 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|||
 |
||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
||||||||
RCBC Plaza , Makati City
6 December 2009
delivered by
LEILA M. DE LIMA
Chairperson
STATUS OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE PHILIPPINES
ood morning to all of you.
First of all, let me thank the United Nations Development Programme, and the United Nations Country Team in the Philippines , for this opportunity to engage in discussion with your institutions, regarding the status of human rights in the Philippines .
Given the current situation, where many of the human rights abuses are being attributed to government security forces, as well as other members of the government machinery, it is good to have more allies in the effort to further human rights in the country, especially partners who exist and operate at the international level.
I am sure that you have been following some of the more recent developments in the Philippines , with damaging human rights consequences. One very recent incident in particular, in Maguindanao, has made eloquently and horrifying clear, that there is a very long way to go, before the Philippines can honestly claim to be a country which truly respects and protects human rights, and human dignity.
Allow me to discuss this incident first, followed by a discussion of another relatively recent occurrence, that relating to the dismissal of the petition of Ang Ladlad, which sought to participate in the 2010 national elections as a party-list candidate.
Why start with Maguindanao? In my view, this incident, the context which made it possible in the first place, and the actions taken in its aftermath, are all emblematic of many of the challenges with respect to human rights protection, throughout the country. But first, allow me to go into some detail regarding the actions undertaken and currently being done by of the Commission on Human Rights (CHR), to address this atrocity.
The CHR is taking a two-pronged approach in terms of dealing with what happened in Maguindano.
First of all, the CHR is conducting its own independent investigation into the mass killing, parallel to the investigation being carried out by other government agencies such as the Armed Forces, the Philippine National Police, and the National Bureau of Investigation, among others.
This is in keeping with our Constitutionally-entrenched function, of investigating all forms of human rights violations involving civil and political rights.
There were and are of course, certain difficulties in terms of investigating the incident in Maguindanao. We were aware of the unfortunate reality that members of the CHR, who live and work, at or close to the area where the mass killing took place, were somewhat hamstrung in terms of carrying out an effective investigation, because of fears for their lives and physical safety, as well as the safety of their loved ones.
Therefore, in order to be able to carry out an investigation, in a relatively more effective and rapid manner, we sent teams of investigators from our other regional offices, as well as the central office, in Metro Manila.
The CHR currently has a fairly constructive relationship with the top brass of the armed forces and the police, which has allowed us fairly unhampered access to the area of the mass grave, as well as other relevant locations.
Our contingents were tasked with the collection of information, the search for witnesses and informants, on-site investigation and retrieval of forensic evidence, among others. The situation on the ground was complicated by the fact that many of the suspected perpetrators and architects of the mass killing, were in positions of power in the area, and the local law enforcement, military and civilian auxiliaries were precisely suspected to be complicit if not actual principals to the crime.
The CHR moved to leverage its role as an independent body, hoping to be able to reach out to those members of the community who might otherwise be afraid to approach the authorities. We became recipients of tips and pieces of information, many of which, for instance, were coursed confidentially through mobile phone text messages.
Those which appeared to be credible were, whenever feasible and appropriate, forwarded to the heads of the military or law enforcement, for rapid action. Again, our working relationship with the upper echelon of these two uniformed institutions has thankfully been constructive. Of course, the CHR would also move on any actionable information from these tips and pieces of information.
In addition, the CHR partnered with the Center for International Law Philippines (CENTER LAW), in order to bring in and deputize two international specialists, with experience and expertise relevant to the situation at hand. Dr. Jose Pablo Baraybay is a forensic anthropologist who has exhumed mass graves in Rwanda , Bosnia and Kosovo. He is the Executive Director of the Peruvian Forensic Anthropology Team (EPAF). Mr. Christopher Cobb-Smith, a former British Army officer, a security expert, weapons inspector and news safety adviser which has had experience investigating violations of human rights and international humanitarian law, in the Israeli Occupied Territories and those under the control of the Palestinian Authority.
We thus sought to bolster the expertise of our own local medical doctors and forensic investigators, with that of these two foreign experts. And we believed that these two would provide additional independence and credibility to the parallel investigation being carried out by the CHR. Having been deputized by the CHR, Mr. Cobb-Smith and Dr. Baraybar were allowed relatively free access to the scene of the killing, as well as the surrounding area.
We continue to search and excavate, although our attempt to procure a backhoe for further digging, in light of the posssibility of a 58th victim, has led to dead ends, where we have been unable to borrow such a machine, from either government or private sources in the area. We were able to finally get one from the province of Sultan Kudarat .
To complicate things even further, we have the very recent declaration of martial law, and the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, in parts of Maguindanao. From a human rights perspective, this is a development fraught with peril, and the potential for abuse.
We are mobilizing further in response to this development. Fresh CHR Quick Reaction Teams and Quick Monitoring Teams will be dispatched to Maguindanao from other regional offices, as well as the central office, over the coming days, in order to provide fresh warm bodies to substitute for those investigators who have been there for some time now.
In addition, a public inquiry will be carried out in order to further investigate what happened in Maguindanao, what allowed it to happen, and what can be done to prevent other similar atrocities in the region, and elsewhere.
Let me now segue to the second part of our two-pronged strategy for addressing the developments in Maguindanao.
Another Constitutionally-entrenched function of the CHR is that of monitoring the Philippine government’s compliance with international treaty obligations on human rights.
In line with our monitoring function, we have been scrutinizing the investigation being carried out by the government. We criticized the initial handling of the suspected perpetrators, with deference and in a manner markedly different from the way, other suspects are treated by law enforcement. We concur with complaints raised by civil society and the media, with respect to the failure to properly secure the scene of the crime, preserve vital physical evidence, and the seeming exclusive focus on retrieval of the bodies.
The fact that heavy machinery was used almost from the outset, in order to retrieve these bodies, was in our view unacceptable, in that evidence which could contribute to the identification, capture and conviction of the perpetrators, may very well have been lost.
We continue to scrutinize and come out with our views, on the manner in which the government is dealing with the incident. Furthermore, the recent declaration of martial law is something that the CHR is vehemently opposed to, as the situation did not call for it, and the legal basis for its proclamation is clearly absent.
I wanted to go into some detail regarding Maguindanao, again because this incident exemplifies many of the human rights challenges faced at present, throughout the Philippines .
There is the killing of media personnel and human rights defenders, which is made possible by the culture of impunity which continues to be pervasive. Wrongdoers are encouraged to kill those who would oppose or trouble them, because the recent experience in this country demonstrates that those who abduct and torture, rape, mutilate and kill, are generally able to successfully evade accountability.
And the culture of impunity finds its roots in many other problems, some entrenched and systemic, which continue to plague the country, and bedevil human rights advocates. We can see some of these in Maguindanao.
There is the superseding of the rule of law, by the rule of the powerful, where positions of authority are used to amass the financial resources, used to further entrench those already in power. Local uniformed services are augmented by so-called civilian auxiliaries, which in many areas is simply another term for an official’s private army. The funding amassed through corrupt practices is also used to further arm this private force, again further solidifying the position of the political incumbent.
This continues, and spreads outwards, making a mockery of the Constitutional prohibition on political dynasties, and this lethal cocktail of authority, wealth, funding and impunity, creates a fertile breeding ground for human rights abuses.
Zooming even further outward, there is the realization that this all also ties into the undermining of the electoral exercise of the Philippines . Local officials become untouchable because of their ability to deliver fraudulent votes to their patrons. Their patrons then help to ensure that within their local spheres, these officials are able to act like gods. There is this foul symbiosis, brought into play every three years, leading to disenfranchisement, fear, injury and even death to the innocent civilians who find themselves caught in the violent power plays.
Again, I discuss this because the warlords and private armies in Maguindanao, are not an isolated instance. Other areas and regions around the country have their families and dynasties, their own warlords and versions of private armies. And in those areas where these warlords have been allowed to take root, again, the threat of human rights abuses increases drastically.
2010 will see another set of national elections. We will continue to remain vigilant during the lead up to the elections, the day itself, and its aftermath. What happened in Maguindanao helped to lay bare the intersection of corruption, tainted polls, private armies, impunity, and human rights violations. This is a lesson we are very much heeding, heading into 2010. We are in for more election-related violence and poll fraud, chiefly terrorism.
Also, we look at the incident in Maguindanao as a form of litmus test for the government, and especially the uniformed services and the justice system. Will the perpetrators be identified, captured, and convicted? Will accountability reach up all the way to the architects of the killing, or will only small fry be offered to soothe the indignant public? Will solid cases actually be built up by the prosecution? Or are we looking at charges built only on sand, especially with the possible loss of potentially vital forensic evidence, at the scene of the crime?
The incident is hot, and it is very much in the public eye at the moment. How will things look weeks and months from now, after other events have served to distract the public’s attention? Are we looking at individuals simply biding their time, waiting for things to cool down in order to eventually evade a final accounting.
The declaration of martial law is not encouraging. We are being told that it was necessary to avert some form of resistance or uprising by armed groups in the area. But again, it was not necessary, and more importantly, such a proclamations fails to meet the legal bases required in the Constitution.
The suspicion here is that this may possibly be a form of testing the waters. This development is made all the more worrying in light of the fast approaching national elections.
The human rights situation in the country continues to be undermined by systemic and entrenched issues, some of which are demonstrated by what is happening in Maguindanao. The CHR will do its best to monitor developments moving forward, undertake parallel actions of its own, and act with independence and transparency, not only in Maguindanao, but also in the other cities and areas where many of the same problems collide, to create hotbeds of human rights abuses.
Let me now also quickly discuss the situation of Ang Ladlad. Again, what happened demonstrates issues and problems which go beyond this one instance and one vulnerable sector.
As I am sure you well know, Ang Ladlad attempted to register as a party-list candidate for the coming 2010 national elections. Its application was denied by a division of the Commission on Elections, in a decision which decried the group as immoral, and which cited passages from religious texts in order to support that claim.
Such a decision did not merely violate the separation of Church and State, which is entrenched in the 1987 Philippine Constitution. It also engaged in prohibited discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, leading to the negation of the right of that group and vulnerable sector, to participate in the political process.
Later comments made by one of the Comelec’s officials only underscored the fact that the application was not taken seriously, and that the discrimination which the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community faces, both overt and inviduous, on a regular basis, was not being seriously considered.
The Commission on Human Rights issued a statement strongly condemning the decision of the division of the Comelec, and met with the members of Ang Ladlad. So far, actions are being undertaken to appeal the ruling, but these moves are hampered and may very well be undermined by the procedural deadlines put in place.
Furthermore, the CHR issued an advisory which urged the Comelec to ensure the prompt and impartial reexamination of Ang Ladlad’s right to stand for elections. The said advisory noted that sexual orientation has already been identified by U.N. human rights treaty bodies, as a specific category subject to protection against discrimination.
In our meeting with Ang Ladlad, they communicated that in the event their application is successfully blocked, and they are unable to run as a party-list candidate, they will look ahead to the next election, while laying the groundwork for that next attempt, today.
This potential disenfranchisement of a vulnerable group is only one example of the way in which prejudice and bias continue to lead to discrimination against certain sectors in Philippine society. What makes a situation like this so damaging is that it prevents such a sector from more effectively bringing its concerns to the political leadership, in such a way that it cannot simply be ignored.
Participation in the political exercise is precisely one of the means by which those who are disadvantaged in society can better protect themselves from discrimination, and better seek to address the issues and concerns which most affect them. The Comelec decision has at present prevented such a potential political exercise, and in addition, it sends the message that a certain group of people, because of their sexual orientation, is somehow automatically composed of immoral individuals.
The CHR will continue to follow this case, the appeals, the developments, until its eventual outcome. We are also looking to potentially elevate this issue to the United Nations, if such a move becomes appropriate.
Such discrimination, while not necessarily characterized by the overt violence we have seen in other abuses, is just as real, just as unacceptable, and just as in need of solutions.
While these are two of the more recent incidents with significant human rights consequences, the CHR continues to carry out its role in terms of all the violations brought to its attention.
For 2009, the CHR has taken cognizance of 47 cases of alleged extrajudicial and political killings. That brings the total since 2001 to 777 cases in all. These cases involve alleged perpetrators from the police, the military, and paramilitaries, as well as members of rebel, insurgent and other armed groups.
In terms of enforced disappearances, abductions and kidnapping cases, the CHR has taken cognizance of 9 cases so far in 2009, bringing the total since 2001, to 246 cases.
In the end, it remains clear that the human rights situation in the Philippines is rather dismal. The events in Maguindanao, as well as the response to the application of Ang Ladlad, only serve to highlight, in different ways, this reality. For far too long, the government has been content to point to laws, programs and policies in order to justify its claim that human rights are respected and protected in the country.
Recent events serve to make such a claim even more untenable. We continue to watch how events will unfold over the coming months, and we will continue to advocate for the changes necessary to truly protect and promote human rights in the Philippines.
Again, we at the CHR thank you for this opportunity to discuss the human rights situation at present, and we thank you as well for continuing to support our efforts, and the efforts of our partners, as we work toward the ideal of a society which truly respects the human dignity of all people.
Thank you very much.