Human Rights Watch Urges UN to ‘Carefully Review’ Failure by Arroyo to Prosecute Killings

Writ of amparo

The Supreme Court’s new procedure of the writ of amparo – a habeas corpus-like procedure in which state agencies are compelled to reveal to the court the whereabouts of named persons, disclose documentary evidence or allow court-authorized searches of premises – has shown some success in “resurfacing” more than half-a-dozen people. But some 100 cases remain pending, including that of Jonas Burgos, an agricultural activist who was abducted by alleged security forces in broad daylight in an urban mall in April 2007. While an important safeguard against government abuse, the writ of amparo is no substitute for prosecuting perpetrators of arbitrary arrest and detention.

Visit by UN expert on extrajudicial killings

In its UPR submission, the government claims that “as a concrete manifestation of the Philippines’ willingness to cooperate with the international human rights system,” it invited UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions Philip Alston in February 2007. The government has chosen to quote only positive selections from Alston’s report, omitting, for example, his finding that the military remained in denial about the killings, and has not rejected earlier government attacks on the report, such as the high-ranking military officer who called the UN rapporteur “brainwashed.”

“It is absurd for the Philippine government to let its generals call a UN expert names and then claim his visit signifies its willingness to cooperate,” Pearson said. “Its cooperation is best measured through its willingness to adopt Alston’s recommendations.”

Continued targeting of alleged communists

The government’s UPR submission notes that the Philippines repealed the anti-subversion law and decriminalized the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP). Although membership in the CPP has been legal since 1992, high-ranking military and police officers have repeatedly made statements to Human Rights Watch that imply that membership is illegal and which conflate the CPP with its armed wing, the New People’s Army. Some officers have also publicly suggested that members of certain nongovernmental organizations are valid targets of attack because of their alleged association or sympathy with the CPP or the New People’s Army.

Counterterrorism law

Human Rights Watch also expressed concerns that the 2007 anti-terrorism law, the Human Security Act, contained provisions that could allow authorities to hold detainees indefinitely, and engage in spurious prosecutions (http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/07/16/philip16404.htm). The UN special rapporteur on human rights and counterterrorism called for the law to be repealed or its implementation to be delayed.

“The Philippines is among the first countries up for the Universal Periodic Review, and as such it will be a test for the Human Rights Council,” said Pearson. “If the Philippines is the rights-respecting nation it claims to be, then why, when ample evidence implicates the military in abuses, are no members of the military being tried for these crimes?”

For more of Human Rights Watch’s work on the Philippines, please visit the following:

· Written submission to the UN Human Rights Council on the Univeral Periodic Review of the Philippines, at: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/PAGES/PHSession1.aspx

· June 2007 report, “Scared Silent: Impunity for Extrajudicial Killings in the Philippines,” at:

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2007/philippines0607/

· Philippines country page, at:

http://hrw.org/doc?t=asia&c=philip