Tag Archives: PNP

[In the news] Initial tokhang documents show lack of genuine probe into killings – lawyers -RAPPLER.com

The Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG) said on Thursday, April 4, that initial drug war documents showed a lack of effort to investigate the killings committed under the mantle of Oplan Tokhang.

“Investigation leaves much to be desired. While all cases indicate that investigations are ongoing, it appears that not much effort has been placed into identifying and arresting the assailants, based on the length of time devoted to investigating the case,” said FLAG’s Ted Te in a news conference on Thursday with FLAG chairman and opposition senatorial candidate Chel Diokno.

FLAG and the Center for International Law (CenterLaw) earlier filed petitions asking the Supreme Court (SC) to declare the war on drugs unconstitutional.

The SC ruled last Tuesday, April 2, to release to the two petitioners documents related to 20,322 killings by both vigilantes and police in the war on drugs.

Read more @www.rappler.com

Support #KarapatDapat na Agenda campaign! Click the poster to know more.

Submit your contribution online through HRonlinePH@gmail.com
Include your full name, e-mail address and contact number.

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] PNP monitors school orgs amid alleged leftist recruitment -GMAnews

PNP monitors school orgs amid alleged leftist recruitment

The Philippine National Police (PNP) on Monday said it is monitoring some school organizations amid the alleged recruitment of the communist rebels among the students in some state colleges and universities.

In Mariz Umali’s report on State of the Nation with Jessica Soho, a former rebel who surrendered to the government said that young people from some state universities were being persuaded by leftist groups to join the armed struggle.

“Ang mga estudyante po na sinasabi ng mga nag-aaral sa UP, parang nakikipamuhay rin po sila sa amin. Nagtatanong kung maginhawa po ba yung aming ginagawa o mahirap. Pagkatapos nun, bumababa na rin po sila (mula sa bundok) kinabukasan,” said the rebel whose face was covered when he was presented by the police at a press conference.

Read full article @www.gmanetwork.com

Submit your contribution online through HRonlinePH@gmail.com
Include your full name, e-mail address and contact number.

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] Paranoia? Government lists in PH proven to be dangerous to lives -ABS-CBN.com

Paranoia? Government lists in PH proven to be dangerous to lives

President Rodrigo Duterte’s legal adviser, Salvador Panelo, charged the 180,000-strong Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT) of “paranoia” following the exposé of a Philippine National Police (PNP) intelligence program aimed at an “inventory” of the militant union’s nationwide membership.

Panelo trotted out the trite line, that the innocent have no cause to fear.

He then promptly undermined that argument, claiming the teachers’ alliance “has been identified as legal front” of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP). Any surveillance, he added, must have “a good excuse.”

Read full article @news.abs-cbn.com

Submit your contribution online through HRonlinePH@gmail.com
Include your full name, e-mail address and contact number.

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] PNP, DepEd must divulge objective behind profiling of teachers, Comelec probe sought -BMP

PNP, DepEd must divulge objective behind profiling of teachers, Comelec probe sought

Leody De Guzman, file photo source: flickr.com

A labor leader expressed grave alarm following the recent disclosure of a memorandum issued by the national directorate for intelligence of the national police for its regional counterparts to conduct a profiling on the members of the teachers’ group Alliance of Concerned Teachers.

Ka Leody de Guzman of Bukluran ng Manggagawang Pilipino (BMP) says that the PNP should disclose and explain the objectives of their “highly dubious and disturbing” memorandum.

On some instances, teachers were also presented with an endorsement letter from division officials of the Education department urging school heads to accomodate the intelligence gathering procedures of the police.

“This is very unlikely. We have been holding elections since martial law was lifted but it has not come to the point that national police instruct its units to send text messages, hold visitations and seek the DepEd’s endorsement for them to hold an inventory of our teachers,” said De Guzman, chairperson of BMP.

He likewise demanded DepEd hierarchy to justify their endorsement that may likely lead to infringement of the legitimate rights of teachers to self-expression and self organization.

“On top of the vagueness of the intel memo, the DepEd endorsement letter also provided nothing urgent and concrete for them to urge school principals to accomodate the PNP’s surveillance of their employees,” he posited.

But De Guzman fears that the police profiling does not end with the intelligence gathering operations and the subsequent intimidation of members of the teachers’ group.

The labor leader alleges that mere mention of the 2019 mid-term election in the PNP memo should send shivers down the spine of all decent, freedom-loving Filipinos.

Public school teachers sit at the electoral board which administers the conduct of elections.

“Let us remind the PNP hierarchy or even the Interior department that any link or partiality on their part to intervene in the outcome of the 2019 midterm elections whether to promote or hamper the candidacy of any aspirant is an infraction of their mandates,” he noted.

Among the retired PNP personnel running for the senate in the mideterm elections include former chief of the PNP and Bureau of Corrections director Ronald dela Rosa and former police general Pedro Montano.

De Guzman, who also seeks a senate seat under Partido Lakas ng Masa compelled the Commission on Election to intercede and hold its own immediate and impartial investigation on the issued memoranda.

He urged the Comelec to ensure that all agencies specially those under the Executive department to abide by their mandates and hold them accountable for any violation of their duty to assist in the conduct of free, honest, peaceful and credible elections.

Press Release
7 January 2019
Reference: Ka Leody de Guzman 0920-52000672

Submit your contribution online through HRonlinePH@gmail.com
Include your full name, e-mail address and contact number.

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] Promoting public safety and security is about observance of and respect for human rights and the rule of law -Balay

Promoting public safety and security is about observance of and respect for human rights and the rule of law

balayThe wanton  disregard for law, rising criminality, terrorism and insurgency has created in the public mind  an impression of a chaotic and dangerous society. Reports about murder and other crimes – many of which are related to drug use and abuse –  have become staple news that tend to jar one’s senses, resulting either to a feeling of helplessness or to utter loss of trust on authorities to protect the right of citizens against lawless violence.

The apparent inability of law enforcers to keep the public safe  evokes an impression that the authorities are inept, if not in connivance with those who profit from breaking the law.

With public safety and security in mind, President Duterte, as soon as he rose to power on June 30, has officially declared war on drugs, criminality, and corruption. To achieve his objectives, he vowed to get rid of scalawags and crooked officials among the ranks of  local government and agents of the law.  He unleashed the full force of law enforcers against those who are at the receiving end of his campaign. Surrender or die were the options he offered to consumers, peddlers, manufacturers, entrepreneurs and  protectors of illegal drug.  He promised that those who oppose him will go down as he vowed to produce substantial results on his crusade within the first  six months of his administration.

The body count of casualties has been staggering since government commenced with its brazen anti-drug advocacy, according to reports of the Philippine Daily Inquirer (8/6/16):

660 drug suspects dead within  five weeks;  of this number 436 were killed in police operations and 224 were executed   by unknown assailants or suspected vigilantes.
This number translates to an average of 19 persons  killed each day in the last five weeks; 23 were shot dead in just one day – on July 9
One-third or 34% of all  reported killings are attributed to  vigilante-style executions. These are speculated to be intended to eliminate informants, personal enemies, or rivals in the drug trade.
In July alone, 400 killings have been attributed to police officers while 196 deaths were reported to have been perpetrated by unknown assailants.
In the first four days of August, 64 drug suspects were killed – 34 involving the police, and 30 involving unidentified perpetrators.

The ABS-CBN News, for its  part, has  compiled the following figures.
Number of drug-related fatalities by type
May 10 – August 4, 2016                          Number
Police operation                                          525
Unidentified assailants                                249
Bodies found away from crime scene            78
Total number of killings                              852

Source:   “MAP, CHARTS: The Death Toll of the War on Drugs | ABS-CBN News”. News.abs-cbn.com. 2016-07-13. Retrieved 2016-08-05.

The President’s war has also brought about  “collateral damage” consisting of poor people who happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. The alarming number of casualties has raised  questions  on the legitimacy of some of the police actions and the propriety of the take-no-prisoner approach of the Commander-in-Chief in his anti-drug crusade.

Reports of shooting  of suspects under police custody – some of whom were in handcuffs already or were confined in tightly guarded police precincts- have given rise to impressions  of  acts of    summary execution.  According to authorities, the  fatalities are either ‘nanlaban” – have fought back -, resisted arrest, or grabbed the gun of the apprehending officers  prompting them to use deadly force against the suspects.

Is it possible that the law enforcers may have employed excessive violence in such cases? Have they stepped out of the line and disregarded due process? Are they really bent on fulfilling their mandate to serve and protect the citizens, or are they undertaking a subtle  detoxification process to erase any trace of involvement of law enforcers in the drug protection racket?

Insisting that accusers do not have any witness nor substantial evidence against claims of unlawful  killings,  police authorities maintain that they have adhered to the  principle of regularity in carrying out their duty.

President Duterte himself has acknowledged that   there could have been abuses by authorities in the drug war, but he  seems to be not bothered by it at all. He said that illegal killings have to be investigated but is short of issuing  a strong statement  to stop the   rising vigilante-style  killings which were come to be   known as ‘cardboard justice”-  referring to the sign left behind by the killers that their victim are dregs in  society that deserved to die.

In his first State of the Nation Address, President Duterte reiterated his policy of bringing death to those who defy his anti-drug campaign as he ordered  the police to “triple” their efforts against crime. He also  earlier said that he would pardon police officers who will be charged for abiding by his deadly  instructions.. He warned the targets of police operations not to seek help from the  Commission on Human Rights nor turn to the Catholic Bishops for protection as invoking human rights will not dissuade him from achieving his goals.  Human rights cannot be used as a shield or an excuse to destroy the country, he declared.

President Duterte’s statements and  policies regarding human rights appear to be inconsistent.    But as a former prosecutor and now the  head of the state, he must know that it his duty to validate in action his public declaration of “uncompromising adherence to due process and  rule of law” and to the international obligations on human rights that the government has signed  as a member of the United Nations.

No one wants President Duterte to fail in his war on drugs and crime. Balay agrees well with the government’s aspiration to  promote public safety, security and the general welfare of the people. It also applauds the President’s commitment to run a government that is  “sensitive to the State’s obligations to promote, and protect, fulfill the human rights of [the] citizens, especially the poor, the marginalized and the vulnerable.”

Balay is   saddened by the deaths of police officers who have died in their line of duty as it extends its  sympathy to those who have been widowed or  orphaned by unlawful killings by authorities or vigilantes.

The agents of the  law  who have sworn to and stick with their credo to serve and protect the public deserve commendation as we look forward – just like with the rest of the population – to the day when malevolent, abusive, and crooked law enforcers and their partners in power will be made accountable for their misdeeds.

Experiences from countries such as  Colombia has failed to show that using lethal violence to contain the drug menace had been completely successful. Instead, their  war on drugs have  resulted in a high cost  of human lives.

A study made by Prof. Daniel Mejia, a scholar at the Research Center on Drugs and Security at Universidad de los Andes in Bogotá, Colombia,  showed  that 57,000 Colombians are estimated to have been killed between 1994 and 2008 as a consequence of growing illegal drug markets and resulting confrontations between drug trafficking organizations (DTO) and the Colombian government.[1] This translates into approximately 3,800 additional homicides (or about 25 percent of total homicides) per year from drug-related violence alone. Yet despite such enormous investments and costs, Colombia continues to be a key producer and trafficker of illicit drugs, and in particular of cocaine.

The International Narcotics Control Board and the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNDOC), following the UN Special Session on the world drug problem, said that extra-judicial killings “contravene the provisions of international drug control conventions, do not serve the cause of justice, and will not help to ensure that all people can live in … security and prosperity.”

With this  in mind, it is imperative that the citizens  remind the authorities to uphold the rule of law and due process and to call on the highest authority in the land to make an unequivocal statement denouncing the extra judicial killings and to make accountable those found to be  using excessive and lethal violence to the disregard of due process.

Maintaining silence over the extra legal killings is tantamount to  condoning another form of criminal act that  runs against the basic agenda of the government to keep the public safe and secure from deadly violence and abuse of authority.

How many lost lives would it take for us to say enough of the bloodshed.   Exacting retribution against criminals may have popular support among the general public for now, but a credible judicial system and a law enforcement regime that is grounded on justice, due process, transparency and respect for the human rights of all must prevail over vengeance and a   criminality-cleansing strategy  that stokes a  culture of  death.

http://balayph.net/news-events/124-promoting-public-safety-and-security-is-about-observance-of-and-respect-for-human-rights-and-the-rule-of-law

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] As raw as it can get. Tears in my eyes drown me. by Ed Dela Torre

As raw as it can get. Tears in my eyes drown me..

Ed Dela Torre blog

The words are from a friend activist-poet, Aida Santos.

On the way to Tacloban airport, she saw people awaiting the bodies of some SAF (Special Action Forces) who were killed in Mamapasano.

The words introduce three short poems she wrote.

The week-long national conversation about the killings in Mamapasano have been cacophonous. My work schedule did not allow me to join in, but also because I couldn’t find words that are superior to silence.

Cautionary words in prison

When I was in prison during the martial law years, fellow activist-prisoners from Mindanao expressed to me their criticism about “Imperial Manila.”

They said that Manila-based people, whether elite or ordinary citizens, including activists, tend to think we have the solutions to Mindanao issues, and that our intervention is always helpful and welcome.

Since then, I have followed this rule. I don’t go to Mindanao unless invited. And in judging events and issues in Mindanao, I give greater weight to Mindanao-based friends and kindred spirits.

Silence. Tears. Words.

When the news broke about the death of 44 SAF fighters (with little mention of MILF fighters killed, nor of civilians), there was understandable outrage, expressed publicly, targeting not just what happened but directed to those in authority.

At the same time, there were fears, also publicly expressed, that he emotions of the moment would be exploited by those who do not agree with the peace process and initial peace agreements that the government has signed with the MILF.

I wondered what public comment my friends from Balay Mindanaw would post.

Kaloy Manlupig chose the response we learned and liked from the recent visit of Pope Francis. How fast things change. The deaths in Mamapasano happened only 10 days after the Pope left..

Silence. Because realities are greater than our ideas.

Tears. Because eyes washed by tears see more clearly. But only after tears have dried. Tears cloud our eyes and hearts.

And difficult it may be, words. To help each other understand what is in our hearts and minds.

Read full article @edicio.wordpress.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.

[From the web] PHILIPPINES: ‘Torture wheels’ is tip of the iceberg — Asian Human Rights Commission

Asian Human Rights Commission

PHILIPPINES: ‘Torture wheels’ is tip of the iceberg — Asian Human Rights Commission.

Photo by CHRP

Photo by CHRP

The discovery of a ‘torture wheel’ “inside a private subdivision in Laguna,” which is under the control of intelligence officers in Biñan, Laguna, where detainees arrested for illegal drugs are tortured and held, drew outrage as to how the police conduct its investigation into crimes.

Asian Human Rights Commission

The “torture wheel” was discovered by the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) after conducting onsite inspections of the detention facility. The facility, however, was not included in the list of official detention centres; and, in fact, its operation reportedly surprised the Philippine National Police (PNP). The facility is “never included in the regular status reports of all police custodial and detention centers.”

With the discovery and exposure of this practice, the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) expresses its appreciation to the CHR for investigating and conducting the onsite inspection. On this occasion the CHR went out of its way by investigating promptly and effectively into the complaints of torture.

The CHR’s investigation was in response to complaints received by the public attorney attached to the Public Attorney Office (PAO) in Laguna. The PAO lawyers filed the complaint with the CHR based on the allegations of torture by victims detained by the intelligence officers and policemen.

Read full article @www.humanrights.asia

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.

[Featured Site] MD4HR.net

MD4HR.net

MD4HR

MAG

The http://www.MD4HR.net is an online database of public health doctors like the City and Municipal Health Officers (C/MHO), Rural Health Physicians (RHP), Doctors to the Barrios (DTTB), Medical Officers, Medico-Legal Officers, Emergency Physicians and the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) Forensic doctors and Philippine National Police (PNP) doctors trained through the initiative of the Medical Action Group, Inc. (MAG) as part of its campaign against torture in the Philippines.

The purpose of http://www.MD4HR.net is to increase public awareness and access to the doctors trained on various human rights concepts, medical and psychological examination of torture victims, sexually-abused and survivors through an online interactive map.

Another aim of http://www.MD4HR.net is to offer a venue for reporting of human rights violation cases like torture and sexual assault as well as the list of the Department of Health (DOH) Retained Hospitals and Women and Children Protection Units in the Philippines.

Visit MD4HR.net @www.md4hr.net

Iboto ang iyong #HRPinduterosChoice para sa HR FEATURED SITES.

Ang botohan ay magsisimula ngayon hanggang sa 11:59 ng Nov 15, 2013.

Ikaw para kanino ka pipindot? Simple lang bumoto:
• i-LIKE ang thumbnail/s ng iyong mga ibinoboto sa HRonlinePH facebook, i-share at ikampanya.
• Bisitahin ang post sa HRonlinePH.com (links sa bawat thumbnail) at pindutin ang button sa poll sa ilalim ng bawat nominadong post.
• 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/

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] Re-militarization of the PNP–NO WAY! Uphold civilian supremacy. Promote rights-based policing! -PAHRA

Re-militarization of the PNP–NO WAY! Uphold civilian supremacy. Promote rights-based policing!

pahra logo copy

The Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates (PAHRA) and the undersigned stand firmly with the 1987 Philippine Constitution stating in Section 6, Article XVI (General Provision) that “The State shall establish and maintain one police force, which shall be national in scope and civilian in character to be administered and controlled by a national police commission….” (emphasis supplied)

Civilianizing the police force was a major step by President Corazon Aquino to break the military domination designed by Marcos in establishing the Philippine Constabulary/Integrated National Police (PC-INP) during Martial Law. This was done when President Cory signed Republic Act No. 6975 creating in 1991 the Philippine National Police (PNP).

It must be noted though that the numerous gross human rights violations perpetrated with impunity during Martial Law, including those done by members of the PC-INP, until now have not yet been fully accounted for, much less were the perpetrators and those with command responsibility brought to justice.

Despite the legal and technical separation as well as distinction of the civilian character of the police from the military nature of the armed forces, there has been no actual complete severance. According to the Philippine Public Safety College (PPSC), “it is common knowledge that the [Philippine National Police] PNP, for far too long, has been under the leadership of PMA graduates with military orientation.” Thus, amidst the fact that the PNP top brass and their successors are mostly graduates of the Philippine Military Academy (PMA), what has prevailed in education and training amongst the officers and personnel of the PNP are strongly a military-mindset and behaviour.

We are alarmed that even while the last batch of military graduates from the PMA, Tanglaw-Diwa Class of 1992, are still to retire by 2026 at the mandatory retirement age of 56, there are already moves to perpetuate further the military hold on the police institution which not so subtly subverts the spirit and intent of 1987 Constitution for civilian supremacy over the military.

We firmly oppose the re-entry of PMA graduates into the PNP as per the proposal made by the PMA Alumni Association as well as the intention to maintain and embed the military hold of the PMAyers when lateral entry has been completed into the PNP as stated in a provision contained in the proposed Executive Order to be presented to the President: “Upon approval of [PMA graduates’] lateral entry to the PNP and the PCG, they shall resign their commission in the Regular Force and be commissioned subsequently in the Reserve Force of the AFP pursuant to the National Defense Act.” (Section 1,c)

When activated, will there not be a conflict on the chain of command to the detriment of the PNP?

Furthermore, such action may also put into question the consistency and sincerity of the AFP’s resolve to uphold civilian supremacy and the rule of law in the implementation of its Internal Peace and Security Plan (IPSP) or “Bayanihan”.

We call on all to uphold the Philippine Constitutional provision and work together for one strong, professional police force that is truly civilian in character, educated and trained with human rights as preferred values in institutional work and in field operations.

Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates (PAHRA)

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.

[Urgent Appeal] Violent Dispersal of Protest Action of Civil Society Organizations during the State of the Nation Address (SONA) of President Benigno Aquino III -TFDP

URGENT APPEAL

July 24, 2013

(PHILIPPINES) Violent Dispersal of Protest Action of Civil Society Organizations during the State of the Nation Address (SONA) of President Benigno Aquino III

Issues: Violent Dispersal; Harassment and Intimidation; Arbitrary Arrest and Detention; Human Rights Defenders; Freedom of Expression and Right to Organize; Physical Injuries; Command Responsibility

TFDP logo small

________________________________________________________________________________

Dear Friends,

The Task Force Detainees of the Philippines (TFDP) is forwarding to you an appeal regarding the violent dispersal of demonstrators perpetrated by members of the Philippine National Police (PNP) at the Southbound lane of Commonwealth Avenue, Quezon City, Philippines during the protest against the SONA of President Aquino on July 22, 2013 and is seeking your help to end violations against the Freedom of Assembly.

Around twenty (20) persons were hurt during the dispersal and one (1) person was arbitrarily arrested during the incident.

If you wish to make any inquiries, please contact the Research, Documentation and Information Program of TFDP at # 45 St. Mary Street, Cubao, Quezon City, Philippines 1109 or call +632 4378054 or email tfdp.urgentappeals@gmail.com.

________________________________________________________________________________

FACTS OF THE CASE

Around 20 demonstrators were hurt and 1 person arbitrarily arrested in a violent dispersal during a protest action in Commonwealth Avenue Quezon Cityon July 22, 2013 at around 3 PM. The protest was in line with the State of the Nation Address of President Benigno Aquino III.

The group of around 2,000 protesters led by the Freedom from Debt Coalition (FDC) were shifting towards the southbound lane of the avenue when around 250 members of the PNP immediately blocked them and instructed them to leave.

Leaders of FDC tried to initiate a dialogue and negotiate with the police to allow them to continue their protests. However, Police Ground Commander Senior Superintendent Norberto Mabagay allegedly instructed the members of the PNP to push the demonstrators back to the northbound lane of the avenue. They also started grabbing the streamers and flags of the protesters.

Further violence erupted when members of the PNP cornered and attempted to pull out FDC leaders from the group. Some protesters at the frontline fell to the ground as the PNP continued pushing them. After a while, some of the PNP started shoving their truncheons and wooden sticks against the protesters.

Some of the demonstrators claimed that they were punched and kicked by members of the PNP who were wearing combat boots. They also noted that many of the PNP were not wearing their name tags.

The scuffle stopped when the demonstrators pleaded to the police to stop since there were already a number of persons injured. Among the casualties were Rasti Delizo, Aaron Pedrosa, Sammy Gamboa, Rapha-el Olegario and Alex Castro, who all obtained bruises and abrasions during the dispersal.

The police also claimed that they were also hurt during the dispersal and arrested Vincent Coronacion, 19 year old son of a member of the Alliance of Progressive Labor (APL) who came to the rally to accompany his mother. The police alleged that Vincent threw the rock that hit one of the police and were recommending that he be charged with multiple cases; resistance and disobedience upon an agent of a Person in Authority, Malicious Mischief, Direct Assault, Physical Injuries and Violation of BP 880. He was only released on July 23, 2013.

 

REQUESTED ACTION:

PLEASE SEND LETTERS TO THE CONCERNED GOVERNMENT AGENCIES TO:

a) Investigate officers and members of the PNP deployed in Commonwealth Avenue, Quezon City during the SONA for their violent dispersal and if they are found to have committed grave abuse of authority for their excessive use of force against the Civil Society demonstrators and be held accountable for their actions.

b) Assurance from the PNP will use Maximum tolerance during protest activities and no similar violent action will be taken against protesters.

c) Guarantee the means for demonstrators to express and act freely in conformity with the bill of rights and freedoms as stated in the Philippine Constitution;

d) Guarantee the respect of human rights and the fundamental freedoms in accordance with international human rights standards.

SAMPLE LETTER

Dear _________________,

RE: Violent Dispersal of Civil Society Group

I am writing you to draw your attention regarding the violent dispersal of a protest rally during the State of the Nation Address of President Benigno Aquino III.

I have learned that around 250 members of the Philippine National Police (PNP) tried to disperse 2,000 demonstrators affiliated with the Freedom from Debt Coalition FDC) by using excessive means that elicited violence, that caused the injury of around 20 protesters.

It was also brought to my attention that after the incident, a young man from the group, Vincent Coronacion was arbitrarily arrested by the Police and recommended to be charged with multiple cases and was only freed a day after his arrest.

I am asking the concerned government agencies to investigate the actions taken by the PNP, as well as appropriate sanctions to be given if they have used excessive force.

I am also asking for the assurance of the concerned government agencies that no such repeat of this violence be done to protesters.

Finally, in view of the above mentioned information, I urge you to act quickly to correct this situation and ask that you inform us of the outcome of your investigation.

Respectfully yours,

____________________

PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:
1. Mr. Benigno Simeon Aquino III

PRESIDENT

Republic of the Philippines

Malacañang Palace

JP Laurel Street, San Miguel

Manila 1005

PHILIPPINES

Fax: +63 2 7361010

Tel: +63 2 7356201/5641451 to 80

Email: corres@op.gov.ph/opnet@ops.gov.ph

 

2. Mr. Mar Roxas

Secretary

Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG)

A. Francisco Gold Condominium II

EDSA cor. Mapagmahal St., Diliman

Quezon City

Philippines 1100

Fax: +63 2 9250332

Tel: +63 2 9250330/9250331

Email: mar@marroxas.com/maia@marroxas.com/mbunico@dilg.gov.ph

 

3. Mr Herber Bautista

Mayor, Quezon City

3rd Floor, High-Rise Building

Elliptical Road, Brgy. Central

Diliman

Quezon City

Philippines 1100

Fax: +632 9216750

Tel: + 632 9884242 local 8300 to 8307/ 9243592

Email: mayor@quezoncity.gov.ph/ http://www.quezoncity,gov.ph

 

4. Police Director Alan LM. Purisima

Chief

Philippine National Police

Camp General Rafael Crame

Quezon City

Philippines

Fax: + 632 7248763/7230401

Tel: + 63 2 7264361/4366/8763

Email: feedback@pnp.gov.ph

 

5. Chairperson Loretta Ann P. Rosales

Commission on Human Rights (CHR)

SAAC Bldg. Commonwealth Avenue

U.P. Complex, Diliman

Quezon City

Philippines

Tel: +632 9285655/9266188

Fax: +632 9290102

Email: rosales.chr@gmail.com

________________________________________________________________________________

Kindly inform or copy-furnish tfdp.urgentappeals@gmail.com of urgent appeals sent to above government officials for monitoring purpose. Thanking you in advance for your time on this important and urgent matter.

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] 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

[From the web] Police Officials On Board with LGBT Sensitization Training From United Nations Human Rights recommendation to concrete action in the Philippines -IGLHRC

Philippines: Police Officials On Board with LGBT Sensitization Training From United Nations Human Rights recommendation to concrete action in the Philippines
February 28, 2013

PNP and LGBT dialogue photo from Ging Cristobal FB copy

Ging Cristobal of IGLHRC, Police Chief Superintendent Nestor Fajura of PNP HRAO, and Raymond Alikpala of LADLAD LGBT Party speaking at the PNP and LGBT Group Dialogue on February 22nd. Photo from Ging Cristobal FB.

“Human rights are for humans and LGBT persons are not to be excluded from the protection of the police when we apply the rule of law. ”
– Police Chief Superintendent Fajura

“This is a major breakthrough.”
– Ging Cristobal, IGLHRC

IGLHRC logo smallManila (28 February 2013)—The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC) and LADLAD LGBT Party launched a partnership with the Philippines National Police (PNP) Human Rights Affairs Office to convene a national Gender and Sexuality training program to sensitize police officers when engaging with lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people. Ging Cristobal of IGLHRC, Raymond Alikpala of LADLAD LGBT Party and Oscar Atadero, a veteran LGBT activist and a former secretary-general of Progressive Organization of Gays in the Philippines (ProGay), planned the engagement in collaboration with Police Chief Superintendent Nestor Fajura, Chief of the Philippines National Police Human Rights Affairs Office.

Police Chief Supt. Fajura stressed that he is concerned with the consistent complaints of police misconduct his office has heard from LGBT groups. Police Chief Supt. Fajura indicated that he wants to address this concern by engaging directly with LGBT people. The training series will include an LGBT community dialogue with the PNP and six three-day gender and sexuality workshops with human rights regional officers, police precinct officers, and women’s and children’s desk officers in major provinces all over the Philippines in the coming months.

“The aim of this engagement with the LGBT sector is to sensitize the police force to bring about attitudinal change that greatly affects how the police enforce the rule of law and to make the necessary recommendations to incorporate inclusion of LGBT issues and rights in the formal training program of instructions (POI) in the policies and standard procedures of the police force,” said Police Chief Supt. Fajura.

Read full article @http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/1870/t/0/blastContent.jsp?email_blast_KEY=1269258

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] Joint investigators and prosecutors training for the first time to fight torture -MAG

Joint investigators and prosecutors training for the first time to fight torture

MAGThe Philippine National Police (PNP) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) are working together with non-governmental organization, the Medical Action Group (MAG) in a UK-funded project to strengthen present efforts to fight torture in the country.

The British Embassy Manila through its Human Rights and Democracy Programme is providing funding for the project “Enhancing the Capacity of the Prosecutors and Investigators for Effective Investigation and Increased Prosecution of Torture Cases Using Medical Evidence.”

Investigators from the PNP and prosecutors from the DOJ will undergo training that will boost their capacity to preserve and process physical and medical evidences that should have probative value in court.

“This is to emphasize the close collaboration between the legal and police professions. However, investigators and prosecutors must often have limited knowledge and understanding of and insight into each other’s work and may even view each other with scepticism. This first joint training of investigators and prosecutors on investigation and documentation of torture cases is crucial process in providing them common ground and framework to work on the application of international standards for effective investigation and successful prosecution of torture cases in the country.” Erlinda Senturias, M.D., Chairperson of MAG explained.

“This project supports efforts to strengthen human rights and the rule of law in the Philippines. This training programme is unique in that it will not only provide investigators and prosecutors with the tools to improve how they process and present medical evidence, but will also strengthen collaboration between the PNP, the DOJ and civil society. This is an example of the openness and ongoing improvement that necessary for delivering positive results,” added Steph Lysaght, First Secretary and Head of the Political Section of the British Embassy Manila.

“This training will galvanize efforts to address the unbearable crimes of torture that tragically remains to be present, albeit in diminished scale, in our society. Quiet efficiency, integrity and honesty will be your guideposts in the use of tools and skills which hopefully will ensure a perfect conviction rate for Complaints and Information filed involving torture. The same aspiration applies to our partner law enforcement agents from the PNP and the NBI,” DOJ Secretary Leila M. de Lima said.

“The PNP must promote and protect human rights because this task lies at the very core of maintaining peace and order, ensuring public safety and upholding the rule of law in this country,” PCSuperintendent Nestor M. Fajura, Head, PNP Human Rights Affairs Office.

The training begins on 23 January 2013 for the first batch of forty-five (45) investigators mostly from the PNP Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) and from the DOJ prosecutors. Selected graduates of the training will further be trained as trainors for investigators and prosecutors in other parts of the country.

Since 2004, the MAG has been increasingly engaged in capacity development among health and legal professionals on the investigation and documentation of torture cases according to the international standards set by “the Istanbul Protocol,” which provides medical and legal professions with tools for investigating, assessing and reporting allegations of torture.-end-

Note to editors:

The UN Manual on Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (“the Istanbul Protocol”), is the international standard that provides medical and legal professions with tools for investigating, assessing and reporting allegations of torture.

The DOJ, PNP and MAG have entered into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) on the implementation of said project on November 15, 2012. Justice Secretary Leila M. de Lima; Mr. Steph Lysaght, Political Section Head of the British Embassy Manila; Police Chief Superintendent Nestor M. Fajura of the PNP Human Rights Affairs Office and Dr. Senturias of MAG signed the MOA, while Atty. Milabel A. Cristobal of the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) witnessed the MOA signing.

On November 22, 2012, Administrative Order No. 35 http://www.gov.ph/2012/11/22/administrative-order-no-35-s-2012 created a body, “Inter-agency committee on Extra-Legal Killings, Enforced Disappearances, Torture and Other Grave Violations of the Right to Life, Liberty and Security of Persons.”

MEDICAL ACTION GROUP, INC.
Health and Human Rights for All

Press release
January 23, 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.

[Press Release] UK, DOJ and PNP forge partnership on training of investigators and prosecutors to fight torture -MAG

UK, DOJ and PNP forge partnership on training of investigators and prosecutors to fight torture

Impunity and insufficient evidence in torture cases against alleged perpetrators are still among the serious impediments to the prevention of torture. Consequently, few complaints are brought forward and few actual prosecutions are made.

To help fight torture, the Medical Action Group (MAG), with support from the British Embassy Manila signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Philippine National Police (PNP) that will provide training for investigators and prosecutors for a more effective and efficient investigation and prosecution of torture cases in the country.

In a media briefing at DOJ, Mr. Steph Lysaght, Political Section Head of the British Embassy Manila said the British Embassy’ project with the MAG and in partnership with the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Philippine National Police (PNP) aims to enhance the capacity of the investigators on investigations and evidence collection and to provide necessary knowledge and skills for the prosecutors on how physical and medical evidences are evaluated in court proceedings on alleged torture cases according to the Anti-Torture Law (Republic Act No. 9745) and international standards contained in the UN Manual on Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (“the Istanbul Protocol”).

The training will be undertaken with funding from the British Embassy’s Human Rights and Democracy Programme.

“This is to emphasize the role that documentation and proper legal process play in the investigation and prosecution of torture cases. Close collaboration between the health and legal professions is crucial in the effective investigation of alleged cases of torture and in establishing standards on how to recognize and document torture in order that the documentation may serve as valid evidence in court,” Erlinda Senturias, M.D., MAG Board of Trustees member explained.

“The need to increase the capacity of investigators in handing evidences and prosecutors in evaluating physical and medical evidences represents recognition that effective and quality documentation of alleged torture cases can contribute mightily to reducing impunity in the Philippines and obtaining redress for torture victims,” MAG added.

Since 2004 the MAG has been increasingly engaged in capacity development among health and legal professionals on the investigation and documentation of torture according to the standards contained in the Istanbul Protocol. MAG explained that the use of the Istanbul Protocol was proved to be an important piece of evidence in the first decision of the Supreme Court (SC) [G.R. No. 180906, The Secretary of National Defense v. Manalo, October 7, 2008] on the application of the Writ of Amparo in the case of Manalo brothers.

Last year, the city and municipal health doctors through the Association of Municipal Health Officers of the Philippines (AMHOP) have declared their support for the effective implementation of the Anti-Torture Act.

This is not the first time that the British Embassy partnered with the MAG to promote the value and use of medical documentation of torture. In 2004, the two facilitated the production of the groundbreaking “Guidelines to Prevent Torture and the Manual on the Recognition, Documentation and Reporting of Torture,” one of the first successful modifications of the Istanbul Protocol. The Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines (CHR) acknowledged the valuable contribution the project made towards fulfillment of Philippines’ international human rights obligations, and still uses the manual in its work.

This partnership among the civil society, the government, the police and the British Embassy affirms the shared commitment to uphold justice and protection of human rights.

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.

[Advisory/Event] British Embassy Manila, Department of Justice (DOJ), Philippine National Police (PNP) and MAG will ink agreement

British Embassy Manila, Department of Justice (DOJ), Philippine National Police (PNP) and MAG will ink agreement
by Medical Action Group (MAG)

ADVISORY

British Embassy Manila, Department of Justice (DOJ), Philippine National Police (PNP) and Medical Action Group (MAG) ink agreement for training of investigators and prosecutors to strengthen investigation and prosecution of torture cases

November 15, 2012 (Thursday), 10:30 to 11:30 AM
Department of Justice (DOJ), Executive Lounge
Padre Faura St., Manila

Non-government organization, the Medical Action Group (MAG), with support from the British Embassy Manila, will sign a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the DOJ and the PNP that will provide capacity development and training among investigators and prosecutors for a more effective and efficient investigation and prosecution of torture cases in the country. The training aims to enhance the capacity of the investigators in gathering and handling of evidences and to provide necessary knowledge and skills for the prosecutors on how physical and medical evidences is evaluated in court proceedings on alleged torture cases according to the Anti-Torture Law (Republic Act No. 9745) and international standards contained in the UN Manual on Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (“the Istanbul Protocol”) . This is in view of the lack of documentation standards for torture cases has often resulted in the rejection of physical and medical evidences by the courts. This training will have a direct impact on the ability to investigate and secure prosecution by improving the quality of evidences in torture cases. The training will be undertaken with funding from the British Embassy’s Human Rights and Democracy Programme.

The Commission on Human Rights (CHR) will witness the signing of MOA.

Guests:

Secretary Leila M. de Lima, DOJ
Mr. Steph Lysaght, Head, Political Section, British Embassy Manila
Representative from the Office of the PNP Director General Nicanor A. Bartolome
Atty. Milabel Cristobal, Office of the CHR Chairperson Loretta Ann Rosales
Erlinda Senturias, M.D., Member, MAG Board of Trustees

For Media Friends
Guests are available for interview.

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] Slain farmer’s kin seek arrest of 6 suspects – Inquirer.net

Slain farmer’s kin seek arrest of 6 suspects
Philippine Daily Inquirer

CAGAYAN DE ORO CITY – The family of lumad farmer Wilce Gica, who was shot dead on August 24 in Maramag, Bukidnon has asked authorities to arrest the six guards of Villalon Ranch who were tagged as suspects.

Police confirmed that murder charges had been filed against the suspects, led by a Milo Ceballos, before the Bukidnon prosecutor’s office in Malaybalay City.

Senior Police Officer 1 Jonathan Bataican, Maramag investigator, said the murder charges were filed after witnesses came forward and identified the guards as suspects in the death of Gica.

Gica was to attend a meeting called for by guards of Villalon Ranch purposely to inform him and his group that they were not allowed anymore to till the land they had been farming.

The slain farmer reportedly declined to surrender his farming tools when frisked outside the meeting venue in Pansalan village in Maramag.

Bataican said witnesses tagged Ceballos as the one who shot Gica, using a Carbine rifle.

The other guards were identified as Kevin Musico, Manuelito de la Cerna, Celso Oplimo, Romeo Dacquiano and Dante Cardines.

Glenda Gica Ubanan, the slain farmer’s eldest sister, said they were puzzled why the suspects remained at large.

Read full article @ newsinfo.inquirer.net

[Press Release] Human Rights Groups challenge AFP to implement stand on absolute prohibition of torture- PAHRA

Max De Mesa, Chairperson of PAHRA during the "Nothing can justify torture..." event at Imperial Holtel, T.Morato, Q.C. held last June 22, 2011. Photo by PAHRA

HUMAN RIGHTS GROUPS CHALLENGE AFP
TO IMPLEMENT STAND ON ABSOLUTE PROHIBITION OF TORTURE
June 26, 2011: United Nations Day for the Victims of Torture

PAHRA Chairperson, Max M. de Mesa, challenged the Armed Forces of the Philippines and its Human Rights Office (HRO) to make prove their sincerity in their avowed policy “to uphold human rights in all military operations”.

“In fact, they have challenged themselves,” the Chairperson said, “when the AFP represented by its HRO head, Col. Domingo Tutaan, took a stand on absolute prohibition of torture.

This public declaration was done last June 22 in Imperial Suites, Quezon City, with Government, other Security Sector representatives and from the diplomatic community in attendance along with human rights groups from civil society.  The event was convened through the partnership of the Presidential Human Rights Committee (PHRC) and a human rights NGO, the Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates (PAHRA).  It is also linked with the global campaign of The World Organization Against Torture (OMCT).  The UN resident coordinator, Ms. Jacqueline Badcock, sent a keynote message read by Ms. Tess Debuque.

PHRC Severo Catura signed the Government’s commitment for absolute prohibition of torture.  This was to re-emphasize the Aquino administration’s determination to implement the Philippines obligation as State Party to the United Nations’ Convention Against Torture (UNCAT), our domestic law RA 9745 and its Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR).

“Chief of Staff Gen. Oban should be commended,” continued Mr. de Mesa, “for ordering Col. Tutaan ‘to revisit and review the investigation’ regarding UP students Sherlyn Cadapan and Karen Empeno and farmer, Manuel Merino.” The PAHRA Chairperson further said, “The obligations of the State on specific human rights violations do not end with the term of each administration.  The obligations of the State demand accountability from each administration even of past violations and ensure the victims and their families justice, redress, reparation and rehabilitation.”  He ended by saying: “It is the straight road to combat impunity.”

PAHRA has also submitted the case of the PICOP 6 to the AFP HRO since February this year.  It is a 10-year old case of enforced disappearance of six contract workers of the Paper Industries Corporation of the Philippines (PICOP) in Agusan del Sur. The six were deprived of their liberty when Corporal Rodrigo Billones from the 62nd Infantry Battalion, 8th Infantry Division of the Philippine Army, upon allegations that the workers were members of the New People’s Army (NPA).  A soldier-witness testified that indeed the six were herded into the camp but were also beaten to death with iron pipes, later burned and buried.

Cases like this should not await decisions of the Supreme Court.  The AFP HRO have to do a pro-active investigation with due diligence respectful of due process and presumption of innocence. “Substantive actions on the ground should follow and supersede rhetorics at the top,” de Mesa added.

PRESS RELEASE:
26 June 2011

Reference:
Ms. Rose Trajano
Acting Secretary General
Cellphone no. 0906-5531792

Ms. Candy Diez
Campaigns Officer
Cellphone no. 0927-4012416

[In the news] Police urged to search for missing journalist – INQUIRER.net

Police urged to search for missing journalist.

By Delfin T. Mallari Jr.
Inquirer Southern Luzon

LUCENA CITY—The National Union of Journalists (NUJP)-Quezon chapter has called on the Philippine National Police and other government agencies to immediately locate journalist-broadcaster Marlyn de Mesa, and her niece who have been missing since Sunday.

“For the peace of mind of their families, the authorities should exert all efforts to find Marlyn and her niece, and leave no stone unturned,” said Ronilo Dagos, NUJP-Quezon chapter chair, in a statement on Thursday.

De Mesa, 39, and her niece Vanesa Tabale, 23, were last seen aboard a white Isuzu D-Max pickup (PFO-290) which De Mesa owned. They were supposedly on their way to Max’s Restaurant in San Pablo City, according to Dagos, quoting Gemi Formaran, head of a group of reporters covering the military in Camp Nakar.

De Mesa, publisher of Quezon-based weekly Southern Tagalog Tribune and a block timer of 95.1 Kiss FM here, is a member of the Camp Nakar Press Corps.

Their families have been trying to reach the two through their mobile phones but both could not be contacted, the NUJP head said, quoting Formaran.

De Mesa is known among her colleagues as a ‘hard-hitting’ broadcaster-journalist.

De Mesa resides in Pabilao, Quezon, and also has a home in Calamba City, the NUJP said.

SPO4 Edwin de Mesa, of the San Pablo City police, confirmed that the broadcaster has been missing for the past five days, or since her disappearance was reported to the city police on Sunday.

He said, however, that police have no leads on the broadcaster’s whereabouts, nor any theories about her disappearance.

[In the news] Unsolved ‘vigilante’ killings frustrated, burdened police | Sun.Star

Unsolved ‘vigilante’ killings frustrated, burdened police | Sun.Star.

CEBU CITY – Someone pushed Romeo Lico out of a multicab past midnight last March 30, 2006 in Barangay Lahug, Cebu City.

When he sensed he was near death, Lico ran. But that didn’t stop his unknown assailant from firing at him. Another gunman, who rode a motorcycle, pierced Lico’s head with more bullets.

Senior Insp. Mario Monilar, the former Cebu City Police Office (CCPO) Homicide Section chief, said Lico had 14 bullets in the head.

Lico was one of nearly 200 victims gunned down, vigilante-style, in Cebu City starting in 2004. He had been charged in connection with the killing of a woman in 2004 and with shooting a policeman who was responding to an alarm.

The onslaught of the vigilante-style killings started on Dec. 22, 2004, after then Cebu City mayor Tomas Osmeña expressed his concern on the increasing crime rate.

Looking back, Monilar, now the Guadalupe Police Station chief, said the series of killings burdened him.

“Wa ta malipay kay dugang sa trabaho, sige’g pangita sa suspek (We had to keep looking for suspects, and that was nothing to be happy about),” he said in a phone interview.

In those cases, the gunmen were usually masked, rode a motorcycle in tandem, and used a gun to kill their target persons. Most of their targets had criminal records.

Monilar said they solved some of the cases, but he admitted majority remained a mystery.

He said the police could never have been the vigilantes—one of the theories that surfaced when none of the cases were cracked.

“We are a government of laws, not of men,” he said. “Di ta ka husgar sa tawo (We cannot act like judges).”

Former CCPO director Melvin Gayotin said the crime rate during this period decreased.

His successor Senior Supt. Patrocinio Comendador, in a separate phone interview, said that some crime groups used hired guns and imitated the “vigilantes” in killing their erring members.

“Daghan nanakay nga grupo,” he said. “Out of revenge, some took the law into their own hands.”

Osmeña, now the congressional representative of Cebu City south district, had said: “I’m not exactly sad when a criminal gets shot.”

But during a mass for the feast of Señor Sto. Niño on Jan. 15, 2006, then Cebu Archbishop Ricardo Cardinal Vidal criticized the summary killings.

“It’s a big sin… pagpusil patay bisan kinsa pa ang nag-inspire, even if it’s meant for peace and order,” he said. Vidal is now the archbishop emeritus.

Osmeña, in an earlier report, admitted he may have “inspired” the attacks on the convicted or suspected criminals.

The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP)-Cebu City chapter had criticized Osmeña for refusing to take a stand against the summary executions.

The right to life is one of the basic human rights guaranteed by the Constitution, they pointed out.

The killings started to wane in the middle of 2007, after the police identified and filed cases against some gunmen, said Comendador, who is now the officer-in-charge of the Cebu Provincial Police Office (CPPO).

He also said the killings corresponded with a drop in petty crimes like theft, but the homicide rate rose.

When Comendador assumed the CCPO’s top post, he wanted to stop the killings, saying they were unlawful.

“Everybody deserves justice,” Comendador said of the victims. But, he said, the “slow wheels of justice system” must be made to go faster.

“Bisag sa kapaspas sa pulis, unya madugay sa fiscal, mawa ra ang efforts sa pulis (No matter who swiftly the police force acts, if the case gets stuck at the fiscal’s level, our efforts will be proven futile),” he said.

For his part, Monilar said there is a dim chance for vigilantes’ victims to attain justice since most of their relatives accepted their fate.

“Nidawat sila kay kasagaran sa napatay problema sa komunidad (They have accepted the fact that most of those killed had caused the community some problems),” he said. KAL of Sun.Star Cebu)

Published in the Sun.Star Cebu newspaper on May 16, 2011.

DoJ issues guidelines for motorists’ rights at checkpoints – INQUIRER.net, Philippine News for Filipinos

DoJ issues guidelines for motorists’ rights at checkpoints – INQUIRER.net, Philippine News for Filipinos.

By Nikko Dizon
Philippine Daily Inquirer
Source: inquirer.net
Filed Under: Security (general), Civil & Public Services, Police, Military, Safety of Citizens

 

Justice Secretary Leila De lima Ask.com

MANILA, Philippines—The Department of Justice on Friday issued an advisory outlining the 10-point guidelines for motorists to ensure that their rights remain protected when they are inspected at military or police checkpoints.

“We came out with this initiative to protect the public from abuses committed by law enforcers and to weed out illegal checkpoints,” Justice Secretary Leila de Lima said in a statement.

De Lima, who was chairperson of the Commission on Human Rights before her appointment as justice secretary, signed the DoJ’s first advisory opinion on March 15, “in line with the thrust of the department to take a pro-active stance and dynamic approach in criminal justice concerns.”

The statement said that the advisory was in line with the constitutional guarantee that protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures “of whatever nature.”

The five-page advisory notes that the Supreme Court, in several cases, has ruled that not all checkpoints are illegal.

Checkpoints are allowed if these are necessary for public order and conducted in the least intrusive way for the motorists, the advisory said, quoting the High Tribunal.

“For as long as the vehicle is neither searched nor its occupants subjected to a body search, and the inspection of the vehicle is limited to a visual search, said routine checks cannot be regarded as violative of an individual’s right against unreasonable search,” the advisory said.

The DoJ statement also stressed that the rules have been written in a “language that is easy to understand and memorize.”

The following are rules on military and police checkpoints issued by the DoJ:

1. A checkpoint must be well-lighted, properly identified and manned by uniformed personnel.

2. Upon approach, slow down, dim headlights and turn on cabin lights. Never step out of the vehicle.

3. Lock all doors. Only visual search is allowed.

4. Do not submit to a physical or bodily search.

5. You are not obliged to open glove compartment, trunk or bags.

6. Ordinary or routine questions may be asked. Be courteous but firm with answers.

7. Assert your rights, have presence of mind and do not panic.

8. Keep your driver’s license and car registration handy and within reach.

9. Be ready to use your cellphone at any time. Speed dial emergency number.

10. Report violations immediately. Your actions may save others.