 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|||
 |
||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
||||||||
21 June 2010
The Commission on Human Rights issues this press statement to call on government to respond to the findings against the Philippine Government by the United Nations Human Rights Committee (HRC) on a violation of the Right to Life.
The HRC released its “Views” on the case of Phillip Andrew Pestaño, a navy officer who died a violent death on 27 September 1995 . Serving then as cargo officer of the BRP Bacolod City ship during its Mindanao voyage, on or about 25 September 1995, the ship’s Commander permitted the loading of more than 14, 000 board feet of logs onto the BRP Bacolod City, without proper papers or authorization. Pestaño vehemently objected to the loading of such unauthorized cargoes.
The complaint was filed at the United Nations by the victim's parents in 2007 after all domestic remedies seeking justice failed.
In Pestaño's case, HRC stated that,
“[I]t now appears undisputed that the death of the author’s son was a violent one, resulting from homicide.
And declared the following, in relation to Government response to the communication:
“xxx.
“While close to fifteen years elapsed since the death of the victim, the authors are still ignorant of the circumstances surrounding their son’s death, and the State party’s authorities have yet to initiate an independent investigation. In its submission of the 8 May 2008 , the State party referred to an Order of 10 August 2007 of the Office of the Ombudsman, which deemed necessary to conduct further proceedings undertaken by that Office since an action was filed de novo by the authors in October 2005. Since that date, no suspect was prosecuted, tried, let alone convicted, and the authors were not compensated for the tragic loss of their son.”
“The State party must accordingly be held to be in breach of its obligation, under article 6, read in conjunction with article 2, paragraph 3, to properly investigate the death of the authors’ son, prosecute the perpetrators, and ensure proper redress.”
The Philippine Government, being a State Party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), has the positive duty to protect the rights enshrined in this covenant, and if violated, should have an effective, enforceable and available remedy.
The Philippines ratified the First Optional Protocol to ICCPR, which recognizes HRC's capacity to receive and hear individual complaints after the exhaustion of domestic remedies.
The government’s violation of the right to life and failure to appropriately redress the victim’s family, among others, are some of the issues the government needs to address.
‘While the CHR appreciates that such international mechanisms for redress are in place, the CHR would rather compel government to make sure that domestic mechanisms for redress are accessible, available and effective as this would ensure a break in the persisting culture of impunity in this country. The Pestaño Case represents the lackadaisical regard for lives lost due to violence in this country, especialy those who have taken up courage to expose anomalies of government’ Chairperson Leila M. de Lima stated upon reviewing the HRC’s views.