The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)
Presented at the Roundtable Discussion, May 31, 2011, at the CHRP Conference Room

A POSITION PAPER by ESCR-Asia, Inc.

The Optional Protocol (OP) to the ICESCR makes “a strong and unequivocal statement about the equal value and importance of all human rights and the need for strengthened legal protection of economic, social and cultural rights.”  Further, it is a milestone, a key step “towards a unified vision of human rights of the Universal Declaration.”

For a country that has ratified both human rights covenants – the ICCPR and the ICESCR, as well as the optional protocols of the first covenant, we fail to see why the current government of the Philippines is hesitant to sign the newest human rights redress mechanism which would show its wholehearted support to respect, fulfill and protect ALL human rights of ALL persons within its territory. Allow us to present our arguments for the early signature and ratification of this OP by the Philippine State.

First, the OP is a good partner to the anti-corruption drive of President Noynoy Aquino. For example, it will help in the setting of standards for such rights as the right to adequate food, part of the Right to Adequate Standards of Living. Just over a week ago, the 2008 food crisis and the NFA’s role in exacerbating that crisis made headlines. An OP would expose the trail of corruption that occurred then to cause that crisis.

Second, the signing and ratification of the OP was part and parcel of the National Human Rights Action Plan (NHRAP) which was approved during the last year of the previous government. This plan went through a thorough and rigorous process where civil society and government entities agreed on common action plans.

Third, even DFA officials admit that it is not necessary to have an enabling law before this OP can be signed. On the contrary, if we may add, signing and ratifying the OP can even help create an enabling law although to our own knowledge, there are already laws in place that address several of the rights found in the ICESCR: e.g. the rights of workers, the rights of indigenous peoples, the rights to education, health, social security, and so forth.

Fourth, by signing the OP, government would have created an enabling environment to realign the national budget and give more for schools and quality education, for health centers, for a sound national food security strategy, for protecting our genetic and intellectual property rights, and so forth. Necessary remedies beyond the merely legal that would help fulfill the basic needs of our people would then be in place.

Fifth, we are ready to sign: the ministries and complete departments are in place, adjudication processes are in place, the infrastructure to help especially the poor and marginalized sectors are being revamped and strengthened (e.g. the NAPC, the NCIP, the Commission on Women). Laws of the land like RA 8425 (SRPA Act) and Indigenous Peoples Rights Act are being implemented. Most of all there is the political space wherein such a mechanism can be made part of the law of the land.

Sixth, we would like to ask both government and CSOs alike, including ourselves: Have we failed in pushing economic, social and cultural rights as HUMAN RIGHTS? Are we updated with the latest General Comments such as that on Cultural Rights?

Before we received a letter from the Presidential Committee on Human Rights last year saying that the Philippine government was not prepared yet to sign the OP, NEDA was already pushing for its ratification, the only government agency that showed its openness and willingness towards the OP. Since then, there has been no follow through. What has happened?

On our end, ESCR-Asia as secretariat of an Asian Consortium on Human Rights-Based Access to Justice plans to upscale the discourse on the OP onto the Asian level in our upcoming General Assembly in August in Thailand. It is ironic that while some of the earliest signatories to the ICESCR were from Asia, the Philippines being one of them (1976 – the year it came into force), only one has ratified the OP: Mongolia.

On the ASEAN level, ESCR-Asia was able to include as part of the 2011 ACSC/APF statement, under the Social and Cultural Pillar:  “We strongly urge ASEAN member states to sign and ratify the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and its Optional Protocol.”  It must be noted that Brunei Darassalam, Malaysia, Myanmar and Singapore have not yet signed nor ratified the ICESCR itself.

In light of the above then, we strongly urge the Philippine Government to sign the Optional Protocol to the ICESCR. The Philippines has long been in the forefront of the human rights struggle and movement in our part of the world. Aside from the ICCPR and its two Optional Protocols, the Philippines is a State Party too to the CEDAW and its Protocol, and the CRC & its Protocol. Sadly, though, the past two years has seen its leadership slip away. Signing this newest human rights redress mechanism can make the Philippines lead once more, bringing into human rights discourse on ASEAN and ASIAN levels, a  renewed dynamism as well as signaling a renewed and vigorous commitment to ALL human rights.

——————————–
i. http://www.unhchr.ch/huricane/huricane.nsf/view01/D39BD9ED5406650FC125751C0039FE08?opendocument

ii Cf. Statement of the 2011 ACSC/APF, May 3-5, 2011, Jakarta, Indonesia.