of the executive administration for political or other reasons. Moreover, there is no limit of duration of the sequestration as what happened with the Philippine Commission on Good Government which sequestered properties indefinitely. An order for the attachment or lis pendens of the properties acquiring the defendant regarding activities to be issued by the Court may be substituted for Section 9 of the Bill.

          Another objectionable provision is Section 12 which provides that the testimony of one participant or conspirator is sufficient for conviction. This said provision might run counter to the basic principle of criminal law that conviction of crime must be based on evidence established beyond reasonable doubt to be determined by the court. Section 12 of the proposed bill also destroys the principle of presumption of innocence.

          Wherefore, subject to the foregoing comments, the Commission supports the passage of this bill.

           Quezon City , 14 March 2000

ON
HOUSE BILL NO. 2091

"An Act Prohibiting Hospitals/Clinics from Requiring Patients to Buy Prescribed Medicines and other Medical Needs at their Pharmacy or Drugstore, and Providing Penalties Therefore"(Introduced by Representatives Ramiro Jr., Loreto-Go, Lorenzo-Villareal, Espina and Unde)

=======================

          In every country of the world, whatever its political and religious persuasion, the government is responsible for the well-being of its people. It is the first duty of the government to promote and protect the human rights of every person, specially the rights to life, to health, and to live a healthy life, among other basic rights.

          Ads are everywhere in the media blaring various health programs of the government.

          But despite these campaign activities which are being paid for by the taxpayers, quality health services have yet to be efficiently and effectively delivered to some 70 million poor Filipinos throughout the country.

          The virtual absence in quality health care could be traced to the undoing of health providers themselves. The public perception is that hospital owners can afford to be greedy at the expense of unsuspecting patients because of inutile government where the business of political upmanship, influence-peddling, and graft and corruption thrives even under the shadow of a life-threatening epidemic.

          The Commission on Human Rights is in full accord with Representative Oscar Rodriguez' description of the present state of affairs in health development. He said that "the decline in quality health care and its commodification wherein only the moneyed can avail of services is dehumanizing."

          The Commission maintains its firm stand that the government must exert efforts to address the situation. It must provide a vigorous approach to health development and services, in accordance with the provisions of the 1987 Constitution, particularly, Section 15, Article II on the state policy to protect and promote the right to health of the people, and in relation to Section 11, Article XIII thereof.

          Except for the penal provisions which must be increased to approximate the financial capabilities of private hospitals vis-à-vis the injury and damage that they may inflict upon the patients, the proposed measure addresses the alarming concern for a quality health care.

          Further, it is strongly suggested that this Bill should be consolidated with House Bill No. 564 entitled "An Act Declaring The Rights Of Patients And Prescribing Penalties For Violations Thereof."

          In view of the foregoing, the Commission on Human Rights strongly supports the immediate passage into law of House Bill No. 2091.

           Quezon City , 21 April 1999