Insights and opinions from our contributors on the current issues happening in the region

 

An Initial Statement of the UN Special Rapporteur on Extra-judicial killings

By Professor Philip Alston
Special Rapporteur of the United Nations Human Rights Council on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions

Manila, 21 February 2007

I have spent the past ten days in the Philippines at the invitation of the Government in order to inquire into the phenomenon of extrajudicial executions. I am very grateful to the Government for the unqualified cooperation extended to me. During my stay here I have met with virtually all of the relevant senior officials of Government.  They include the President, the Executive Secretary, the National Security Adviser, the Secretaries for Defence, Justice, DILG and the Peace Process. I have also met with a significant number of members of Congress on different sides of the political spectrum, the Chief Justice, the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), the Chair of the Human Rights Commission, the Ombudsman, the members of both sides of the Joint Monitoring Committee, and representatives of the MNLF and MILF. Of particular relevance to my specific concerns, I also met with Task Force Usig, and with the Melo Commission, and I have received the complete dossier compiled by TF Usig, as well as the report of the Melo Commission, the and the responses to its findings by the AFP and by retired Maj-Gen Palparan. I have also visited Baguio and Davao and met with the regional Human Rights Commission offices, local PNP and AFP commanders, and the Mayor of Davao, among others.

Equally importantly, roughly half of my time here was devoted to meetings with representatives of civil society, in Manila, Baguio, and Davao. Through their extremely valuable contributions in the form of documentation and detailed testimony I have learned a great deal.

Let me begin by acknowledging several important elements. The first is that the Government's invitation to visit reflects a clear recognition of the gravity of the problem, a willingness to permit outside scrutiny, and a very welcome preparedness to engage on this issue.  The assurances that I received from the President, in particular, were very encouraging. Second, I note that my visit takes place within the context of a counter-insurgency operation which takes place on a range of fronts, and I do not in any way underestimate the resulting challenges facing for the Government and the AFP. Third, I wish to clarify that my formal role is to report to the UN Human Rights Council and to the Government on the situation I have found. I consider that the very fact of my visit has already begun the process of acting as a catalyst to deeper reflection on these issues both within the national and international settings. Finally, I must emphasize that the present statement is only designed to give a general indication of some, but by no means all, of the issues to be addressed, and the recommendations put forward, in my final report. I expect that will be available sometime within the next three months.

Sources of information

The first major challenge for my mission was to obtain detailed and well supported information. I have been surprised by both the amount and the quality of information provided to me. Most key Government agencies are organized and systematic in much of their data collection and classification.  Similarly, Philippines civil society organizations are generally sophisticated and professional. I sought, and obtained, meetings across the entire political spectrum. I leave the Philippines with a wealth of information to be processed in the preparation of my final report.

But the question has still been posed as to whether the information provided to me by either all, or at least certain, local NGO groups can be considered reliable. The word 'propaganda' was used by many of my interlocutors.  What I took them to mean was that the overriding goal of the relevant groups in raising EJE questions was to gain political advantage in the context of a broader battle for public opinion and power, and that the HR dimensions were secondary at best.  Some went further to suggest that many of the cases were fabricated, or at least trumped up, to look more serious than they are.

I consider it essential to respond to these concerns immediately. First, there is inevitably a propaganda element in such allegations. The aim is to win public sympathy and to discredit other actors. But the existence of a propaganda dimension does not, in itself, destroy the credibility of the information and allegations. I would insist, instead, on the need to apply several tests relating to credibility. First, is it only NGOs from one part of the political spectrum who are making these allegations? The answer is clearly 'no'. Human rights groups in the Philippines range across the entire spectrum in terms of their political sympathies, but I met no groups who challenged the basic fact that large numbers of extrajudicial executions are taking place, even if they disagreed on precise figures. Second, how compelling is the actual information presented? I found there was considerable variation ranging from submissions which were entirely credible and contextually aware all the way down to some which struck me as superficial and dubious. But the great majority are closer to the top of that spectrum than to the bottom. Third, has the information proved credible under 'cross-examination'. My colleagues and I heard a large number of cases in depth and we probed the stories presented to us in order to ascertain their accuracy and the broader context.

As a result, I believe that I have gathered a huge amount of data and certainly much more than has been made available to any one of the major national inquiries.

Extent of my focus

My focus goes well beyond that adopted by either TF Usig or the Melo Commission, both of which are concerned essentially with political and media killings. Those specific killings are, in many ways, a symptom of a much more extensive problem and we should not permit our focus to be limited artificially. The TF Usig/Melo scope of inquiry is inappropriate for me for several reasons:

(a) The approach is essentially reactive. It is not based on an original assessment of what is going on in the country at large, but rather on what a limited range of CSOs report. As a result, the focus then is often shifted (unhelpfully) to the orientation of the CSO, the quality of the documentation in particular cases, etc.;

(b) Many killings are not reported, or not pursued, and for good reason; and

(c) A significant proportion of acknowledged cases of 'disappearances' involve individuals who have been killed but who are not reflected in the figures.

How many have been killed?

The numbers game is especially unproductive, although a source of endless fascination. Is it 25, 100, or 800? I don't have a figure. But I am certain that the number is high enough to be distressing. Even more importantly, numbers are not what count. The impact of even a limited number of killings of the type alleged is corrosive in many ways. It intimidates vast numbers of civil society actors, it sends a message of vulnerability to all but the most well connected, and it severely undermines the political discourse which is central to a resolution of the problems confronting this country.

Permit me to make a brief comment on the term 'unexplained killings', which is used by officials and which I consider to be inapt and misleading. It may be appropriate in the context of a judicial process but human rights inquiries are more broad-ranging and one does not have to wait for a court to secure a conviction before one can conclude that human rights violations are occurring. The term 'extrajudicial killings' which has a long pedigree is far more accurate and should be used.

Typology

It may help to specify the types of killing which are of particular concern in the Philippines: Killings by military and police, and by the NPA or other groups, in course of counter-insurgency. To the extent that such killings take place in conformity with the rules of international humanitarian law they fall outside my mandate. Killings not in the course of any armed engagement but in pursuit of a specific counter-insurgency operation in the field. Killings, whether attributed to the military, the police, or private actors, of activists associated with leftist groups and usually deemed or assumed to be covertly assisting CPP-NPA-NDF. Private actors include hired thugs in the pay of politicians, landowners, corporate interests, and others. Vigilante, or death squad, killings Killings of journalists and other media persons. 'Ordinary' murders facilitated by the sense of impunity that exists.

Response by the Government

The response of Government to the crisis of extrajudicial executions varies dramatically. There has been a welcome acknowledgement of the seriousness of the problem at the very top. At the executive level the messages have been very mixed and often unsatisfactory. And at the operational level, the allegations have too often been met with a response of incredulity, mixed with offence.

Explanations proffered

When I have sought explanations of the killings I have received a range of answers.

(i) The allegations are essentially propaganda. I have addressed this dimension already.

(ii) The allegations are fabricated.  Much importance was attached to two persons who had been listed as killed, but who were presented to me alive. Two errors, in circumstances which might partly explain the mistakes, do very little to discredit the vast number of remaining allegations.

(iii) The theory that the 'correct, accurate, and truthful' reason for the recent rise in killings lies in purges committed by the CPP/NPA. This theory was relentlessly pushed by the AFP and many of my Government interlocutors. But we must distinguish the number of 1,227 cited by the military from the limited number of cases in which the CPP/NPA have acknowledged, indeed boasted, of killings. While such cases have certainly occurred, even those most concerned about them, such as members of Akbayan, have suggested to me that they could not amount to even 10% of the total killings. The evidence offered by the military in support of this theory is especially unconvincing. Human rights organizations have documented very few such cases. The AFP relies instead on figures and trends relating to the purges of the late 1980s, and on an alleged CPP/NPA document captured in May 2006 describing Operation Bushfire.  In the absence of much stronger supporting evidence this particular document bears all the hallmarks of a fabrication and cannot be taken as evidence of anything other than disinformation.

(iv) Some killings may have been attributable to the AFP, but they were committed by rogue elements. There is little doubt that some such killings have been committed. The AFP needs to give us precise details and to indicate what investigations and prosecutions have been undertaken in response. But, in any event, the rogue elephant theory does not explain or even address the central questions with which we are concerned.

Some major challenges for the future

(a) Acknowledgement by the AFP  –  The AFP remains in a state of almost total denial (as its official response to the Melo Report amply demonstrates) of its need to respond effectively and authentically to the significant number of killings which have been convincingly attributed to them. The President needs to persuade the military that its reputation and effectiveness will be considerably enhanced, rather than undermined, by acknowledging the facts and taking genuine steps to investigate. When the Chief of the AFP contents himself with telephoning Maj-Gen Palparan three times in order to satisfy himself that the persistent and extensive allegations against the General were entirely unfounded, rather than launching a thorough internal investigation, it is clear that there is still a very long way to go.

(b) Moving beyond the Melo Commission  –  It is not for me to evaluate the Melo Report. That is for the people of the Philippines to do. The President showed good faith in responding to allegations by setting up an independent commission.  But the political and other capital that should have followed is being slowly but surely drained away by the refusal to publish the report.  The justifications given are unconvincing. The report was never intended to be preliminary or interim. The need to get 'leftists' to testify is no reason to withhold a report which in some ways at least vindicates their claims. And extending a Commission whose composition has never succeeded in winning full cooperation seems unlikely to cure the problems still perceived by those groups. Immediate release of the report is an essential first step.

(c) The need to restore accountability  –  The focus on TF Usig and Melo is insufficient.  The enduring and much larger challenge is to restore the various accountability mechanisms that the Philippines Constitution and Congress have put in place over the years, too many of which have been systematically drained of their force in recent years. I will go into detail in my final report, but suffice it to note for present purposes that Executive Order 464, and its replacement, Memorandum Circular 108, undermine significantly the capacity of Congress to hold the executive to account in any meaningful way.

(d) Witness protection  –  The vital flaw which undermines the utility of much of the judicial system is the problem of virtual impunity that prevails.  This, in turn, is built upon the rampant problem of witness vulnerability. The present message is that if you want to preserve your life expectancy, don't act as a witness in a criminal prosecution for killing. Witnesses are systematically intimidated and harassed. In a relatively poor society, in which there is heavy dependence on community and very limited real geographical mobility, witnesses are uniquely vulnerable when the forces accused of killings are all too often those, or are linked to those, who are charged with ensuring their security. The WPP is impressive – on paper. In practice, however, it is deeply flawed and would seem only to be truly effective in a very limited number of cases. The result, as one expert suggested to me, is that 8 out of 10 strong cases, or 80% fail to move from the initial investigation to the actual prosecution stage.

(e) Acceptance of the need to provide legitimate political space for leftist groups  –  At the national level, there has been a definitive abandonment of President Ramos' strategy of reconciliation.  This might be termed the Sinn Fein strategy. It involves the creation of an opening the party-list system for leftist groups to enter the democratic political system, while at the same time acknowledging that some of those groups remain very sympathetic to the armed struggle being waged by illegal groups (the IRA in the Irish case, or the NPA in the Philippines case). The goal is to provide an incentive for such groups to enter mainstream politics and to see that path as their best option.

Neither the party-list system nor the repeal of the Anti-Subversion Act has been reversed by Congress.  But, the executive branch, openly and enthusiastically aided by the military, has worked resolutely to circumvent the spirit of these legislative decisions by trying to impede the work of the party-list groups and to put in question their right to operate freely. The idea is not to destroy the NPA but to eliminate organizations that support many of its goals and do not actively disown its means.  While non-violent in conception, there are cases in which it has, certainly at the local level, spilled over into decisions to extrajudicially execute those who cannot be reached by legal process.

(f) Re-evaluate problematic aspects of counter-insurgency strategy  –  The increase in extrajudicial executions in recent years is attributable, at least in part, to a shift in counterinsurgency strategy that occurred in some areas, reflecting the considerable regional variation in the strategies employed, especially with respect to the civilian population. In some areas, an appeal to hearts-and-minds is combined with an attempt to vilify left-leaning organizations and to intimidate leaders of such organizations.  In some instances, such intimidation escalates into extrajudicial execution.  This is a grave and serious problem and one which I intend to examine in detail in my final report.

Conclusion

The Philippines remains an example to all of us in terms of the peaceful ending of martial law by the People's Revolution, and the adoption of a Constitution reflecting a powerful commitment to ensure respect for human rights. The various measures ordered by the President in response to Melo constitute important first steps, but there is a huge amount that remains to be done.

 

 

 

 

Anti-Terrorism bill, harbinger of further terrorism

A press Statement by Benedictines for Peace Movement-Eastern Visayas
February 10, 2007

We take exemption and caution on the statement of Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile, the principal proponent of the Anti-Terrorism Bill that “there is nothing to be afraid of on the anti-terrorism bill because of the many safety measures that goes with the law”. First, coming from an unrepentant architect of martial law who has to fake his own ambush to justify the declaration of martial law and the alleged atrocities he committed in Samar during the operation of his logging company, San Jose Timber Corporation are more than reasons enough to trust his words. Second, the Arroyo administration even without the Anti-Terrorism Bill has been wildly accused of consciously ordering “neutralizing” her perceived “enemies of the State”. Unfortunately, more often than not, it is the legal activists that has been targeted and is continually facing threats to their lives.

Looking at this angle, we would like to register our concern and principled opposition of this becoming into law for there is the grave danger of abuse in its use especially coming from an administration facing wide opposition.

We look at this anti-terrorism bill as an affront the liberties that we as a Filipino has fought and sacrificed for since the downfall of the Marcos dictatorship and the Estrada regime.

As always, the means does not justify the end, especially so if the end is greed for power. It is our fervent hope and prayer that civil libertarians, peace and human rights advocates and the people as a whole will make their voices heard.

Oppose Anti-Terrorism Bill!

Protect our civil, economic and political rights!

Justice to all victims of State Terrorism!

 

 

 

 

BAYAN condemns military harassment against COURAGE leader

A Press Statement by Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (BAYAN-SB)
February 8, 2007

Members and officers of COURAGE in the region is one of those facing the brunt of Oplan Bantay Laya’s offensive against legal and progressive activists. First it was Pax Diaz, regional chairperson then it was Jose Maria Cui, chairperson in Northern Samar then a week after it was Dominador de Luna of Catbalogan. Just recently was the harassment committed against the person of Ricky Palencia, the incumbent chairperson of COURAGE in Eastern Visayas.

Last Feb. 4 (Sunday), two elements of the military presumed to belong to the Internal Security Unit (ISU) was apprehended by elements of the SWAT as they were tailing Ricky Palencia since he left LMWD Motorpool at Nulatula until he arrived at their main office in Tacloban City. The two men who were riding a red XRM motorcycle with expired registration and no plate number were identified as Joshua Mendoza and Jorge Lamoste. Both were then taken to the Tacloban PNP Station for questioning.

Both denied that they were shadowing Mr. Palencia claiming that they are new in the city and were just out on sight seeing. However, when, Bernie Devaras and Jovito Susaya who are both employee of LMWD arrived, they positively identified one of those apprehended as the triggerman that shot and killed Sammy Bandilla and seriously wounding Bernie Devaras. It is worth remembering that October 15 of 2004, Bandilla, Susaya and Devaras just came from their picket infrot of LMWD and were on their way to the house of Bandilla when motorcyvle-riding assassin shot them at Paseo de Legaspe hitting both Devaras and Bandilla.

Unfortunately, the police released them claiming that the arrest was irregular and that there is no material basis for their continued detention. Both were fetched by motorcycle which also has no plate number. During the investigation, an identified person was seen going inside the investigation room and conversing with the apprehended men. The unidentified person was recognized as an ISU agent.

This incident strengthen our claim that it is the military and their death squad that are doing the killings among our rank. It further negates the claim of Task Force Usig of “internal purging”. Furthermore, this is another blow to Mrs. Arroyo who has continually exonerated the military of any culpability and even asked the European Union to help her bolster her claim.

BAYAN condemns this continued attack on their ranks even as it calls on all patriotic forces to be vigilant, steadfast and to persevere in combating state terrorism.

 

 

 

 

Press Statement from the family of the late Benito B. Astorga

January 29, 2007

Re: Press Statement by the Arnulfo Ortiz Command of the New People’s Army admitting the Murder of Mayor Benito B. Astorga

The Press Statement dated 26 January 2007 issued by the Arnulfo Ortiz Command, New People’s Army (“NPA”), Provincial Command, Samar, allegedly signed by a certain Vicente Magbuhat, is a mere fabrication. For one, Philippine National Police Provincial Director, P/SSupt. Asdali Idja Abah, issued a statement on ABS-CBN’s TV Patrol News Program on 28 January 2007, that the Arnulfo Ortiz Command of the NPA does not operate in Samar.

The family believes that the Murder was politically motivated. Hence, the said press statement was concocted by the political opponents of the late Mayor Benito Astorga to mislead the people and the investigators as to the real perpetrators of the crime. The family has full trust and confidence that the authorities will come out with the truth so that justice will be served.

(Sgd.) Severa Astorga-Buquid

 

 

 

 

CPP-NPA-NDF’s diatribe!

A Press Statement by Alliance for Nationalism and Democracy (ANAD)
January 24, 2007

ONCE AGAIN, the Maoist communist CPP-NPA-NDF has not shown remorse nor does it value life after all. Despite all pretensions, e.g. upholding human rights, protectors of freedoms, and advocate of equal opportunities for all especially the under privileged sectors of the Filipino community, the Maoist communist ideology has bore down heavily on peace loving Filipinos.

While expressing lamentations and dismay on government’s alleged dismal performance in promoting and protecting human rights, with emphasis on unarmed communist sectoral front groups and personalities, they gave a deafening silence on NPA atrocious activities against unarmed Filipinos who steadfastly opposed them.

Such is their response to the killing of at least 2 ANAD unarmed leaders. Augusto “Ka Agoy” Daclitan in Samar, Jan. 17; and Jose Lorena, a free lance broadcaster in Daraga,Albay who were treacherously murdered by Maoist communist hitmen, last Jan. 18.

The families and relatives of both Daclitan and Lorena now seek justice from those who openly professed as staunch purveyors of justice, fairness, and equitable governance. But what is their response? KARAPATAN, the Ecumenical Movement for Justice and Peace (EMJP), the Promotion of Church-Peoples’ Response (PCPR), BAYAN, their partylist representatives from Bayan Muna, Gabriela, Anak Pawis, Partido Mangagawa, and Akbayan, chose to remain silent on these incidents.

Yet, without any qualms, KARAPATAN strongly condemned the killing, last January 19, of Prof. Jose Ma. Cui, former leader of Katungod-Samar (the Maoist communist human rights organization in Eastern Visayas) and chair of the University of Eastern Philippines Employees Union-COURAGE (the Maoist communist front organizations for government employees).

Does Prof. Cui have superior rights to seek justice over Daclitan and Lorena that the Maoist communist organizations now shout for justice over the death of Cui while being so silent on Daclitan’s and Lorena’s murder? Indeed, Cui was one of their peers.

With this vivid picture of biases and prejudices utterly displayed, certainly this is the Maoist communist’s menu – vigorous action if things shall be in favor towards their own vicious and demonic intentions.

Equal opportunity, advocates of human rights, protectors of the oppressed are the lines mouthed by the glib-tongued blabbermouths of the Maoist communist CPP-NPA-NDF. This communist diatribe is now revealed to all Filipinos.

Shame and woe to the Maoist communists!

 

   

 

◄◄home I next►►