Tag Archives: Forced disappearance

[From the web] “First anti-enforced disappearance law in the whole Asian region, was enacted into law exactly a year ago today.” -AFAD

AFADREPUBLIC ACT 10353, AN ACT DEFINING AND PENALIZING ENFORCED OR INVOLUNTARY DISAPPEARANCE, the first anti-enforced disappearance law in the whole Asian region, was enacted into law exactly a year ago today. It is a product of years of struggle of families of the disappeared in the Philippines for truth, justice, reparation, memory and guarantees of non-recurrence. As the human rights community commemorates the first anniversary of this law, the Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances in cooperation with the Families of Victims of Involuntary Disappearance (FIND) continues to work hard to ensure its full implementation.”

Source: https://www.facebook.com/afad.online2?fref=ts

Human Rights Online Philippines does not hold copyright over these materials. Author/s and original source/s of information are retained including the URL contained within the tagline and byline of the articles, news information, photos etc.

[Press Release] Hundreds of cyclists demand passage and implementation of human rights laws -AIPh

Hundreds of cyclists demand passage and implementation of human rights laws

Photo grabbed from AIph FB

Photo grabbed from AIph FB

 

More than a thousand participants of the Amnesty International Philippines’ Bike for Rights PadyaKarapatan 2013 cycled through 7 cities of Metro Manila reminding the Aquino administration and the 16th Congress of their obligation to enact and implement legislation necessary for protecting human rights of Filipino citizens.

AI small

The 78-kilometer Bike for Rights which is now on its 19th year carried the theme ‘Sampung Tanong ng Bayan sa Pamahalaang Aquino at Kongreso’ reiterating the 10 Point Human Rights Legislative Agenda of Amnesty International Philippines and its previous calls and demands upon the Aquino government.

“Before the 2010 and 2013 elections, Amnesty International presented its Philippine Human Rights Agenda to the candidates and promises were subsequently made. As the year ends, we ask 10 questions – ‘Sampung Tanong ng Bayan sa Pamahalaang Aquino at Kongreso’ – to remind the Aquino government and the 16th Congress about important human rights agenda which they need to act upon immediately starting 2014,” explained Dr. Aurora A. Parong, Director of Amnesty International Philippines.

The 10 questions highlighted, among others, the need for Congressional oversight in the implementation of the Anti-Torture Law, ratification of the International Convention on Enforced disappearances, amendment of the Witness Protection Program, review of the Cybercrime Prevention Act and repeal of discriminatory laws against women, gender and ethnic minorities, as well as the strengthening of the Commission on Human Rights through the adoption of its Charter.

Amnesty International recognizes that many good laws for the protection of human rights were enacted in recent years. Yet the organization is deeply concerned on the continuing crimes and abuses as well as the failure of the Philippine criminal justice system to ensure that justice is served fairly and without delay to victims of human rights violations. Impunity exists, perpetrators of crimes and human rights abuses are not prosecuted and justice is not served to the victims and their families.

“Our laws penalize killings, torture and other human rights violations, however, the killings continue, torture continues, and enforced disappearances remain realities in our country. Three journalists were killed during the past of two weeks. Perpetrators of these killings and abuses get away with their crimes. The good laws do not positively impact on people’s lives,” added Dr. Parong.

Three journalists were killed in the last two weeks – Rogelio Butalid was shot dead in Tagum City on Wednesday while Michael Milo of Tandag City and Jash Dignos of Valencia City was killed on 29 November according to news sources.

Amnesty International reminds the Philippine government to work towards better governance, at the national, provincial and municipal levels, by combating impunity within their jurisdiction. The criminal justice system must be made to work effectively towards penalizing perpetrators of abuses to end impunity and prevent extra judicial killings, unlawful arrests, secret detention, enforced disappearances, torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.

“Amnesty International Philippines calls on the Aquino government to take immediate steps to diligently implement pro-human rights laws and enhance our system of laws by acting on the10 points human rights agenda within the 16th Congress.” concluded the Director.

The Bike for Rights: PadyaKarapatan 2013 culminates Amnesty International Philippines’ celebration the 65th year of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The cycling event started in Quezon City traversing though Marikina, Pasig, Mandaluyong, Makati, Pasay, Manila and back to the Quezon City Memorial Circle.

The complete Amnesty International’s Legislative Agenda to the 16th Congress can be downloaded here: bit.ly/legagenda16th

Amnesty International Philippines
Press Release
15 December 2013

Human Rights Online Philippines does not hold copyright over these materials. Author/s and original source/s of information are retained including the URL contained within the tagline and byline of the articles, news information, photos etc.

[Statement] Sombath Somphone one year on: 62 NGOs call for a new investigation into his enforced disappearance. -FIDH

Sombath Somphone one year on: 62 NGOs call for a new investigation into his enforced disappearance
December 13, 2013

We, the undersigned 62 regional and international organizations, express outrage over the Lao Government’s ongoing failure to shed light on the enforced disappearance of prominent activist and civil society leader Sombath Somphone.

sombath_somphone

December 15, 2013 marks the one-year anniversary of Sombath’s disappearance. Sombath was last seen on the evening of December 15, 2012 in Vientiane. Closed-circuit television (CCTV) footage showed that police stopped Sombath’s car at a police post. Within minutes after being stopped, unknown individuals forced him into another vehicle and drove away. Analysis of the CCTV footage shows that Sombath was taken away in the presence of police officers. This fact supports a finding of government complicity.

Despite the Lao Government’s pledge to “thoroughly and seriously” investigate Sombath’s disappearance [1], the authorities’ probe has been inadequate and unproductive. On January 18, 2013, 65 NGOs signed a joint letter to Lao Prime Minister Thongsing Thammavong to express their concern over Sombath’s disappearance. Since then and in spite of widespread international calls for his return, including from the European Union (EU), the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) parliamentarians, the USA and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Sombath’s whereabouts remain unknown and there has been no progress in the investigation into the circumstances of his enforced disappearance. In addition, the authorities have rejected offers of technical assistance to analyze the CCTV footage.

For the past 30 years, Sombath has pushed tirelessly for expansion for civil society space and rights of the rural poor and young people to have a voice in the development of Lao society and governance. Shortly before his disappearance, Sombath played a key role in organising the Asia-Europe People’s Forum (AEPF), a civil society forum that preceded the official Asia-Europe Summit Meeting. At the forum, discussions on land and water issues, and poorly regulated FDIs which threatened people’s livelihoods were discussed openly for the first time in Laos.

Sombath’s enforced disappearance is not an isolated incident. To this day, the whereabouts of nine people, two women, Kingkeo and Somchit, as well as seven men, Soubinh, Souane, Sinpasong, Khamsone, Nou, Somkhit, and Sourigna, arbitrarily detained by Lao security forces in November 2009 in various locations across the country remain unknown. The nine had planned peaceful demonstrations calling for democracy and respect of human rights. Also unknown are the whereabouts of Somphone Khantisouk, the owner of an ecotourism guesthouse and an outspoken critic of Chinese-sponsored agricultural projects that were damaging the environment in the northern province of Luang Namtha. He disappeared after uniformed men abducted him in January 2007.

The Lao Government’s failure to undertake proper investigations into all these cases of enforced disappearances violates its obligations under Article 2(3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Laos is a State party. The ICCPR states that governments must provide an “effective remedy” for violations of rights guaranteed by the Covenant, including the right to liberty and security of person.

Read full article @fidh.org

Human Rights Online Philippines does not hold copyright over these materials. Author/s and original source/s of information are retained including the URL contained within the tagline and byline of the articles, news information, photos etc.

[Statement] The Right Not to be Disappeared: A Product of the Blood, Sweat and Tears of Victims and Families of Enforced Disappearances around the world -AFAD

The Right Not to be Disappeared: A Product of the Blood, Sweat and Tears of Victims and Families of Enforced Disappearances around the world

Sixty-five years ago, 48 member countries of the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), recognizing “the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family as the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.”

AFAD

The UDHR inspired many human rights activists and defenders around the world to fight for their human rights. One of such great legends was the revered Nelson Mandela, whose recent death brought back memories of his anti-apartheid struggle and his 27 years of imprisonment. His and the struggles of many women, men, girls and boys who were or have been human rights defenders before us further defined and sharpened the various aspects of human rights resulting in the crafting of specific human rights treaties and declarations.

Similarly, the families of victims of involuntary disappearances, undaunted by threats to their lives in the pursuit of justice for their disappeared loved ones lobbied with the international community for the UN to adopt a specific international treaty that would address the phenomenon of enforced disappearance. Initiated by Latin American organizations under Federación Latinoamericana de Asociaciones de Familiares de Detenidos-Desaparecidos (FEDEFAM), other regional bodies were formed and became a potent lobby force. Their steadfastness bore fruit when the UN adopted the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPAPED) on 20 December 2006 and entered into force on 23 December 2010. This Convention declared a new right – the right not to be disappeared and States parties are duty bound to protect its citizens.

The above examples show that our human rights were not given to us in silver platter; rather, while inherent and inalienable, they are the fruit of the blood, sweat and tears of activists, defenders and freedom fighters around the world.

However, for the families of victims of enforced disappearance, the entry into force of ICPAPED is not a guarantee to end this heinous crime. In fact, men and women from different walks of life from around the world continue to be disappeared until today and only very few get punished. The government of Lao for example signed the Convention yet on 15 December 2012, it disappeared Sombath Somphone, a human rights defender and 2005 Ramon Magsaysay awardee for community leadership. He was last seen taken by the police after his car was stopped. Despite repeated calls from the international community and even the United Nations, the Lao government continues to deny its involvement even though recent reliable reports gathered by AFAD show otherwise.

The UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (UNWGEID) reported in January this year that there are 53,986 cases transmitted to its office since its inception in February 1980 where 42,889 cases from 84 States are in active consideration (have not yet been clarified, closed or discontinued). Here in the Philippines, the Families of Victims of Involuntary Disappearances (FIND) documented 1,838 victims of enforced disappearance where 436 surfaced alive, 256 found dead and 1,146 are still missing. This includes the high profile case of Jonas Burgos whose whereabouts are unknown till now. Fortunately for this case, an Army Officer is now facing trial. But for majority of the cases, there has been no progress in the relatives’ search for justice.

The continued search for their missing loved ones and their desire to end impunity encouraged the members of FIND and their allied organizations to lobby for a law criminalizing enforced disappearance. After 16 long years of indefatigable advocacy, President Benigno Aquino III signed RA 10353 or the Anti-Enforced or Involuntary Disappearance Act of 2012, the first of such kind in Asia. Now the families are actively involved in fleshing out the contents of the Implementing Rules and Regulations especially in matters concerning restitution, compensation and guarantees of non-repetition among other substantial aspects of the law.

In the same manner in Indonesia, the relatives and friends of IKOHI and KontraS have long lobbied for their government to ratify the ICPAPED. Just last week, its foreign ministry and the Foreign Affairs Commission of the House of Representatives agreed to ratify it but delayed the ratification pending further discussions on some parts of the law.

In Latin America, especially in Argentina, the perseverance of the relatives, the commitment of its government to uphold human rights and the general attitude of its people in preserving the memories of the disappeared paved the way for the continued prosecution of perpetrators of the Dirty War in the 1970s which disappeared thousands of people (12,000 officially declared and 30,000 estimated to have been killed or disappeared).

“These are but some of the positive developments in the fight to end impunity,” says Mary Aileen Bacalso, Secretary-General of AFAD and this year’s Emilio Mignone International Human Rights Awardee. “The lessons of the past remind us to continuously defend our human rights, safeguard our gains and monitor the State’s implementation of international human rights laws and policies” she adds.

For Mugiyanto, AFAD Chairperson and himself a surfaced disaparecido, human rights continue to evolve in a complex and globalized world and the challenge is for all of us to continually deepen our understanding and practice of the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of peoples not only in situations of armed conflicts and insurgencies but also within the context of large scale disasters and climate change.

Signed:

MUGIYANTO
Chairperson

MARY AILEEN DIEZ-BACALSO
Secretary-General
Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances (AFAD)
Rms. 310-311 Philippine Social Science Center Bldg.,
Commonwealth Ave., Diliman, 1103 Quezon City

Telefax: 00-632-4546759
Mobile: (63)917-792-4058
Website: http://www.afad-online.org

10 December 2013

All submissions are republished and redistributed in the same way that it was originally published online and sent to us. We may edit submission in a way that does not alter or change the original material.

Human Rights Online Philippines does not hold copyright over these materials. Author/s and original source/s of information are retained including the URL contained within the tagline and byline of the articles, news information, photos etc.

[From the web] Philippines: divided leadership and lacklustre performance -PAHRA

Philippines: divided leadership and lacklustre performance
By Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates (PAHRA)[1]

Source: http://renatomabunga.wordpress.com/

I. General Overview

President Benigno Aquino III considered 2012 a year of continued resurgence of the economy bolstered with increased confidence in good governance. He took pride in the dramatic leaps the country has taken in the global competitive index of the World Economic Forum; the unprecedented attainment of investment-grade status from the most respected credit ratings agencies in the world; and the astounding 6.8 percent Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth in 2012.[2]

Boyet small

Amidst this enthusiasm, cases of extra-judicial killings (EJK), enforced disappearances, torture, illegal arrests as well as other political, civil, economic, social and cultural rights violations increase halfway into the Aquino administration. What becomes alarming “is the growing number of threats and killings of rights defenders” as observed by the UN Special Rapporteurs on human rights defenders, Margaret Sekaggya, and on extrajudicial killings, Christof Heyns.[3]

In 2012 alone, the Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines (CHRP) reported 43 cases of EJK involving 48 victims; 14 cases of Enforced Disappearance involving 17 victims; and, 39 cases of Torture involving 63 victims. There were 65 documented cases of arrest and detention by the Task Force Detainees of the Philippines involving 133 individuals. The spate of arrests came after the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) and Department of National Defense (DND) announced its Php467 million bounty for some undisclosed list of 235 communist leaders.[4] This list would definitely be used to harass political activists and leaders of peoples’ organizations with or without legal charges and would constitute another institutionalized utter disregard of the right to due process.[5]

In an October 2012 interview with Radio New Zealand, President Aquino brushed aside criticism of his human rights records as simply “leftist propaganda”. He issued Administrative Order (AO) 35 in November “creating the inter-agency committee on extra-legal killings, enforced disappearances, torture and other grave violations of the right to life, liberty and security of persons”. He promoted military officers charged with cases of human rights violations.[6] Brig. Gen Eduardo Añowas appointed chief of the Intelligence Service of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (ISAFP). He was among those charged in the abduction and disappearance of Jonas Burgos. Brig. Gen. Aurelio Baladad was appointed Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and before him Lt. Gen. Jorge Segovia who was assigned to head the Eastern Mindanao Command. Baladad and Segovia were among those charged in the illegal arrest and torture of the Morong 43.[7]

2012 also witnessed positive developments in policy reforms. The President signed into law Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act of 2012, which is restrained for implementation by the Supreme Court following petitions of unconstitutionality by the Catholic Church; the Compensation for Martial Law Victims Act, early 2013, providing compensation, recognition and acceptance of the historical facts of grave human rights violation during Martial Law; the Muslim Mindanao Autonomy Act 288 or the ARMM Human Rights Commission Charter of 2012, an independent regional national human rights institution vested with the powers and mandate of the national Commission on Human Rights within the autonomous region; Republic Act (RA) 101361 or the Kasambahay Law in January 2013, an act instituting polices for the protection and welfare of domestic helpers; the Anti-Enforced or Involuntary Disappearance Act of 2012, an act defining and penalizing enforced or involuntary disappearance; and the Ratification of the Rome Statute.

Read full article @renatomabunga.wordpress.com

All submissions are republished and redistributed in the same way that it was originally published online and sent to us. We may edit submission in a way that does not alter or change the original material.

Human Rights Online Philippines does not hold copyright over these materials. Author/s and original source/s of information are retained including the URL contained within the tagline and byline of the articles, news information, photos etc.

Iboto ang iyong #HRPinduterosChoice para sa HR BLOGSITE

Iboto ang iyong #HRPinduterosChoice para sa HR BLOGSITE.

HR BLOGSITE LOGOAng botohan ay magsisimula ngayon hanggang sa 11:59PM ng Nov 15, 2013.

IKAW PARA KANINO KA PIPINDOT? Simple lang bumoto:
• i-LIKE ang thumbnail/s ng iyong mga ibinoboto, i-share at ikampanya.
• Bisitahin ang LINK ng poll sa HRonlinePH.com (links sa bawat thumbnail) at pindutin ang button sa poll sa ilalim ng bawat nominadong post. Vote @
• Most number of the combined likes sa FB at sa poll buttons ang magiging 3rd HR Pinduteros Choice na kikilalanin sa 2013 HR week celebration.

Makiisa sa pagpapalaganap ng impormasyon hinggil sa karapatang pantao. Pindot na!

WHAT IS 3RD HR PINDUTEROS CHOICE AWARDS? https://hronlineph.com/2013/10/01/3rd-human-rights-pinduteros-choice-awards/


FOR HR BLOGSITE

1. renatomabunga.wordpress.com

FREE ZONE
ZONE where thoughts and actions on human rights are FREE
By Renato Mabunga

1FREEZONE

This page is a mere sounding board for a lively, fruitful and pluralistic discussions, a platform for opinions, and an arena for constructive dialogues where we may all learn and share thoughts… grand or simple as they may be… on human rights and our fundamental freedoms.

http:// renatomabunga.wordpress.com/

2. taomunahindimina.wordpress.com

TAO MUNA-HINDI MINA!
Kalikasan at tao muna- hindi tubo at kita.
Managed by TFDP

2TAO MUNA

Members of Civil Society, Faith based organizations and Human Rights Defenders working against destructive mining in the country are launching a campaign dubbed “TAO MUNA HINDI MINA!”. It is a campaign to assert that government as duty bearer should uphold human rights and protect the environment, and should conduct its affairs consistent with human rights standards and principles.
http:// taomunahindimina.wordpress.com/
3. koihernandez.wordpress.com

YOU’RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE HERE.
By Koi Hernandez

3KOI

The opinions of a challenge-oriented, courageous, creative and curious youth in transition to becoming an adult. WARNING: I am not for the FAINT-HEARTED

http:// koihernandez.wordpress.com/
4. anakngdesaparecidos.wordpress.com

ANAK NG DESAPARECIDOS
By FIND

4SAD

The objective for founding SAD was to provide the children with much-needed rehabilitaion. In its early years, the focus of SAD was the attainment of this objective. Rehabilitation sessions and family conferences were conducted to help the children cope with their parents’ disappearance.

5. rodrigo75.wordpress.com

DEKONZTRUKTSCHON
thinkering thoughts
By Rodrigo Rivera

5ROD

is about looking at things differently, breaking the whole into its parts to understand each piece that makes the whole, then putting them again together as a new construction. It’s simply a way of thinking, of knowing and of understanding. The posts here are critical, reflexive and constructive attempts of life discourse – an exercise of being academic, political, apolitical, sometimes cynical and skeptic, theoretical, simple or unusual. This blog attempts to contribute to human understanding of their life realities by examining things in their social world with a different lense – deconstruction for reconstruction of knowledge.

6. digitelemployeesunion.wordpress.com

DIGITAL EMPLOYEES UNION

6DEU

• Closure, Integration of operation to PLDT – Redundancy cum (ERP) Retire – Rehire No Way! • Absorb Digitel employees in the Integration of Digitel Operation to PLDT
• Negotiate CBA with the DEU immediately, Without Further Delay!

7. rodgalicha.com

WE ARE NATURE
By Rodney Galicha

7RODNEY

Protecting the biodiversity and natural resources of Sibuyan Island (known as the Galapagos of Asia) through sustainable programs and social media, Galicha has been serving as executive director[7] of Sibuyan Island Sentinels League for Environment Inc. (Sibuyan ISLE) since 2007. His group, Sibuyanons Against Mining (SAM) successfully campaigned against nickel mining giant BHP Billiton and lobbied for the suspension of mineral extraction of a Canada-based mining company being operated by a Filipino corporation.[8][9] He also helped the Romblon Ecumenical Forum Against Mining (REFAM) in a successful campaign against a Canada-based mining giant Ivanhoe.[10] He also helped organize Mining Action Philippines – Australia (MAP-Oz), a mining watchdog based in Australia.

8. dars0357.wordpress.com

CARPE DIEM
Seize the Moment. Be Critical. Be Involved. Be Heard
By Darwin Mendiola

8DARWIN

Carpe diem is a phrase from a Latin poem by Horace which means “seize the day”. Carpe is literally translated as “to pick, pluck, pluck off, cull, crop, gather”. Diem on the other hand simply connotes “day”. Roman poet Ovid used this phrase to mean “to enjoy, seize, use, and live”. For the author, this is about changing our attitude – by simply being critical, being involved and to express one’s thought. This is what this blog is trying to do – just to contribute in the understanding of the social realities by examining issues that affect our lives.
Carpe diem is a call for individual and collective action.

9. matangapoy.blogspot.com

MATANG APOY
By Greg Bituin

9GREG

Wala akong yaman kundi ang panitik
Na kaulayaw ko sa gabing tahimik
Gamit sa paglikha ng tulang mabagsik
Na kapag tumama’y singtalim ng lintik

10. cannotallowtorture.blogspot.com

CAT ALERT!
Cannot Allow Torture Philippines
By TFDP

10CAT

“…torture has been humanity’s option for clinging to power and in suppressing truth. We cannot allow torture in anyway.”

[Event] Red-Baiting Forum 2013 -IPON

Red-Baiting Forum 2013

As a follow-up to our 2012 Red-Baiting Conference we cordially invite you to our
Red-Baiting Forum 2013

(on October 4th at UP Balay Kalinaw, Quezon City)

Based on the talks and results of the two previous forums, objective of the Red-Baiting Forum 2013 is to bring together Philippine state actors, international actors and national/international CSOs/NGOs to gather ideas and recommendations on a “Guideline to AFP ground line personnel on the prevention of Red-Baiting/Red-Labeling of HRDs and/or their legal organizations in conflict and non-conflict situations”.

IPON logo

Red-Baiting in the Philippines can be described as a political strategy to accuse, denounce and persecute individuals and groups as members of communist organizations like the CPP-NDF-NPA in order to obstruct their work. The most forceful and extreme examples of Red-Baiting related violations of human rights are enforced disappearances, torture and extralegal killings.

Funded by the German Federal Foreign Office, IPON emphasizes this crucial issue that deals with threats to the existence of civil society organizations and their members in the third year.
Among the victims of Red-Baiting, human rights defenders are particularly endangered. They become victims of physical and legal harassments because of their peaceful engagement in their demand for human rights. Therefore it is the responsibility of the Philippine state to particularly take measures to protect human rights defenders and provide a situation in which they can peacefully strive for their rights without any kind of repressions.

Together we want to share perspectives, find common grounds and work out practical steps towards possible solutions. We sincerely hope that you will support us with your expertise and knowledge in this important policy design process.

Please feel free to contact us in case of further inquiries.

Nina Johnen
(Country & Project Coordinator)

R.S.V.P. (until Sept 30th), n.johnen@ipon-philippines.org, +63 (0)92 797 016 75

All submissions are republished and redistributed in the same way that it was originally published online and sent to us. We may edit submission in a way that does not alter or change the original material.

Human Rights Online Philippines does not hold copyright over these materials. Author/s and original source/s of information are retained including the URL contained within the tagline and byline of the articles, news information, photos etc.

[Statement] Break through the Marcos impunity: Pass the Freedom of Information bill now -PAHRA

Break through the Marcos impunity:
Pass the Freedom of Information bill now

21 September 2013-41st Anniversary of the Imposition of Martial Law

pahra logo copy

On September 21, 2011, the Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines (CHRP) and the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) launched a joint endeavor to implement the first Principle of the United Nations Updated Principles in Combating Impunity – the Right to Truth.

The Updated Principles present two aspects of this right: the individual(s) right to know as well as the victim(s)’ families and relatives to know the circumstances and the reasons for the victim’s torture, enforced disappearance or extrajudicial killing. The other aspect is the collective aspect, wherein the nation should remember the tragedies that were consequent of the human rights violations. The obligation to preserve documents and other related evidences to the violations arise from the state’s duty. So is the obligation that public access is facilitated.

None of the documents subsequently turned over by the military would help add to the numbers of those who with “conclusive presumption” would be recognized and compensated as victims of human rights violations during the martial law period. The AFP documents have not even start to come close to the documentation done by the Task Force Detainees of the Philippines (TFDP) which was set up in 1974 by the Association of the Major Religious Superiors in the Philippines (AMRSP).

No additional information as of now may be seen as forthcoming from any initiative of the security forces. We may never know how many even how many have been arrested, tortured, subjected to extra-judicial execution and enforced disappearance. Much less would there be a naming of perpetrators of these serious human rights violations and bringing them to justice.

The September 21, 2011 joint endeavor is now proved to be no more than an empty gesture to obtain the right to truth to combat impunity.

It is the people who must initiate to surface the truth about the gross violations against human rights, not only of civil and political rights but also of the violations of the people’s economic, social and cultural rights, especially of the impoverished, the marginalized and the vulnerable. Even then, it is also imperative to bring to the open the violations done against our Muslim sisters and brothers during the repressive period of martial law.

Now, more than ever, with the expose of grand corruption of Napoles-ian scale, should all people of good-will determinedly work for the passage of the people’s initiative bill on the freedom of information.

Accountability must be obtained for both human rights violations and criminal activities.

All submissions are republished and redistributed in the same way that it was originally published online and sent to us. We may edit submission in a way that does not alter or change the original material.

Human Rights Online Philippines does not hold copyright over these materials. Author/s and original source/s of information are retained including the URL contained within the tagline and byline of the articles, news information, photos etc.

[Press Release] Families and Advocates Against Enforced Disappearance urge Asian governments to bring the Desaparecidos home -AFAD

Families and Advocates Against Enforced Disappearance urge Asian governments to bring the Desaparecidos home

AFAD

On the occasion of the International Day of the Disappeared, the Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances (AFAD) vows to make full use of Republic Act 10353, the Anti Enforced Disappearance Act of 2012 to bring home all Filipino desaparecidos and to exact accountability from its violators.

Republic Act 10353 or the “Anti-Enforced Disappearance Act of 2012, which was enacted into law on 21 December 2012 and whose Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) was promulgated on 12 February 2013, clearly define and penalize the act of enforced disappearance as a distinct and separate criminal offense.

The families of victims enforced disappearance in the Philippines have pledged to utilize the new law as a measure to combat impunity and guarantee substantial remedies to victims and their families.

While AFAD members laud the Philippine government for the passage of RA 10353 as an acknowledgement that the country needs to seriously address the problem of enforced disappearance, they are however disturbed that enforced disappearances persist under the present dispensation even as past cases remain unresolved. They take note for example, of the case of the three Islamic scholars en route to Sudan who were disappeared inside the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) Terminal 3 on January 3, 2012. While the Manila-based AFAD takes pride in the fact that the Philippines is the first Asian country to have an anti-enforced disappearance law in Asia, it stresses the importance of ensure the law’s full implementation and set a good example for its neighboring Asian states to imitate.

The federation also urges the Philippine government to accord its citizens with complete protection mechanisms from enforced disappearance by immediately signing and acceding to the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance and recognizing the competence of the UN Committee on Enforced Disappearance.

“Disappointingly, the Philippines until now is not yet a signatory much less a State Party to the Convention despite having committed to support the treaty as one of the voluntary pledges of the Philippine government to the United Nations Human Rights Council in 2007,” lamented Ms. Mary Aileen D. Bacalso, Secretary General of the Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances (AFAD).

“While we rage against the disappearance of public funds from the government coffers through large scale corruption and irregularities, we must also strongly protest against the disappearance of people who fight against corruption and other social ills,” Ms. Bacalso added.

Days prior to today’s commemoration of the International Day of the Disappeared, AFAD has recently launched a publication on the phenomenon of enforced disappearances in selected countries in Asia including the Philippines and the #BringThemHome online campaign in order to continuously raise awareness of and generate public response to the issue of enforced disappearance.

Contact Person:

Darwin Mendiola
Philippine Project Coordinator
Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances
Mobile no. 0917.8968459
Office No. 490.7862

PRESS RELEASE
INTERNATIONAL DAY OF THE DISAPPEARED
AUGUST 30, 2013

All submissions are republished and redistributed in the same way that it was originally published online and sent to us. We may edit submission in a way that does not alter or change the original material.

Human Rights Online Philippines does not hold copyright over these materials. Author/s and original source/s of information are retained including the URL contained within the tagline and byline of the articles, news information, photos etc.

[People] International Day of the Disappeared Brings a Grim Reminder by Renato Mabunga

International Day of the Disappeared Brings a Grim Reminder

Boyet small

For three years, the United Nations has marked the International Day of the Disappeared on August 30 in recognition of the fact that “enforced disappearances” have no place in a world that aspires to freedom and justice.

An “enforced disappearance” is defined as “deprivation of liberty outside of the protection of the law by agents of government or of authority through concealment of the victim’s whereabouts.”
Beyond this definition, however, is the immense suffering of families haunted by the fate of the “desaparecidos,” the term used for the disappeared in the Philippines.

In Asia, where most governments hide behind the pretext of law and order and national security, official rhetoric has failed to cover up enforced disappearances.

In Bangladesh, 24 disappeared were documented in 2012. This year, there have already been 14 documented cases, allegedly perpetrated by members of the Rapid Action Battalion, the Police Detective Branch and the Industrial Police.

In Jammu and Kashmir in India’s restive northwest, conflicting statements by different government agencies have become a feature of this issue. There have been more than 8,000 cases of recorded disappearances since 1989, yet successive governments have officially downplayed the number. In 2005, the People’s Democratic Party-led government claimed there were 3,931 such cases. In 2009, the National Conference-led government claimed 3,429 missing and then last year, the same government claimed only 2,305 people had disappeared since 1989.

Whether there has been just one or thousands of victims is of secondary concern. What is essential is an effective mechanism for probing cases of violations, finding victims, easing the burden and suffering of families and for holding governments accountable within a human rights framework.

In Indonesia, the entrenched and successful use of terror during the New Order regime (1965-1998) terrified the populace into not reporting enforced disappearances. Even with the change of government, 414 mostly unsolved cases of missing persons were documented in the restive province of Aceh alone from 1999 to 2005.

Read full article @renatomabunga.wordpress.com

All submissions are republished and redistributed in the same way that it was originally published online and sent to us. We may edit submission in a way that does not alter or change the original material.

Human Rights Online Philippines does not hold copyright over these materials. Author/s and original source/s of information are retained including the URL contained within the tagline and byline of the articles, news information, photos etc.

[Event] “Beyond Tears and Borders” book launch -AFAD

On the 30th of August, the world will observe the International Day of the Disappeared which was officially declared by the United Nations in 2010.

AFAD

The Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances (AFAD) sees it fit to commemorate this historical day by launching a book entitled, “Beyond Tears and Borders” that will comprehensively present the phenomenon of enforced disappearances in selected Asian countries where AFAD has member organizations.

The book launch is part of our on-going campaign against enforced disappearance which resonates our call – to “Bring All Desaparecidos Home!” It will highlight our solidarity campaign for Mr. Sombath Somphone, a prominent Lao human rights defender and Ramon Magsaysay Awardee Somphone who was taken away from a police post in the city of Vientiane on 15 December, 2012 and was never seen again.

We underscore the fact that the unabated commission of enforced disappearance in many parts of Asia continues to violate not only the basic rights of the victims but also of their families and next of kin. It is therefore imperative for the Philippines and other Asian countries to accede to the Convention in order to have an effective protection mechanism against enforced disappearances and to combat impunity. It is our civic duty as well as our moral obligation to make enforced disappearance finally disappears.

“Beyond Tears and Borders”

Book Launch

August 28, 2013, from 9:00 am to 12:00 noon

at the CHR Multi-Purpose Hall.

For your confirmation or inquiries, please contact us at telephone number 490.7862 or at mobile number 0915.4689306 or email us at afad@surfshop.net.ph.

Human Rights Online Philippines does not hold copyright over these materials. Author/s and original source/s of information are retained including the URL contained within the tagline and byline of the articles, news information, photos etc.

[Statement] AFAD@15: An Arduous Journey Under a Crystal Clear Sky

AFAD 15th Anniversary Statement
4 June 2013

AFAD@15:
An Arduous Journey Under a Crystal Clear Sky

AFAD

4 June 2013 – A decade and a half have passed since the founding of the Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances (AFAD). Many Asian governments continue the practice of making people disappear while past cases remain unresolved. While they fail to hold the perpetrators accountable, victims and their families continue to suffer from this abominable scourge, which violates a number of human rights. Much as it wants itself to be rendered irrelevant, AFAD remains to be relevant.

The birth of AFAD had given voice to the voiceless, power to the powerless and presence to the disappeared in the Asian region. It has provided flesh and blood to solidarity which endeavors to transform shared aspirations into common actions towards a unified vision.

With the commitment of its 11 member-organizations from Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Nepal, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Timor Leste and the support of its partners, AFAD has been able to respond to the needs of the surviving victims and their families – to the women and children left behind in their pursuit for justice and for an end to impunity.

Today, we celebrate our accomplishments. From a federation of three organizations, it has grown to 11 organizations in eight countries, 11-member Secretariat in its country of base and has forged partnership with various organizations. Amidst multi-cultural diversity, the Federation has sustained its solidarity and advocacy.

Anniversaries are occasions to ponder on our inner capacities and limitations. On this 15th anniversary, the Federation counts on its accomplishments even as it humbly reflects on its shortcomings. In the course of its journey, it continues to sharpen its mission, vision and goals.

The strength of any Federation is founded on the strength of its member-organizations. How well have we, as a Federation, marched in step towards the same vision? How have we, in various capacities, performed our role in expressing mutual solidarity and in steering the Federation towards the fulfillment of its dreams? How have we mutually extended solidarity among each other given the commonalities and particularities of our situation and the uneven development of our constituents? How have we gone beyond crises? How sustainable are our accomplishments vis-à-vis our limited resources? These are questions we ask ourselves as we commemorate our 15th anniversary.

On this day, we thank all those organizations and individuals who, during good and not-so-good times, have linked arms with us since our conception, birth and eventual full maturity as a Federation. To the disappeared and their families, we owe them the inspiration much-needed in this difficult journey.

On the occasion of the 1997 International Week of the Disappeared in the Philippines, with the theme, Strengthen and Intensify the International Movement for the Disappeared, an Asian group was conceived. A year later, AFAD was born. Since then, it has gone a long way. Fifteen years later, AFAD has become the focal point of what is now the International Coalition Against Enforced Disappearances, whose mandate is to campaign for universal accession and implementation of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (Convention) and the creation of an independent monitoring body, the UN Committee on Enforced Disappearances. The Federation can claim of its contribution to the adoption and entry into force of the Convention and its eventual universal application. Related to this is AFAD’s contribution to the signing of the Convention by Indonesia and Thailand and its support to the enactment of the Philippine Anti-Enforced Disappearance law. Needless to say, AFAD has gained recognition at all levels as the only regional federation in Asia that works on the theme of enforced disappearances. Our small and great victories are worth the celebration.

Yet, the challenges are many. Amidst the huge number of enforced disappearances in a continent that submitted the highest number of cases to the UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances, we need a voice louder enough to be heard. As AFAD consolidates its ranks, it needs to continue expanding to cover cases and situations in the vast Asian region. It has to explore possibilities of cooperation with regional inter-governmental bodies in the formulation of more effective human rights policies and mechanisms.

Every year, we learn from our own experiences, develop our own capacities and adapt to the changing times. Without a doubt, the journey has not always been smooth sailing. But the challenges we have confronted along the way were a resounding affirmation of the relevance and legitimacy of our cause.

This gives us all the reason not to rest on our laurels. We need to raise our voices again and again; march in every street; continue knocking at every door of States for them to accede to the Convention without delay and to enact effective implementing legislation in accordance with international human rights standards.

As we commemorate our 15th anniversary, we must give due recognition to those who have offered their lives to the altar of freedom – our sisters and brothers who were made to disappear and killed during the massacre at the Tiananmen Square in Beijing, China twenty-four years ago. Lest we forget, we remember Munir, our former Chairperson who was poisoned by arsenic allegedly by elements of the military intelligence agencies in Indonesia in 2004. We likewise remember Aasia Jeelani of APDP who, in the same year, was killed by a landmine blast in the north of Kashmir while on election monitoring duty. More recently, we honor our dear friend, Patricio Rice of Argentina, who, in the course of his work, succumbed to death on 7 July 2010.

For the desaparecidos, their families and the greater global community, we continue to dedicate our efforts as a Federation in this collective arduous journey towards a world without disappearances under a crystal clear sky.

Signed and authenticated by:

MUGIYANTO MARY AILEEN D. BACALSO
Chairperson Secretary-General

All submissions are republished and redistributed in the same way that it was originally published online and sent to us. We may edit submission in a way that does not alter or change the original material.

Human Rights Online Philippines does not hold copyright over these materials. Author/s and original source/s of information are retained including the URL contained within the tagline and byline of the articles, news information, photos etc.

 

sign petiton2 smallPhoto by TFDPcat alert icon copy

[Statement] AFAD remembers and honors the men, women and children victims of enforced disappearance in Asia and the world

AFAD REMEMBERS AND HONORS THE MEN, WOMEN AND CHILDREN VICTIMS OF ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCE IN ASIA AND THE WORLD

AFAD

On the 32nd year of the commemoration of the International Week of the Disappeared, the Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances (AFAD) joins the families and friends of victims of enforced disappearance in remembering, paying tribute and restoring the dignity of the men, women and children who were made to disappear in Asia and the rest of the world.

Who were these victims and why do we honor them?

In the Asian region, most of these men and women victims of enforced disappearance fought for political freedom and democracy in countries under repressive governments. They were then called enemies of the State who defied the dictatorships of then President Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines, Gen. Suharto in Indonesia, Gen. Chon Doo Hwan in South Korea, and Gen.Suchinda Kraprayoon in Thailand in Southeast Asia during the ‘70s to ‘80s. They were hunted by agents of these dictatorial governments.

Some of them were men and women who fought for independence against the occupation or annexation of their independent States – as in the case of Timor Leste (the former Portuguese Timor which was invaded and occupied by Indonesia in 1975-1999) and the independent State of Jammu and Kashmir which is being administered by India. In the ‘80s and ‘90s, majority of the victims in countries embroiled in internal armed conflicts such as in Sri Lanka and Nepal were combatants, supporters or plain community members in armed conflict areas.

In Bangladesh, majority of victims of enforced disappearance were freedom fighters during the Liberation War in 1971 when the former East Pakistan seceded from West Pakistan and declared the People’s Republic of Bangladesh. In recent years, victims of enforced disappearance are said to be opposition activists, local traders, workers and some who were abducted because of criminal feuds or business rivalries[1].

In Asian countries under democratic transition or in fledgling democratic states, victims of enforced disappearances are those who continue to fight for political reforms as well as those who demanded for their basic rights. They were farmers, workers, informal settlers, and non-teaching personnel who simply asserted and demanded their rights to land, work and decent wages, to unionize, to have decent housing and education. A significant number of them were students, teachers and journalists who fought for academic and press freedom; lawyers and medical professionals who practiced their profession and assisted people who sought their services; or religious leaders who spoke on behalf of the marginalized peoples against repression. They helped empower people to speak for themselves and assert their rights.

They were innocent men, women and children relatives and friends of the disappeared who were “at the wrong place at the wrong time.” Since their relatives were considered enemies of the State, government security forces, in the course of hunting their “enemies,” victimized their innocent children, relatives, and even friends. They were harassed, arrested, imprisoned, some summarily killed, while others were also disappeared. During the Indonesian invasion of East Timor for example, the International Rescue Committee (IRC) documented 4,200 missing children[2]. Until now, many of their whereabouts are uncertain.

Thus, on the occasion of the International Week of the Disappeared, AFAD salutes the men and women victims of enforced disappearance. They are human rights advocates and defenders, not enemies of the State. AFAD recognizes their valiant contribution towards social transformation where principles of human rights, freedom, justice and peace serve as its foundation.

AFAD calls on the children of the disappeared to stand up and be acknowledged. Be proud of the noble deeds of your parents. They are heroes.

AFAD also calls on each and every one of us to take a few minutes of silence and offer our heartfelt thanks and prayers to these courageous men and women who selfishly dedicated their lives to the betterment of society so others can live better lives.

Let their deeds inspire us further. Let us impart to the younger generation the ideals of a just, free and peace-loving society these victims aspired for. The tasks they have started are not yet finished. The road to genuine freedom and democracy is filled with roadblocks and detours. The culture of impunity is still very much ingrained in the minds of key institutions that are threatened with the culture of human rights.

AFAD calls on States to STOP the Culture of Impunity by enacting laws criminalizing enforced disappearance and to accede to the International Convention Against Enforced Disappearance.

Further, AFAD calls on the States and their agencies to come up with policies and programs to support the families of disappeared victims who are facing psycho-emotional and socio-economic difficulties. Majority of the disappeared are men who are the breadwinners. Women are often left to bear the social and economic impact of the disappearance. Consequently, the children can no longer continue going to school. In many cases, the eldest child has to find work to support the -family.

Moreover, the women relatives of the disappeared also face procedural problems in their claims to inheritance of their disappeared loved ones because of the uncertainty of their status – they cannot be declared as widows. In the course of their search for justice for their loved ones, women also face the risk of sexual and other violence and could be subjected to disappearance, too.

Enforced disappearance is a multi-faceted issue that requires multi-faceted interventions. Let this International Week of the Disappeared, initiated by the Latin American Federation of Associations of Relatives of Disappeared-Detainees (FEDEFAM) be an opportunity for government agencies concerned, civil society organizations, and the general public to reflect and plan strategies to curb this problem.

Signed by:

Mugiyanto Mary Aileen Diez-Bacalso
Chairperson Secretary-General

Human Rights Online Philippines does not hold copyright over these materials. Author/s and original source/s of information are retained including the URL contained within the tagline and byline of the articles, news information, photos etc.

wk of disappeared2 copysign petiton2 small

[Statement] Itaguyod ang karapatang pantao, sugpuin ang sapilitang pagwala! -FIND

PAHAYAG International Week of the Disappeared (IWD) May 27-31, 2013 ITAGUYOD ANG KARAPATANG PANTAO, SUGPUIN ANG SAPILITANG PAGWALA!

FIND

Nakikiisa ang FIND (Families of Victims of Involuntary Disappearance), mga pamilya, kaanak at mga biktima ng sapilitang pagwala sa buong mundo sa paggunita ng International Week of the Disappeared (IWD) mula Mayo 27 – 31, 2013. Ang taunang pag-alala na ito ay una nang sinimulan sa Latin America.

Ang paggunita na ito ay isang pagbibigay pugay sa mga naging biktima ng sapilitang pagwala, na kung tawagin ay enforced or involuntary disappearance. Ang enforced or involuntary disappearance ay isang karumal-dumal na paglabag ng karapatang pantao na isinasagawa upang patahimikin ang mga indibidwal na malayang nagsasalita at kumikilos para sa pagbabago ng lipunan.

Nagiging makabuluhan ang paggunita ng IWD dahil sa isang kasunduang internasyunal sa loob ng United Nations (UN) na nagbabawal ng sapilitang pagwala at pagkilala nito na walang sinumang tao, sa kahit anumang sitwasyon ay maaring dukutin at sapilitang iwala. Sa kasalukuyan ay mayroon nang 38 na mga kaanib-bansa na pumirma at sumang-ayon sa kasunduang ito, ang International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPAPED). Kapansin-pansin na ang bansang Pilipinas ay hindi kabilang sa mga bansang ito.

Hindi maikaila na ang Pilipinas ay isa sa mga bansang mayroong mahabang talaan ng mga biktima ng sapilitang pagwala. Ang kalakhan ng bilang nito ay idinulot ng mapaniil na diktaduryang rehimen ni dating Pangulong Ferdinand Marcos. Ang kabuuang bilang ayon, sa dokumento ng FIND, ay umabot ng 878 na hanggang sa ngayon ay mayroon pa ring 613 na hindi matagpuan. Ang gawaing sapilitang pagwala ay nagpatuloy sa pagpalit-palit ng mga administrasyong sumunod. Sa katunayan, sa mahigit tatlong taong panunungkulan ni Pangulong Simeon Benigno C. Aquino III, ay mayroon nang 22 ka-taong dinukot at iniulat na sapilitang iwinala ng mga hinihilalang tauhan ng gubyerno o ahente ng estado.

Sa kabila nito, nagkaroon ng liwanag at pag-asa ang adhikain ng FIND na itaguyod ang karapatang pantao ng mamamayan at wakasan ang enforced disappearances nang lagdaan ng Presidente ang “Anti-Enforced or Involuntary Disappearance Act of 2012” noong Disyembre 21, 2012. Ngayon, maaari nang matulungan at makinabang ang mga biktima ng sapiltang pagwala sa pamamagitan ng programang rehabilitasyon, kumpensasyon at restitusyon, samantalang ang mga mapapatunayang may kagagawan ng krimeng enforced disappearance ay maaari nang sampahan ng kaso at managot sa ilalim ng batas, RA 10353.

Hindi nalalayo ang mga probisyon ng RA 10353 sa International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPAPED) kaya ang panawagan ng FIND sa pamahalaang Aquino ay isunod na, sa lalong madaling panahon, ang paglagda sa international convention. Ito ay isang kongkretong hakbang upang tuluyang puksain ang sapiltang pagwala sa bansa. hinihikayat din ng FIND, sa pakikipagtulungan sa mga municipal at city councils, ang paghain ng mga lokal na resolusyon na magdedeklara ng kanilang mga lugar na isang “Enforced Disappearance Free Area” bilang pagkilala at tugon sa batas, RA 10353.

Ang FIND ay tuluyang naninindigan at kikilos upang mabigyan ng katarungan ang mga biktima ng sapilitang pagwala at mawakasan ang pagsasagawa nito. Samahan n’yo kami sa pagwawakas ng karumaldumal na gawaing ito at nang manaig ang pagrespeto sa karapatang pantao ng buong mamamayang Pilipino.

All submissions are republished and redistributed in the same way that it was originally published online and sent to us. We may edit submission in a way that does not alter or change the original material.

Human Rights Online Philippines does not hold copyright over these materials. Author/s and original source/s of information are retained including the URL contained within the tagline and byline of the articles, news information, photos etc.

wk of disappeared2 copysign petiton2 small

 

[Events] Activities in commemoration of the INTERNATIONAL WEEK OF THE DISAPPEARED- AFAD/FIND

INTERNATIONAL WEEK OF THE DISAPPEARED
May 27 -31, 2013

FIND AFAD
Dear Friends:

The Families of Victims of Involuntary Disappearance (FIND), the International Coalitions Against Enforced Disappearances (ICAED) and the Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances (AFAD are organizing two activities in commemoration of the INTERNATIONAL WEEK OF THE DISAPPEARED (May 27 -31, 2013).

The May 28 Roundtable Discussion on Restitution for the Victims of Enforced Disappearance which will be held at the Minority Hall of the Philippine Congress from 2 to 5 pm, aims to bring together various stakeholders to come up with a common understanding of the concept of restitution and to identify its different forms and the necessary operational mechanisms for its provisions.

The May 30 Roundtable Discussion (RTD) on the Lobby Efforts for the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance which will be held at the Blue Room of the Ateneo Professional Schools, Rockwell, Makati City from 9:00 to 11:30 am, aims to discuss the complementation of the lobby work of human rights NGOs and the diplomatic community for possible accession to ICPAPED by the Philippine government.

WE SHALL TRULY APPRECIATE IT IF YOU CAN TAKE PART IN THIS AFOREMENTIONED EVENTs.
THANK YOU.

For inquiry, please contact:

Mr. Darwin Mendiola
Mobile No. 0917.8968459
Office Phone No. 490.7862

Email address: afad@surfshop.net.ph

All submissions are republished and redistributed in the same way that it was originally published online and sent to us. We may edit submission in a way that does not alter or change the original material.

Human Rights Online Philippines does not hold copyright over these materials. Author/s and original source/s of information are retained including the URL contained within the tagline and byline of the articles, news information, photos etc.

wk of disappeared copysign petiton2 small

 

No one shall be subjected to enforced disappearance

wk of disappeared2 copy

No one shall be subjected to enforced disappearance.

The arrest, detention, abduction or any other form of deprivation of liberty by agents of the State or by persons or groups of persons acting with the authorization, support or acquiescence of the State, followed by a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty or by concealment of the fate or whereabouts of the disappeared person, which place such a person outside the protection of the law.

Know the convention…http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/CED/Pages/ConventionCED.aspx

Justice for All Desaparecidos of the World!

Sign and Ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance NOW!

wk of disappeared copysign petiton2 small

[From the web] Inter-Agency Com on ELK & Enforced Disappearance Guidelines for Investigation & Prosecution

Inter-Agency Committee on Extra-Legal Killings and Enforced Disappearance Meet to Adopt Guidelines for Investigation and Prosecution

Source: www.doj.gov.ph

doj

On April 18, 2013, the Inter-Agency Committee (IAC) on Extra-Legal Killings, Enforced Disappearances, Torture and Other Grave Violations of the Right to Life, Liberty and Security of Persons, chaired by the Department of Justice (DOJ), held its third regular meeting at the GHQ Conference Room, Camp Aguinaldo. The IAC composed of the DOJ, Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), Department of National Defense (DND), Office of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process (OPAPP), Office of the Presidential Adviser for Political Affairs (OPAPA), Presidential Human Rights Committee (PHRC), Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), Philippine National Police (PNP) and the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), adopted the Operational Guidelines or the implementing rules and regulations of Administrative Order No. 35 which was signed by President Benigno S. Aquino III last 22 November 2012.

The Operational Guidelines is an important step towards engendering an investigative environment that will benefit greatly from the legal knowledge, experience and leadership of a prosecutor to ensure an airtight investigation and successful prosecution of a greater number of cases. The Guidelines call for the creation of special investigation teams which are composite teams of investigators and prosecutors that will undertake case build-up of human rights violations covered by the administrative order. Their efforts to secure a successful prosecution will be monitored closely by special oversight teams composed of seasoned prosecutors and investigators who are mandated to provide guidance to the investigators and prosecutors on the ground and also submit recommendations to the JAC. Special tracker teams may also be created to secure the apprehension of perpetrators who continue to successfully elude the enforcement of their warrants of arrest.

In an interview, DOJ Secretary Leila M. Dc Lima shared her observations that, “these Guidelines will be the important tools to train the composite teams of investigators and prosecutors all over the country, not only to secure the paradigm shift in our ranks that will encourage our prosecutors to take a more pro-active approach at the investigation level, but indubitably to ensure a higher conviction rate on cases involving grave human rights violations.” De Lima observed, “our main challenge is make sure we have the full support of the PNP, NBI and the National Prosecution Service to see the spirit of A.O. No. 35 through which is to secure the arrests and eventual convictions of perpetrators of these human rights violations and to address, through these institutional mechanisms, the perceived continuing culture of impunity.”

The IAC has also undertaken the inventory of cases of extra-legal killings (ELK), enforced disappearances (ED), torture and other grave human rights violations from lists of all government sources. De Lima confirmed that the Technical Working Group (TWG) assisting the IAC has initially submitted a recommended list of priority ELK and ED cases which will be validated by the IAC members within the week. These cases will thereafter be assigned to the various A.O. No. 35 teams for investigation, prosecution or monitoring, as the case maybe.
Present in the said meeting were Sec. Voltaire Gazmin of DND, Sec. Teresita Quintos Deles of OPAPP, Gen. Emmanuel Bautista, Chief of Staff of AFP, Usec. Rafael Santos of DILG, Usec. Luis Martin Gascon, Usec. Pio Lorenzo Batino of DND, Gen. Nestor Fajura of PNP and Atty. Ferdinand Lavin of NBJ. Also present as resource persons and observers, were Commission on Human Rights (CHR) Chairperson Loretta Ann Morales, CHR Commissioner Ma. Victoria Cardona and Assistant Ombudsman Evelyn Baliton, who signed as witnesses to the Operational Guidelines. The Office of the Ombudsman and the CHR also contributed to the list of A.O. No. 35 cases being processed by the TWG.
The next meeting of the IAC will be on the second week of June.

Enclosed: Operational Guidelines of A.O. No. 35

OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES OF ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 35

WHEREAS, Article II, Section ii of the 1987 Constitution declares that the State values the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for human rights;

WHEREAS, Article III, Section i of the 1987 Constitution provides that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law;

WHEREAS, Article III, Section 2 of the 1987 Constitution provides that the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable;

WHEREAS, Article III, Section 12(1) of the 1987 Constitution provides that any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have the right to be informed of the right to remain silent and to have competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice;

WHEREAS, Article III, Sedtidn 12(2) of the 1987 Constitution provides that no torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means which vitiate the free will shall be used against any person, and that secret detention places, solitary incommunicado, or other similar forms of detention are prohibited;

WHEREAS, Article III, Section 14(1) of the 1987 Constitution provides that no person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law;

WHEREAS, Article III, Section 18(1) of the 1987 Constitution provides that no person shall be detained solely by reason of political beliefs and aspirations;

WHEREAS, the Philippines is a state party to key international human rights instruments, among which are: (a) the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights and (b) the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment;

WHEREAS, in becoming a State Party to these international human rights conventions, the Philippines undertook to harmonize and reflect in its laws, policies and practices the provisions of such conventions;

WHEREAS, being such a State Party, the Philippine Government passed Republic Act No. 9745, entitled, “An Act Penalizing Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment and Presctibing Penalties Therefor” penalizing torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment;

WHEREAS, to further institutionalize the commitment of the Philippines to improve its human rights record, the Philippine Government enacted Republic Act No. 9851, entitled, “Philippine Act on Crimes Against International Humanitarian Law, Genocide, and Other Crimes Against Humanity;

WHEREAS, to fully adhere to the principles and standards of absolute condemnation and prohibition of enforced or involuntary disappearance, the President signed into law Republic Act No. 10353, “An Act Defining and Penalizing Enforced or Involuntary Disappearance,” a first of its kind in Asia and another major legislative milestone on the protection and promotion of human rights;

WHEREAS, commitment to resolve cases of political violence in various forms of human rights violations caused President Aquino to establish an institutional legacy through Administrative Order No. 35, entitled, “Creating the Inter-Agency Committee on Extra-Legal killings, Enforced Disappearances, Torture and Other Grave Violations of the Right to Life, Liberty and Security of Persons,” a comprehensive government machinery mandated to monitor cases of extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, torture and other human rights violations;

WHEREAS, in order to ensure that political activist and media killings are effectively investigated and successfully prosecuted, the Secretary of Justice and the Secretary of the Department of Interior and Local Government jointly formulated and issued through a Joint Department Order No. 003-2012, which outlines the Operational Guidelines for Prosecutors and Law Enforcement Investigators in Evidence-Gathering, Investigation and Case Build-Up; Inquest and Preliminary Investigation; and Trial of Cases of Political-Activist and Media Killings;

WHEREAS, there have been reported and validated violations of human rights of the individuals throughout the years, which have served to create an impression of a culture of impunity, wherein State and non state forces have been accused of silencing, through violence and intimidation, legitimate dissent and opposition raised by members of the civil society, cause-oriented groups, political movements, people’s and non-government organizations, and by ordinary citizens;

WHEREAS, most of these violations remain uninvestigated and unsolved, with the perpetrators unidentified or unprosecuted, giving rise to more impunity;

WHEREAS, there is a need to revisit these unsolved cases of grave violations of the right to life, liberty, and security of persons, whether committed as part of an apparent government policy in the past or as recurring cases of unsanctioned individual abuse of power and authority by State and non-state forces under the present;

WHEREAS, it is important to establish a respectable and validated databank of all specific allegations of human rights violations in the form of extra-legal killings, enforced disappearances, torture, and other grave violations of the right to life, liberty, and security of persons in order to ensure the comprehensive, coherent, well-coordinated and quick response of the Philippine Government; and

WHEREAS, the present Administration declares as a matter of paramount policy that there is no room for all these forms of political violence and abuses of power by agents or elements of the State or non- state forces, and towards this end commits to establish an institutional legacy of an efficient, coherent, and comprehensive government machinery dedicated to the resolution of unsolved cases of political violence in the form of extra-legal killings, enforced disappearances, torture, and other grave violations of the right to life, liberty, and security of persons;

NOW THEREFORE, in order to carry out the implementation of Administrative Order No. 35, the following Operational Guidelines are hereby prescribed and promulgated.

ARTICLE I
DEFINITION OF TERMS

In the implementation of Administrative Order No. 35 (A.O. No. 35) and these Guidelines, the following terms shall mean:

Extra-Legal Killings (ELK) or Extra-Judicial Killings (EJK) – For purposes of operationalization and implementation of A.O. No. 35, the ELK/ElK will refer to killings wherein:

a. The victim was:
i. a member of, or affiliated with an organization, to include political, environmental, agrarian, labor, or similar causes; or

ii. an advocate of above-named causes; or

iii. a media practitioner or

iv. person(s) apparently mistaken or identified to be so.
b. The victim was targeted and killed because of the actual or perceived membership, advocacy, or profession;

c. The person/s responsible for the killing is a state agent or non-state agent;

d. The method and circumstances of attack reveal a deliberate intent to kill;

For purposes of the focused mandate of AO No . 35, killings related to common criminals and/or the perpetration of their crimes shall be addressed by other appropriate, mechanisms within the justice system.

2. State Agent – is a person who, by direct provision of law, popular election or appointment by competent authority, takes part in the performance of public functions in the government, or who performs in the government or in any of its branches, public duties as an employee, agent or subordinate official, of any rank or class1.

Sec 3, Anti-Enforced Disappearance Act.
Any other person who does not fall under the above-definition shall be deemed as a Non-State Agent.

3. Enforced or Involuntary Disappearance (EID)—refers to the arrest, detention, abduction or any other form of deprivation of liberty committed by the agents of the State or by persons or groups of persons acting with the authorization, support or acquiescence of the State, followed by the refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty or by concealment of the fate or whereabouts of the disappeared person, which places such person outside the protection of the law2.
4. Torture – refers to an act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him/her or a third person information or a confession; punishing him/her for an act he/she or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed; or intimidating or coercing him/her or a third person; or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the! consent or acquiescence of a person in authority or agent of a person in authority. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to lawful sanctions3.
5. Other Grave Human Rights Violations – refer to acts that grossly violate an individual’s right to life, liberty and security of persons and/or their physical or mental integrity
and dignity.4
The Inter-Agency Committee (IAC) shall identify the different grave human rights violations to be prioritized for investigation and prosecution under these Guidelines and pursuant to A.O. No. 35.

6. AO 35 Cases – refer to cases of extra-legal killings, enforced or involuntary disappearances, torture, and other grave human rights violation cases, involving right to life, liberty and security of peçsons.
7. Special Investigation Teams for New Cases (SITN) – refers to composite teams of prosecutors and investigators designated by the IAC purposely to investigate, prosecute and monitor new cases or incidents that occurred after the effectivity of A.O. No. 35 on 22 November 2012.
8. Special Investigation Teams for Existing/Current Cases (SITEC) – refers to composite teams of prosecutors and investigators designated by the TAC purposely to investigate, prosecute and monitor existing or current cases that are actively being investigated or prosecuted in court and those that have been archived by the court, where such cases or incidents occurred prior to the effectivity of A.O. No. 35 on 22 November 2012.
9. Special Investigation Teams for unsolved Cases (SITU) – refers to composite teams of prosecutors and investigators designated by the IAC tasked to conduct further investigation of unsolved AO 35 cases for the purpose of identifying and arresting the persons responsible for the crime and ensuring the successful prosecution of the cases.

10. Special Oversight Team (SOT) for unsolved cases – is a composite team of investigators and prosecutors created by the TAC tasked to evaluate and oversee the reinvestigation by the SITUs, supervise the management of unsolved AO 35 cases, and to regularly report and submit recommendations to the JAC regarding these cases.

11. Special Oversight Team (SOT) for existing and new cases – is a composite team of investigators and prosecutors created by the IAC tasked to evaluate, to monitor and supervise the investigation and prosecution of new and existing cases, and to regularly report and submit recommendations to the JAC regarding these AO 35 cases.

12. Inter-Agency Committee (IAC) – is a body created under Administrative Order No. 35 dated 22 November 2012 tasked to monitor and ensure the speedy resolution of extra judicial killings, enforced or involuntary disappearances, torture, and other grave violations of the right to life, liberty and security of persons.

13. Technical Working Group (TWG) – a body composed of the representatives of the member-agencies and observers/resource persons of the IAC which shall serve as the central support system to the Committee in the monitoring and handling of A035 cases.

14. Observers/Resource Persons —refers to the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) and the Ombudsman or any of their authorized representatives.

15. High Profile Cases – are cases identified by the IAC as such because of the presence of any of the following circumstances:
a. High media attention;
b.Highlighted or monitored by international agencies, organizations, or institutions;
c. Given special attention by other stakeholders;
d. The victim or suspect is a public personality; and
e. Other cases as may be declared “high profile” by the JAC.

16. Unsolved Cases – are incidents that were previously investigated by the Philippine National Police (PNP), the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) or the Commission on
Human Rights (CHR) prior to 22 November 2012 that would have been treated as AO 35 cases but where no complaint for preliminary investigation was filed with the National Prosecution Service (NPS) or the Office of the Ombudsman due to lack of sufficient evidence, or unwillingness of eyewitnesses to cooperate in the investigation, or to give information, or for total lack of witnesses.

Unsolved cases may also refer to cold cases.

17. Closed Cases – AO 35 cases which, upon thorough review and final determination of the IAC, are denominated as “closed” because vital witnesses are no longer available or can no longer testify, or have already died, or for total lack of evidence, or where all possible suspects have already died.

18. Cases Under Investigation – are incidents that are presently undergoing investigation by law enforcement offices for the possible filing of cases for preliminary investigation with the NPS or the Ombudsman, or those that have been dismissed by the prosecution due to lack or insufficiency of evidence, or dismissed by the court for lack of probable cause and ordered to be reinvestigated by law enforcement agencies.

19. Cases under Re-Investigation – refer to the following cases:

a. Unsolved cases identified by the SOT to be prioritized for further investigation ‘for the purpose of identifying the person/s responsible for the crime and witnesses and the collection of evidence for possible case build-up;
b. Cases dismissed by the prosecutor for lack or insufficiency of evidence and identified by the SOT to be prioritized for further investigation ‘for the purpose of identifying the person/s responsible for the crime and witnesses and collection of evidence for possible case build-up and;

c. Cases dismissed by the court for lack of probable cause and ordered to be reinvestigated by law enforcement agencies. Such cases must also be identified by the SOT to be prioritized for further investigation for the purpose of identifying the person/s responsible for the crime and witnesses and collection of evidence for possible case build-
up.
20. Cases Under Preliminary Investigation – refer to cases that are undergoing preliminary investigation either by the NPS or the Ombudsman.

21. Cases on Appeal – refers to cases where the resolution of the prosecutor is appealed by way of petition for review before the Office of the Secretary of Justice or to the Ombudsman.

22. New Cases – refer to incidents covered by A.O. 35 that occurred after its effectivity on 22 November 2012.

23. Inquest – is an informal and summary investigation in a criminal case conducted by the prosecutor involving person/s arrested and detained without the benefit of a warrant of arrest for the purpose of determining whether said person/s should remain under custody and correspondingly charged in court.

24. AO 35 Prosecutors – refer to the prosecutors designated by the IAC to lead special investigation teams (SIT) in the investigation and build-up of AO 35 Cases.

25. Investigating Prosecutor – refers to the prosecutor who is tasked to conduct a preliminary investigation in an A035 Case.

26. Trial Prosecutor – refers to the prosecutor who actively handles the trial of an AO 35 case in court.

27. Law Enforcement Agency – refers to the Philippine National Police (PNP) or the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), or to any of its offices or sub-offices or other law
enforcement agencies of the government ordered by competent authorities to investigate AO 35 cases and/or arrest those responsible therefor.

28. Law Enforcement Investigator/A0 35 Investigator – refers to the investigator from a law enforcement agency as defined in the preceding paragraph designated by the IAC as part of the composite team led by the AO 35 prosecutor in the investigation and build-up of AO 35 cases.

The investigators designated under their respective law enforcement agencies’ normal processes of forming SITG (Special Investigation Task Group) or Task Forces may form part of the various Special Investigation Teams by default.

29. Composite Team Approach – refers to the strategy or scheme adopted by the IAC as mandated by A035, where prosecutors and investigators collaborate, cooperate and
coordinate in the investigation and build-up of AO 35 cases.

30. Case Build-Up – refers to the entire process of investigation and case preparation, including the collection and preservation of evidence, documentation, and identification of suspects to ensure the successful prosecution of the case.

ARTICLE II
SOURCES OF INFORMATION

1. Police, NBI and other law enforcement agencies;

2. Fact-Finding Committees and other ad hoc bodies created by laws, ordinances, department orders, administrative issuances, or judicial orders for purposes of information-gathering, the conduct of investigation, and submission of findings and recommendations relative to AO 35 cases;

3. CHR, being the constitutional body tasked to investigate cases involving human rights violations;

4. AO 35 Member-Agencies which may separately provide information on AO 35 cases which are submitted to the IAC for appropriate action;

5. Other government offices or units;

6. Media and Reports from other private entities, including civilians, human rights organizations, civil society organizations and other groups which report incidents of grave violations of the right to life, liberty and security of persons;

7. Reports from international entities including United Nations Bodies, Committees, Working Groups, Special Representatives, international NGOs and foreign governments, on possible human rights violations identified under AO 35;

ARTICLE III
SYSTEM OF COOPERATION

Unsolved Cases

Section 1. Reinvestigation by Special Investigation Teams (SITU). Unsolved cases identified by the IAC, especially those that transpired between 2001 up to November 22, 2012 shall be re-evaluated and re-investigated by Special Investigation Teams for Unsolved Cases (SITU) that shall be created by the IAC.

Section 2. Duties and Responsibilities of a SITU. As soon as practicable after their creation, a SITU, led by an AO 35 prosecutor, shall convene in order to thoroughly study the records of the case, interview the relatives of the victim, conduct an ocular inspection of the crime scene, interview possible witnesses to the incident, and exert all other efforts which may lead to the identification of the person/s responsible for the crime.

Section 3 . Period of Reinvestigation; Extensions. The SITU shall expeditiously work on the unsolved cases and finish their reinvestigation and case build-up within a period of thirty (30) days from their initial meeting, unless otherwise extended by the SOT for another thirty (30) days upon their prior written request and only on meritorious grounds such as difficulty in obtaining testimonies or cooperation of witnesses.

Section 4. Investigation Report. Upon completion of re- investigation, the SITU shall submit a Final Investigation Report to the IAC Secretariat containing the following:

(a) Summary of the Incident (which shall include name and affiliation of the victim/s and the suspect/s);
(b) Brief narrative on the previous investigative efforts and their results;
(c) Detailed narrative on the SITU’s reinvestigation efforts and their results;
(d) Enumeration and evaluation of evidence;
(e) Findings;
(f) Conclusion;
(g) Recommendation; and
(h) Annexes of pertinent documents.

Section 5. Deliberations and Recommendations of SOT for Unsolved Cases. The Secretariat shall, upon receipt of the Investigation Report from the SITU, calendar the same for discussion by the SOT for unsolved cases which, depending on the result of deliberations and thorough review of the records, may recommend to the IAC any of the following actions:

(a) That the case be immediately filed with the appropriate prosecution office against the respondent;
(b) That the case be further reinvestigated on the basis of some other leads;
(c) That the case be declared closed, especially if vital witnesses to the incident can no longer testify, have already died or can no longer be located, or for total lack of evidence, or where
the suspect(s) have already died; or
(d) That the case be delisted on the ground that the same is not an AO 35 case.
Section 6. IAC Action. Acting on the recommendations of the SOT for unsolved cases based on the result of SITU’s reinvestigation, the IAC may adopt, modify, or otherwise overturn the same, or altogether create another team to reinvestigate the case anew.

The IAC may solicit the assistance of other agencies which may not be a member of the Committee and/or take any other appropriate action.

Section 7. Filing and Indorsement of AO 35 Case. If the IAC adopts the recommendation for filing of a complaint, the SITU shall file the corresponding complaint before the appropriate prosecution office. The complaint shall contain an Indorsement signed by the A035 Investigator who is a member of the SITU, indicating that the investigation was conducted pursuant to AO 35 and these Guidelines.
Section 8. Closed Cases Not To Be Delisted. Whenever the IAC resolves to close an unsolved case reinvestigated by the SITU due to the impossibility of obtaining sufficient evidence to move it forward, the same shall not be delisted from the inventory of alleged AO 35 cases.

However, the person/s implicated in an Unsolved Case that was resolved to be closed, shall forthwith be delisted from the case after due assessment is conducted by the SOT on the said person/s’ purported participation. The SOT shall thereafter recommend to the IAC the approval to delist the aforesaid person/s. The delisting of such name/s shall be without prejudice to their inclusion if the case is revived due to newly-obtained evidence sufficiently showing the person/s participation as the perpetrator/s thereof.

Section 9. Change of SITU Composition. If it appears at any time during the investigation and case build-up that an A035 agency may be somehow involved in the incident subject of the investigation, the IAC Chairperson, upon recommendation of the AO 35 prosecutor or the TWG, may reorganize the SITU.

B. New Cases

Section 10. Initial Assessment and Report. When a killing (which shall be deemed to include an attempted or frustrated killing) or a deprivation of liberty or a suspected case of torture or other suspected AO 35 violations occurs or are reported, the local law enforcement agency, office or unit concerned, shall make an initial assessment within forty-eight (48) hours from deployment, whether or not the incident may be treated as a possible AO 35 case, guided by the following:

(a) For an EJK case, the presence of any two of the elements of Article 1(i) of these Guidelines is present;

(b) For an enforced or involuntary disappearance, when the deprivation of liberty is suspected to have been committed by agents of the State or by persons or groups of persons suspected to have acted with the authorization, support or acquiescence of agents of the State; and

(c) For a torture case, when there are signs, reports or allegations of severe pain or suffering suspected to have been inflicted by persons in authority or their agents.

Immediately but not later than six (6) hours after the initial assessment of the incident or information by the local police office or law enforcement agency, office or unit, a report shall be submitted to the Chief of Police, provincial, or regional director as the case maybe. If the initial assessment indicates that the incident is a possible AO 35 Case, the report shall be certified as “Extremely Urgent”. After receipt of the report, the Chief of Police, Provincial or Regional Director, shall immediately but not later than six (6) hours forthwith inform the designated A035 prosecutor in the locality about the same.
Section 11. Designation of AO 35 Prosecutors. There shall be in every city, province or region of the country, a roster of AO 35 prosecutors who shall be available on an on-call basis in order to serve as team leaders in the investigation and case build-up of AO 35 Cases.

Section 12. Convening of the SITN. Immediately within 24 hours upon receipt from the Chief of Police, Provincial Director or Regional Director of the information and the names of investigators that will form part of the SITN, the designated A035 prosecutor shall convene the team to start the case build-up.

If in case the investigation has been started by a local team of investigators, or a Special Investigation Task Group or Task Forces of the PNP or similar teams of the NBI or other law enforcement agencies, the SITN shall oversee, supervise and monitor the investigation to ensure that the case is supported by sufficient and strong evidence, provided however, that the Chairperson of the JAC may, in the exercise of plenary powers, direct the designated SITN to take over the investigation and case build-up from the local investigators, or Special Investigation Task Group or Task Forces of the PNP, or similar teams of the NBI or other law enforcement agencies, or to direct their absorption into the SITN. The investigator(s) thus absorbed shall be deemed as A035 investigator(s).

Section 13. Duties and Responsibilities of the SITN. The SITN shall have the following duties and responsibilities:
(a) To immediately investigate a possible AO 35 case for purposes of filing the appropriate charges with the prosecution office;

(b) To identify witnesses and assist in the preparation of their sworn statements;

(c) To recommend the immediate or provisional coverage of witnesses and/or their immediate families under the Witness Protection Program (WPP) of the Department of Justice (DOA)

(d) To evaluate the scene of the crime report and other physical or object evidence necessary in the filing of the case with the prosecution office;

(e) To invite the participation of other government agencies as may be deemed necessary or beneficial to the investigation;.

(f) To periodically submit reports about the progress of the investigation to the Secretariat of the JAC;

(g) To ensure the proper preservation and custody of all the evidence collected; and

(h) To perform such other tasks as the IAC, SOT or the TWG may direct them to perform.

Section 14. Change of SITN Composition. If it appears at any time during the investigation and case build-up that an A035 agency may be somehow involved in the incident subject of the investigation, the IAC Chairperson, upon recommendation of the AO 35 prosecutor or the TWG, may reorganize the SITN.

Section 15. Investigation Report. Within thirty (30) days from the time it convenes, the SITN shall submit an Investigation Report to the IAC Secretariat.

The Investigation Report shall contain the following:
(a) Summary of the Incident (which shall include the name and affiliation of the victim and the suspect);
(b) Detailed narrative on the SITN’s investigation efforts and their results;
(c) Enumeration and evaluation of evidence;
(d) Findings;
(e) Conclusion;
(f) Recommendation; and
(g) Annexes of pertinent documents.
In case the STTN recommends the filing of charges, the Investigation Report shall likewise be accompanied by a copy of the corresponding Indorsement to the appropriate prosecution office for preliminary investigation.

Section 16. Extension of Investigation Period. If, on account of difficulty in the identification of the person/s responsible for the crime, or in seeking the cooperation of the victim or the witnesses to the crime, the SITN cannot submit the Investigation Report within a period of thirty (30) days, the SOT for new/existing cases may, upon prior written request from the SITN, extend the investigation period for another thirty (30) days.

Section 17. Deliberations and Action of SOT for New and Existing Cases. The Secretariat shall, upon receipt of the Investigation Report from the SITN, calendar the same for discussion by the SOT for new/existing cases.

The SOT, after conduct of deliberations and thorough review of the records, may direct the SITN to do any of the following actions:

(a) That the case be immediately filed with the appropriate prosecution office;
(b) That the case be further reinvestigated by the SITN; or
(c) Delist the case on the ground that the same is not an AO 35 Case.

If the SITN recommends that the case be declared closed, especially if vital witnesses to the incident can no longer testify, have already died or can no longer be located, or for total lack of evidence, the SOT for new/existing cases, after a thorough evaluation of the report, may either concur or cause the reinvestigation of the case.

If the SOT for new/existing concurs with the recommendation to close the case, the same shall be reported to the IAC for its consideration.

Section 18. IAC Action. Acting on the recommendations of the SOT for new/existing cases to close the case, the IAC may adopt, modify, or otherwise overturn the same, or altogether create another team to reinvestigate the case anew.

The IAC may solicit the assistance of other agencies which may not be a member of the Committee, and/or take any other appropriate action.

Section 19. Filing and Indorsement of AO 35 Case. If the SOT for new/existing cases adopts the recommendation to file a complaint, the SITN shall file a complaint before the appropriate prosecution office.

The complaint shall contain an Indorsement signed by the A035 Investigator who is a member of the SITN, indicating that the investigation was conducted pursuant to AO 35 and these Guidelines.
Section 20. Closed Cases Not To Be Delisted. Whenever the IAC resolves to close a case due to the impossibility of obtaining sufficient evidence to move it forward, the same shall not be delisted from the inventory of alleged AO 35 cases.

Section 21. Continued Monitoring and Reporting. Notwithstanding the referral of the case to the prosecution office, the SITN shall continue to convene for the purpose of evaluating and gathering of additional evidence necessary to further strengthen the case. The SITN shall likewise continue to monitor and periodically report the progress of the preliminary investigation to the IAC Secretariat.

Section 22. Inquest of AO 35 Cases When SITN Has Not Yet Been Convened. In instances of warrantless arrests, the arresting officers shall immediately conduct an initial assessment in order to determine whether the offense for which the person was arrested falls in any of the circumstances enumerated under Section 1 of Article III.B. of these Guidelines. If any of such circumstances is present, the arresting officers shall inform the AO 35 prosecutor, through any expedient means, about the arrest and pending inquest proceedings.

The said arresting officer/s shall also certify before the inquest prosecutor his or her initial assessment that the person/s arrested subject of inquest may have committed an A035 offense.

The A035 prosecutor, upon receipt of the notice from the arresting officer/s, shall convene the SITN pursuant to Sections 3 and 4 of this Article to further enhance case build-up.

Section 23. Inquest of AO 35 Cases When SITN Has Been Convened.

In instances where the SITN I has been convened and the person suspected of committing an AO 35 ‘ case is taken into custody by other law enforcers without a warrant under circumstances allowed by the law/rules, the arresting officer shall immediately inform, by any expedient means, the AO 35 prosecutor of the said SITN of such warrantless arrest.

The arresting officer/s shall then furnish the inquest prosecutor with all documents necessary for the conduct of inquest proceedings and shall indicate that the complaint is a probable AO 35 case.

The SITN shall continue to monitor the case in accordance with Section 12 above.

For purposes of this Section, both the AO 35 investigator and the AO 35 prosecutor are enjoined to take advantage of the innovations or advancements in communications technology in order to facilitate and expedite their coordination efforts.

C. Existing/Current Cases

Section 24. Existing or Current Cases shall refer to cases that are being investigated or re-investigated by law enforcement officers per order of the Court; or undergoing preliminary investigation; or is already pending in Court whether there be an active trial or has been archived by the Court, as of 22 November 2012, where such cases fall under the classification of any of the enumerated human rights violations under the said Administrative Order.

Section 25. Identification of Existing/Current Cases By TWG. The TWG shall identify existing/current cases that may possibly fall within the ambit of A.O. No. 35. The TWG shall thereafter recommend possible interventions or actions involving such identified cases to the IAC for their appropriate instructions.

Section 26. IAC Action. Acting on the recommendations of the TWG, the IAC may order that a SITEC be convened:
(a) To investigate or prosecute certain cases pursuant to Article 111(B);

(b) To oversee, supervise or monitor the investigation or prosecution by other investigative or prosecutorial bodies or office; –

(c) To monitor the handling and management of such cases including the submission of regular reports to the SOT and IAC; or

(d) To solicit the assistance of other agencies which may not be a member of the IAC; or to undertake any appropriate actions pertaining to such A.O. 35 case.

Section 27. Convening of the SITEC. Immediately within twenty four (24) hours upon receipt of the directive from the IAC to convene the special investigation team for existing/ current cases (SITEC), the designated. A035 prosecutor shall convene the team pursuant to Article III (B) hereof.

Section 28. Duties and Responsibilities of the SITEC. Depending on the stage of the case, whether investigation or prosecution, the SITEC shall have the following duties and
responsibilities:

(a) To immediately investigate a possible AO 35 case for purposes of filing the appropriate charges with the prosecution office;

(b) To identify witnesses and assist in the preparation of their sworn statements;

(c) To recommend the immediate or provisional coverage of witnesses and/or their immediate families under the Witness Protection Program of the Department of Justice;

(d) To evaluate the scene of the crime report and other physical or object evidence necessary in the filing of the case with the prosecution office;

(e) To invite the participation of other government agencies as maybe deemed necessary or beneficial to the investigation;

(f) To periodically submit reports about the progress of the investigation to the Secretariat of the IAC;

(g) To ensure the proper preservation and custody of all the evidence collected;

(h) To assess if the case being investigated constitutes an AO 35 case; and

(i) To perform such other tasks as the IAC, SOT or the TWG may direct them to perform.

Section 29. Change of SITEC Composition. If it appears at any time during the investigation and case build-up that an A035 agency may be somehow involved in the incident subject of the investigation, the TAC Chairperson, upon recommendation of the AO 35 prosecutor or the TWG, may reorganize the SITEC.

Section 30. Investigation Report. Within thirty (30) days from the time it convenes, provided that the intervention falls within the investigation phase of the case, the SITEC shall submit an Investigation Report to the IAC Secretariat.

The Investigation Report shall contain the following:

(a) Summary of the Incident (include name and affiliation of victim and suspect);
(b) Detailed narrative on the their results; SITEC’s investigation efforts and
(c) Enumeration and evaluation of evidence;
(d) Findings;
(e) Conclusion;
(f) Recommendation; and
(g) Annexes of pertinent documents.

In case the SITEC recommends the filing of charges, the Investigation Report shall likewise be accompanied by a copy of the corresponding Indorsement to the prosecution office for preliminary investigation.

Section 31. Extension of Investigation Period. If, on account of difficulty in the identification of the person/s responsible for the crime, or in seeking the cooperation of the victim or the witnesses to the crime, the SITEC cannot submit the Investigation Report within a period of thirty (30) days, the SOT for new/existing cases may, upon prior written request from the SITEC, extend the investigation period for another thirty (30) days.

Section 32. Deliberations and Action of SOT for New and Existing Cases. The deliberations and action of the SOT shall be undertaken pursuant to Art III (B) hereof.

Section 33 . Filing and Indorsement of AO 35 Case. The filing and Indorsement of an existing or current case shall be undertaken pursuant to Art III (B) hereof.

Section 34. Closed Cases Not To Be Delisted. Whenever the IAC resolves to close a case due to the impossibility of obtaining sufficient evidence to move it forward, the same shall not be delisted from the inventory of alleged AO 35 cases.

Section 35. Continued Monitoring and Reporting. Notwithstanding the referral of the case to the prosecution office, the SITEC shall continue to convene for the purpose of evaluating and gathering of additional evidence necessary to further strengthen the case.

The SITEC shall likewise continue to monitor and periodically report the progress of the preliminary investigation to the IAC Secretariat.

Section 36. Inquest of AO 35 Cases. Whether or not the SITEC has been convened prior to an inquest, the action of the AO 35 investigator or AO 35 prosecutor shall be made in pursuant to Article III (B) and Article IV hereof.

ARTICLE IV
INQUEST

Section 1. When Commenced. The inquest proceedings shall be considered commenced upon receipt by the inquest prosecutor of the following:

(a) Affidavit of Arrest duly subscribed and sworn to before him by the arresting officers;
(b) Investigation Report;
(c) Sworn Statements of the complainants and their witnesses; and
(d) Other supporting evidence gathered by the law enforcement agency in the course of their investigation of the criminal incident involving the arrested person.

Section 2. Determination of Propriety of Arrest. During the inquest proceedings, the inquest prosecutor shall first determine if the arrest of the detained person was made in accordance with the provisions of Section 5, sub-paragraphs (a) and (b) of Rule 113 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure (Rules) and other applicable jurisprudence.

Should the inquest prosecutor find that the arrest was not made in accordance with the aforesaid Rule, he or she shall do the following, to wit:

(a) Recommend the release of the person arrested or detained;
(b) Prepare a resolution indicating the reason for the action taken; and
(c) Forward the same, together with the records of the case to the Office of the Prosecutor General, or the City/Provincial Prosecutor for appropriate action.

When the recommendation for the release of the arrested person is approved but the evidence on hand warrants the conduct of a regular preliminary investigation, the inquest prosecutor shall:
(a) Serve the Order of release on the law enforcement officer concerned having custody of the arrested person; and
(b) Serve upon the arrested person the subpoena or notice of preliminary investigation, together with the copies of the charge sheet or complaint, sworn statements of witnesses and other supporting evidence.
If, on the other hand, the inquest prosecutor finds that the arrest was done in accordance with the Rules, he or she shall ask the arrested person if the latter desires to avail of a preliminary investigation. If he or she does, the consequences thereof must be explained to him or her in a
language or dialect known to him or her.

Section 3. Additional Duty of Inquest/Investigating Prosecutor When the Person Delivered is a Victim of Enforced Disappearance. Any inquest or investigating prosecutor who learns that the person delivered for inquest or preliminary investigation is a victim or a probable victim of enforced or involuntary disappearance shall have the duty to immediately disclose the probable victim’s whereabouts to his or her immediate family, relatives, lawyer/s or to the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) or any human rights organization such as but not limited to FIND (Families of Victims of Involuntary Disappearance) and Desaparecidos (Families of Desaparecidos for Justice), by the most expedient means through any of the following
modalities, including but not limited to:

(a) Telephone;
(b) SMS; or
(c) Electronic mail.

The inquest or investigating prosecutor shall inquire from the person presented for inquest or preliminary investigation whether or not the respondent’s immediate family or relatives, lawyer, the CHR or any human rights organization, have been informed of the respondent’s arrest and/or detention, including his or her whereabouts; and if so, the details or particulars of such communication as regards to name/s of person/s communicated to, their contact details, and the time of communication.

If the respondent is accompanied by his or her family or relatives, lawyer, or other persons other than the arresting officers, the prosecutor shall likewise verify from the said companion/s the time or particulars of the communication with the respondent.

The prosecutor shall include in the minutes of proceedings the facts and details of communication to the respondent’s family, relatives, the CHR and/or other human rights organizations, and require the said respondent, as well as his or her companion and the arresting officers, to sign thereon.

The DOJ shall ensure that a list of updated contact details of concerned CHR Offices, FIND, Desaparecidos, and other human rights organizations shall be available at all times to prosecutors.

Section 4. Waiver of the Provisions of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC). The arrested person, with the assistance of counsel of his own choice, shall then be made to execute a waiver of the provisions of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code.

In the event that the arrested person does not have a counsel to assist him or her, the inquest prosecutor shall coordinate with the Public Attorney’s Offlde in his or her area in order to ensure that the rights of the person arrested are amply protected.

If the arrested person refuses to execute a waiver of the provisions of Article 125 of the RPC, the inquest prosecutor shall immediate proceed to resolve the case on the basis of the evidence presented by the complainant or law enforcement agency.

If on the other hand, the arrested person executes the waiver, the preliminary investigation shall continue and be terminated within fifteen (15) days from its inception.

Section 5. Counter-Affidavit. The arrested person shall be required to file his or her counter affidavit and the affidavit of his or her witnesses within a period of ten (io) days from receipt of the complaint sheet and its attachments from the inquest prosecutor.

Immediately thereafter, the inquest prosecutor shall proceed to resolve the case. No Reply or Rejoinder shall be allowed and neither shall motions for extension be entertained.

Section 6. Discussion of Nature of Case. In preparing the resolution, the inquest prosecutor shall state that the same is an A035 case and provide the appropriate discussions therefor. The recommendation of the inquest prosecutor shall be submitted to the Prosecutor General, or the City or Provincial Prosecutor within three (3) days from the time it was submitted for resolution. If the inquest prosecutor finds that probable cause exists, he or she shall, in addition to
the preparation of the resolution, shall also prepare the corresponding Information and submit the same to the Prosecutor General, City or Provincial Prosecutor for approval.

ARTICLE V
PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION

Section 1. Subpoena and Counter-Affidavit Upon receipt of the complaint, the Prosecutor General, City or Provincial Prosecutor shall immediately assign the complaint to an investigating prosecutor, who shall issue subpoena within two (2) days from his/her receipt of the assigned case and require the respondent/s to submit their counter- affidavit within ten (in) days from receipt thereof.

To obviate requests for extension to file counter-affidavit, the investigating prosecutor shall ensure that copies of the complaint and all attachments are attached to the subpoena, and that the same are personally served by the process server or by the law enforcement unit handled the investigation upon the respondent/s.

Section 2. Duration of Preliminary Investigation. The investigating prosecutor shall terminate the preliminary investigation within thirty (30) days from the receipt of the complaint. No Reply or Rejoinder shall be entertained, nor motions for extensions be allowed.

Section 3. Submission of Resolution and Information. The investigating prosecutor shall submit the resolution for the approval of the Prosecutor General, City or Provincial Prosecutor within five (5) days from the time the case is submitted for resolution.

If the resolution contains a finding of probable cause, then the investigating prosecutor shall likewise prepare the corresponding Information and submit the same to the Prosecutor General, City or Provincial Prosecutor for approval.

The Prosecutor General, City or Provincial Prosecutor shall act on the recommendation of the investigating prosecutor within two (2) days from receipt of the same.

Section 4. Transmittal of Information to Court. Once the resolution finding probable cause is approved by the Prosecutor General, City or Provincial Prosecutor, the transmittal to the appropriate Office of the Clerk of Court shall state that the case involves an extra-legal killing, enforced or involuntary disappearance, torture, or other grave human rights violation as the case maybe.

If the case involves an extra-legal killing, the transmittal should invoke Administrative Order No. 25-2007 of the Supreme Court in order for the case to be raffled to any of the designated special courts.

Section 5. Report to IAC Secretariat. The AO 35 prosecutor shall prepare monthly reports to the IAC Secretariat on the efforts of the SITN and the status, progress and challenges of the case during preliminary investigation.

ARTICLE VI
TRIAL

Section 1. Coordination Among the Trial Prosecutor, the A035 Prosecutor, and AO 35 Investigator. Once a case involving extra-legal killing, enforced or involuntary disappearance, torture or grave human rights violation, is raffled to the proper court, the trial prosecutor shall immediately coordinate with the Special Investigation Team which investigated and built-up the case. He or she shall also submit a report of the fact of raffle to the IAC Secretariat, furnishing
copies thereof to the City or Provincial Prosecutor.

Periodic reports shall also be submitted to the above-mentioned officials informing them of the status and progress of the case.

Section 2. Creation of Panel of Prosecutors. As far as practicable, the Prosecutor General, City or Provincial Prosecutor shall create a special panel of prosecutors composed of the A035 prosecutor, investigating prosecutor and trial prosecutor for the purpose of handling the actual prosecution of the A035 Case.

In such cases, the JAC Secretariat shall be furnished with copies of the Office Orders creating special prosecution panels.

Section 3. Pre-Trial and Trial. In the course of the pre-trial and trial, the panel of prosecutors or the trial prosecutor shall ensure that:

(a) A pre-trial brief containing the following is preferred:
i. Brief summary of facts;
ii. Applicable laws and jurisprudence;
iii. Proposals for stipulation and requests for admission;
iv. List of witnesses and synopsis of their respective testimonies;
v. List of exhibits; and
vi. Proposed schedule for the presentation of prosecution witnesses.

(b) The case conferences are conducted with the AO 35 prosecutor, the A035 investigator, and the prosecution witnesses at least three (3) days before the scheduled trial date; and

(c) At least two (2) prosecution witnesses are available every scheduled hearing date.

Section 4. Plea Bargaining. No plea bargaining shall be allowed without the prior written consent or authority of the IAC.

Section 5. Duration of Trial. The panel of prosecutors should ensure that the presentation of evidence for both the prosecution and the defense shall as far as practicable be terminated within sixty (60) days.

Section 6. Report to IAC Secretariat. The AO 35 prosecutor shall prepare monthly reports to the IAC Secretariat on the efforts of the Special Investigation Team and the status, progress and challenges of the case during trial.

Section 7. Supervision and Reporting by SOT. The SOT shall have the authority to supervise the Special Investigation Teams in the handling and management of all AO 35 cases on trial to include recommendation of trial strategies, review of court pleadings, attendance in court trials, monitoring of case development and conduct of case conferencing.

The SOT shall report to the IAC every month on the status of all cases it is monitoring.

ARTICLE VII
A.O. 35 STRUCTURES

A. Inter-Agency Committee (IAC)

Section 1. Composition: – The IAC shall refer to the high- level policy-making and oversight body tasked to monitor and ensure the speedy resolution of AO 35 cases which shall be headed by the Secretary of the Department of Justice (DOJ) as the Chairperson.

The members of the IAC shall be the following:

(a) Secretary of the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG);
(b) Secretary of the Department of National Defense (DND);
(c) Chairperson of the Presidential Human Rights Committee (PHRC);
(d) Presidential Adviser on Peace Processes (PAPP);
(e) Presidential Adviser for Political Affairs (PAPA);
(f) Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP);
(g) Director General of the Philippine National Police (PNP); and
(h) Director of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI).

The Committee shall invite the Chairperson of the CHR and the Ombudsman as observers and resource persons of the Committee.

The above members of the IAC may designate their representatives to the Committee, who shall have the rank not lower than Assistant Secretary, or General and Chief Superintendent in the case of the AFP and the PNP.

Section 2. Functions – The IAC shall direct the policy – formulation and implementation with regard to the investigation and prosecution of cases involving an A035 case. As such it shall have the following functions:

(a) To develop a mechanism for the unification and inventory of all cases of extra-judicial killings, enforced disappearances, torture, and other grave violations of human rights, committed by both State and Non-State Agents from all government as well as non-government sources, to include independent and non-partisan international and national human rights organizations;

(b) To create special oversight teams for unsolved, new and existing cases that will supervise the investigations of AO 35 cases;
(c) To create or revise the composition of special investigation teams for unsolved, new and existing cases that will supervise, monitor and/or coordinate actual investigations of AO 35 cases until its final resolution;

(d) To create, upon the recommendation of any AO 35 structure or JAC member, Special Tracker Teams, or to direct existing tracker teams from law enforcement agencies, or a
combination thereof, to operate under the ambit of AO 35, specifically to locate and effect the arrest of the accused in AO 35 cases in order to undergo trial;

(e) To monitor the development of cases under investigation, preliminary investigation and trial through the duly designated special oversight teams and adopt, modify, or otherwise overturn the recommendations of the same;

(f) To cause, in the exercise of their oversight functions, the administrative investigation of the officers mentioned in Section 1 above for alleged violations or administrative offenses in connection with the implementation of these Guidelines and pursuant to the Civil Service Rules and other pertinent administrative discipline policies of concerned agencies;

(g) To engage and liaise with the Supreme Court (SC), through the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA), to raise the Judiciary’s awareness on Administrative Order No. 35 cases
and the efforts of AO 35 structures to ensure the successful prosecution and speedy disposition thereof.
(h) To develop and support programs that will enhance and strengthen relations of the IAC and its member-agencies with domestic and international stakeholders such as, but not limited to, International Organizations, Non- Governmental Organizations, Civil Society Organizations;

(i) To report to the President, every six months, on the inventory of cases, describing the accomplishment and progress made for each case, or the problems and obstacles encountered, highlighting problematic high profile cases; and

(j) To present recommendations for any additional action that may be taken by the President requiring coordination on a common course of action with the CHR, the Ombudsman,
Congress and the Judiciary.

Section 3. Meetings – The IAC shall meet every second Tuesday of the month or as may be requested by the chairperson on matters of policy coordination or cases which may require high-level discussion of principals.

Section 4. Quorum – A majority of the member agencies of the IAC shall constitute a quorum.

B. Special Oversight Team

Section 5. Composition – There shall be an SOT for unsolved cases and an SOT for new/existing cases.

Each SOT shall be composed of five (5) members with a prosecutor and one investigator each from the PNP and the NBI, all of which must have at least ten (10) years of experience. The two (2) remaining members shall be another prosecutor and a PNP investigator, both of whom with at least five (5) years of experience.
The most senior prosecutor shall be the head of the SOT.

Section 6. Functions- The SOT shall have the following powers and functions:

(a) To approve requests for extension of reinvestigation and case build-up;
(b) To recommend to the IAC that a case be filed with the appropriate prosecution office, or that the case be reinvestigated, or that the case he closed; and
(c) To supervise the SIT in the handling and management of all AO 35 cases on trial for new and existing cases pursuant to Section 7 of Article VI.

Section 7. Meetings – Both SOTs shall have separate regular meetings at least once a month. The IAC or the Chairperson of the Committee may, however, convene any of the SOT at any time.

C. Special Tracker Teams (STT)

Section 8. Composition – Special Tracker Team(s) shall be composed of personnel from the PNP, the NBI, the PNP Special Investigation Task Group (SITG)/Task Force/Task Group, or from other law enforcement agencies of the government ordered by competent authorities, or a
combination of any of the foregoing, created to effect the arrest of the accused in AO 35 cases.

Personnel from the AFP or other security forces of the government may be directed to complement the Special Tracker Teams created, especially if the accused to be arrested is from the agency concerned.

Section 9. Functions – Special Tracker Team(s) shall have the following functions:
(a) Submit an Operational Plan to the TWG;
(b) Conduct manhunt operations to locate the accused in AO 35 cases;
(c) Effect the arrest of the accused in AO 35 cases;
(d) Immediately return the Warrant of Arrest to the issuing court; and
{e) Deliver the arrested person/s to a lawful detention facility in accordance with the order of the court.

The tracker teams shall ensure that arrested persons shall be afforded their constitutional or statutory rights under Republic Act No. 7438, Republic Act No. 9745, Republic Act No. 10353 and all other applicable laws during their arrest and detention and also during the conduct of
their physical/psychological examinations.

Section 10. Reporting Functions —Tracker Teams shall submit, by any expeditious means, its report on the progress of its efforts to the SOT at least twice a month.

Section 11. Dissolution— Tracker Teams may be dissolved upon compliance of their functions or upon order of the JAC.
D. Technical Working Group (TWG)

Section 12. Composition – There is hereby created the Technical Working Group (TWG) which shall be composed of representatives from IAC member-agencies.

Section 13. Functions – The TWG shall have the following powers
and functions:
(a) To process unsolved cases for the consideration of the IAC;

(b) To ensure the effective and efficient implementation of A.O. 35 and the continuous and periodic evaluation thereof;

(c) To report and recommend to the JAC the administrative investigation of the officers mentioned in Section 1 above for alleged violations or administrative offenses in connection with the implementation of these Guidelines and pursuant to the Civil Service Rules and other pertinent administrative policies of concerned agencies;

(d) To formulate and monitor plans, projects and activities of A.O. No. 35 structures thereby enabling them to contribute more fruitfully to the objectives of A.O. No. 35;

(e) To undertake and supervise information publication and public relation programs for nationwide dissemination of information regarding the programs/projects of the IAC,
thus drawing more participation in such activities;

(f) To prepare regular reports to the IAC and to the President; and

(g) To recommend policy direction to the IAC.

Section 14. Meetings – The TWG shall hold regular meetings where named members or nominees of JAC member-agencies are enjoined to actively participate.

E. Secretariat

Section 15. Composition – There is hereby the Secretariat which shall be composed of representatives from JAC member-agencies.

Section 16. Functions – The JAG Secretariat shall have the following powers and functions:
(a) To coordinate the business of the JAC, including the preparation of agenda for each meeting, the circulation of papers and the communication and consultation among member-agencies;
(b) To help coordinate the efforts of all other AO 35 structures;
(c) To manage the databank, of AO 35 cases;
(d) To manage the reportorial requirements of all A035 structures, including being the repository and conduit of all reports; and
(e) To provide personnel, legal, budgetary and other services supportive of the functions and activities of the JAC, SOTs and Special Investigation Teams;
Section 17. Meetings – The Secretariat shall hold regular meetings where named members or nominees of JAC member-agencies are enjoined to actively participate.
Section 18. Administration of the IAC Secretariat – The IAC Secretariat shall be headed by a Chairperson who shall be appointed by the Chairperson of the JAC upon recommendation of the majority of the member-agencies. The Chairperson of the Secretariat shall administer and supervise the internal operations of the Secretariat as well as the implementation of the various programs of the IAC.

ARTICLE VIII
ACCOUNTABILITY

Section 1. Duties – All officers involved in the implementation of A.O. No. 35 are enjoined to faithfully, completely and diligently execute their functions and responsibilities as provided by these Guidelines.
Section 2. Oversight Function of IAC – The JAG, in the exercise of its oversight functions, may cause the administrative investigation of the officers mentioned in Section 1 above for alleged
violations or administrative offenses in connection with the implementation of these Guidelines and pursuant to the Civil Service Rules and other pertinent administrative discipline policies of concerned agencies.

The representative of the concerned IAC member-agency may be the complainant in such administrative investigation which may be filed either before the concerned agency or the Ombudsman.

Section 3. Any administrative investigation, as provided for in the next preceding section, shall not preclude the filing of other actions before other appropriate bodies or tribunals.

ARTICLE IX
COOPERATION WITH INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
(IOs), NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS (NGOs),
CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZATIONS (CSOs) AND OTHER
STAKEHOLDERS

Section 1. Sharing of Information – The IAC, in pursuance of its adopted communication plan, may share information it deems relevant with IOs, NGO5, CSOs and other stakeholders, provided that the rights of the accused will not be violated or that the disclosure would not interfere with the administration of justice.

Section 2. Engagement with IOs, NGOs, CSOs and other stakeholders – In pursuit of its mandate, the IAC may seek and accept the assistance of the IOs, NGOs, CSOs and other stakeholders, among others, in obtaining relevant information, promoting grassroots advocacy and strengthening the capacity of the AO 35 structures. The IAC may make suitable arrangements for consultation with the said parties.

ARTICLE X
FINAL PROVISIONS

Section 1. Funding. The initial funding requirements for the implementation of A.O. No. 35 shall be charged against current appropriation of the member-agencies. Thereafter, funding for the succeeding years shall be incorporated in the respective regular appropriations.

Section 2. Separability. If any section of these Guidelines or part thereof is held invalid or unconstitutional, the remainder not otherwise affected shall remain valid and subsisting.

Section 3. Effectivity. These Guidelines shall take effect immediately. The Joint Department Order No. 003-2012 (Operational Guidelines for Prosecutors and Law Enforcement Investigators In Evidence-Gathering Investigation and Case Build; Inquest and Preliminary Investigation; and Trial of Cases of Political-Activist and Media Killings) and internal rules of procedure of the PNP, NBI and the NPS shall be supplemental to this Operational Guidelines.

Adopted and signed by the Inter-Agency Committee, this 18th day of April, 2013.
SEC. LEILA M. DE LIMA
Department of Justice
IAC CHAIR
SEC. TERESITA QIJINTOS-
DELES
Presidential Adviser on the
Peace Process
Member

SEC. VOLTAIRE T. GAZMIN
Department of National Defense
Member
USEC. RAFAEL ANTONIO
SANTOS
Department of the Interior and
Local Government
Member

USEC. JOSE LUIS MARTIN
GASCON
Office of the presidential Adviser
on Political Affairs (OPAPA)
Member
P/CSUPT. NESTOR M. FAJURA
Philippine National Police
Member
USEC. SEVERO S. CATURA
Presidential Human Rights
Committee
Member
GEN. EMMANUEL T. BAUTISTA
Armed Forces of the Philippines
Member
DIR. NONNATUS CAESAR R.
ROJAS
National Bureau of Investigation
Member
Witnesses:
CHAIRPERSON LORETTA ANN
P. ROSALES
Commission on Human Rights
Observer
ASST. OMBUDSMAN EVELYN A.
BALITON
Office of the Ombudsman
Observer

Human Rights Online Philippines does not hold copyright over these materials. Author/s and original source/s of information are retained including the URL contained within the tagline and byline of the articles, news information, photos etc.

wk of disappeared copy

[Statement] Truth cannot be hidden forever… -AFAD

Truth cannot be hidden forever…

AFAD Statement on the 6th Anniversary of Jonas Burgos’ Disappearance
28 April, 2013

AFADExactly six years ago, Jonas Burgos, peasant leader and son of the late press freedom icon, Joe Burgos, was allegedly seized and made to disappear by the military at the Ever Gotesco Mall in Quezon City. For six long years, the Burgos family has indefatigably searched for him, used of every possible step available to know the truth behind Jonas’ enforced disappearance and bring those responsible to justice.

But after six years, no one has yet been put on trial despite the government’s repeated pledges of making Jonas’ disappearance case its top priority. So far, the Aquino government has done nothing concrete to shed light on the number of enforced disappearance cases and other forms of human rights violations committed during the Arroyo administration. Far worse is that enforced disappearances continue, albeit in lesser number compared to the previous administration. Under the present political dispensation, 18 cases have been documented by the Families of Victims of Involuntary Disappearance (FIND). Yet, one case is worse enough…

But truth cannot be hidden forever. The relentless efforts of the Burgos family particularly of Jonas’ mother, Mrs. Edita Burgos and the support of the human rights community have gradually led them in getting close to the truth.

A huge step forward in this quest for truth is the recent decision of the Supreme Court ordering the re-investigation of Jonas’ disappearance case.. The High Court’s decision was based on new pieces of evidence submitted by Burgos family in a petition. This newly discovered documentary evidence includes confidential military reports such as the “After Apprehension Report,” the “Psycho Social Processing Report,” and the “Autobiography of Jonas Burgos”, which fell into the lap of the Burgos family from a source not completely part of the military.

Not only that these new pieces of evidence give weight to the Burgos family’s court petition but it further proves the already established fact that state actors are the ones involved in this case.

Many people in many parts of the world who advocated change have suffered the same fate like Jonas Burgos. Who would imagine a human rights lawyer like Mr. Somchai Neelaphaijit of Thailand, a journalist like Prageeth Ekneligoda of Sri Lanka and a Development worker and a Ramon Magsaysay awardee like Mr. Sombath Somphone of Laos to be victimized by enforced disappearance? How could we imagine democratic governments to commit such an act?

This clearly shows that enforced disappearance particularly in Asia, a continent which has the highest number of cases of enforced disappearances reported to the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearance, remains a state’s instrument of repression that spares no one.

The Philippines has recently made history being the first in Asia to criminalize and penalize enforced disappearances with the enactment of Republic Act No. 10353 or the “Anti-Enforced or Involuntary Disappearance Act of 2012” on 21 December 2012 and the promulgation of the law’s Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) on 12 February 2013. But a law is as good as its implementation. It requires strong political will on the part of Aquino government to ensure the law’s full implementation. The disappearance case of Jonas Burgos is a litmus test of the government’s commitment not only to ensure accountability but to combat impunity and guarantee that it will never happen again.

Those responsible for the disappearance of Jonas Burgos and all Desaparecidos should bear in mind that their time will surely come, for truth will come out eventually despite desperate efforts to hide it.

On the occasion of the 6th anniversary of Jonas Burgos’ disappearance, AFAD calls on the Philippine government to prove its adherence to the spirit and letter of the Anti-Disappearance Act of 2012. The Aquino government has to leave no stone unturned to ferret out the truth, to punish the perpetrators to the full extent of this new law and indeed, to be a good example to Asian and other governments that in word and in deed, it is, indeed, against enforced disappearance.

Finally, as the Aquino government must prove to be an exemplary government in Asia, it has to ensure that all mechanisms be made in place against enforced disappearance by abiding to international human rights standards concretely to be shown among other things, by its immediate signing and acceding to the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance.
Signed by:

MUGIYANTO                                                              MARY AILEEN BACALSO
Chairperson                                                                  Secretary-General

***

Darwin Mendiola
Philippine Project Coordinator
Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances
Mobile no. 0917.8968459
Office No. 490.7862

All submissions are republished and redistributed in the same way that it was originally published online and sent to us. We may edit submission in a way that does not alter or change the original material.

Human Rights Online Philippines does not hold copyright over these materials. Author/s and original source/s of information are retained including the URL contained within the tagline and byline of the articles, news information, photos etc.

[In the news] How the military hid the truth behind Jonas Burgos abduction -bulatlat.com

How the military hid the truth behind Jonas Burgos abduction
By RONALYN V. OLEA, Bulatlat.com

bulatlatMANILA – Following the recent developments on the case of missing activist Jonas Burgos, the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) said it would submit to the legal processes.

The Special 7th Division of the Court of Appeals (CA) issued a ruling holding the AFP accountable for the enforced disappearance of Jonas Burgos. Also this week, the victim’s family filed an urgent motion before the Supreme Court (SC) urging the re-investigation of the case.

“The AFP condemns any act of violation of the basic and constitutional rights of individuals. We are doing every necessary step to ensure that all our personnel strictly follow the AFP rules, regulations and policy which are consistent with the internationally accepted agreements and laws,” the AFP said in a statement.

The Jonas Burgos case itself, however, is a testimony to what the family calls “institutional cover-up” of the military in cases of human rights violations.

Read full article @bulatlat.com

Human Rights Online Philippines does not hold copyright over these materials. Author/s and original source/s of information are retained including the URL contained within the tagline and byline of the articles, news information, photos etc.

[In the news] Rights body hails CA ruling AFP behind Burgos abduction -INQUIRER.net

Rights body hails CA ruling AFP behind Burgos abduction
By Gil C. Cabacungan
Philippine Daily Inquirer
March 28, 2013

inquirerThe Court of Appeals (CA) ruling declaring the Armed Forces of the Philippines and not Leftist rebels was directly responsible for the “enforced disappearance” of journalist and activist Jonas Burgos is being hailed as a “concrete, positive step” towards getting to the bottom of the climate of impunity which gripped the Arroyo administration.

Commission on Human Rights Chair Loretta Ann P. Rosales on Wednesday bared the March 18 decision of the Court of Appeals on the petition for habeas corpus filed by Burgos’ mother, Edita, against the AFP and its officers led by former Chief of Staff Hermogenes Esperon which she said reinforced the perception of a military cover-up of the abduction.

In a statement, Rosales said the CA decision recognized the abduction of Jonas Burgos as an enforced disappearance case covered by the rule on the writ of amparo. “The decision is noteworthy because it categorically declares the AFP, as an institution, directly accountable for the enforced disappearance of Jonas Burgos. This conclusion effectively discredits the theory propounded by the Armed Forces that Jonas was the victim of an internal CPP-NPA plot,” said Rosales.

Read full article @newsinfo.inquirer.net

Human Rights Online Philippines does not hold copyright over these materials. Author/s and original source/s of information are retained including the URL contained within the tagline and byline of the articles, news information, photos etc.

« Older Entries