Japan Group Releases Report on Killings in Philippines

(5) Conclusion

The HRN fact-finding team concludes that there are reasonable grounds to believe that in the many cases, either the AFP or PNP are responsible for the killings.

First, in eight extrajudicial killing cases, the team can identify the witnesses who clearly point out elements of the AFP as the perpetrators. In two cases (including one of the above eight cases), the AFP admitted at least once that they killed the victims “in the course of legitimate encounters with NPA.” Also in two of the three forced disappearance cases, witness and released victims clearly testified about the military’s involvement.

Second, in another six extrajudicial killings and one abduction case, the fact-finding mission has not identified any witness to point out military personnel as perpetrators, nor has the team identified any acknowledgement by the military. However, the team can recognize that there are systematic patterns to the killings which suggest a connection between the killings and elements of governmental agencies.

All extrajudicial cases have several patterns in common with other cases, such as:

(a ) the victims are limited to certain groups, (b) victims were condemned by the government or AFP as enemies or NPA front, (c) victims were publicly exposing the human rights violations allegedly committed by the AFP, (d) victims were harassed, threatened with death, encouraged by the military to stop their leftist activity, or under persistent surveillance. Also, the weapons used, locations of crime scenes, and patterns of the crimes have certain similarities. In enforced disappearance cases, the characteristic of the cases have many factors in common with the extrajudicial killing cases.

The cases related to the former General Palparan are the clearest examples of military responsibility. Even if he did not directly order the killings, he publicly encouraged the killings. Successive killings have taken place in the areas which his military Brigade or Battalion controlled and there are cases in which witnesses clearly identified elements of his military as the perpetrators.

Considering the Arroyo Administration’s All Out War policy as well as the AFP’s neutralizing policy toward the leftist, which will be discussed later along with the above findings, the team considers that the governmental agencies, most extensively the AFP, are responsible for most of the above killings.

2. The number and characteristics of the victims.

One of the controversial problems concerns the number of the victims of extrajudicial killings in the Philippines. KARAPATAN, a local human rights organization, reported that more than 800 extrajudicial killings have been committed49 since Arroyo came into power in 2001. Another local human rights organization PAHRA has a different number. According to Amnesty International, there were 66 cases of extrajudicial killings in 2005, but the number of cases reached 51 in the first six months of 200650. Moreover, the cases investigated by the Task Force USIG were even more limited in number.

In terms of the number of killings, we recognize that more evaluation and clarification is necessary to determine the exact number. However, the difference in the numbers provided by different organizations cannot be a justification to underestimate or discredit their allegations of victimization. All claims of killings and abductions should be listened to sincerely, and investigated thoroughly by the government. Although KARAPATAN and PHARA reported different numbers of extrajudicial killings, the difference in number can be attributed to the fact that they are working in different regions and their investigations have not overlapped51.

What is important to note is that a number of extrajudicial killings were indeed committed by state agencies. It is of grave concern that despite the facts stated above, perpetrators within the government have not been brought to justice and human rights violators are enjoying impunity. Most of the victims’ relatives we met with claimed that there had been no justice, accountability, or even serious investigations of the killings of their loved ones.

Also, we have grave concerns about the characteristics of the targeted victims in these killings. In the cases we investigated, the victims include highly respected lawyers, human rights activists, union leaders, a church bishop, a city councilor, a Barangay Captain52 and left-wing activists. Most of the victims were advocates for the rights of ordinary citizens. Such killings perpetuate fear among the people and have a chilling effect on the society as a whole. It undermines freedom of expression, and ultimately, democracy in society53.