Japan Group Releases Report on Killings in Philippines

The TFU explains the gap by discounting the numbers produced by human rights organizations such as KARAPATAN, Amnesty International, Bayan Muna, and CRP-MC. For example, the TFU argued that 462 cases out of the 783 cases alleged by KARAPATAN as of November 14, 2006 were invalid and should be excluded.

One reason for this exclusion was a “lack of report to local police”. The second reason was that the cases were caused by conflicts between the army and the NPA. Other reasons included personnel motive and robbery. TFU also excluded a number of cases alleged by Amnesty International for the same reasons. Similarly, the TFU was only willing to admit 27 of 52 cases reported by the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines. The TFU gave reasons for eliminating 15 of the cases, and placed the remaining 6 cases under review.

With regard to the cases that were excluded, it does not appear that the TFU held a hearing or produced an official explanation as to why those cases could validly be excluded. None of the cases the fact-finding team investigated were cases that the TFU was willing to investigate or prosecute.

To try to address this point, the fact-finding team met with Mr. Melchor Rosales, the Under-Secretary General of DILG. The team expressed concerns regarding the apparent impunity in the cases they had investigated. Mr. Rosales’s response was that the “TFU would not work unless information is officially provided.” He stated that reports provided by KARAPATAN could not provide the requisite credibility for establishing information therein because KARAPATAN had made mistakes in the past: five victims in KARAPATAN’s victims list had been found alive.

Additionally, Mr. Rosales stated that extrajudicial killings did not exist in the Philippines. He said that only “unexplained” killings existed.129

The TFU admitted military involvement in eight cases prosecuted by the TFU. However, the TFU has attributed all of the other killings to a purge of leftists. This view contradicts both the Alston report and the Melo report. The TFU does not give due regard to the findings of the Melo report130.

As previously mentioned, the fact-finding mission could not complete investigations in all cases nor could they verify the number of extrajudicial killings. However, the fact remains that the TFU seems to discount many cases alleged by human rights organizations, does not give due explanations, and does not even start investigations that victims’ families deserve.

According to the TFU, several alleged victims claimed by KARAPATAN were later found to be alive. However, these findings have not yet established that the all claims of extrajudicial killings raised by KARAPATAN are proved to be false at all.

As stated, in most of the cases the fact-finding team investigated, victims’ families stated that no investigation or prosecution has been carried out against perpetrators.

A culture of impunity for human rights violations committed by military officials must be ended. Human Rights Now urges the TFU to conduct thorough and sincere investigations in the cases we have investigated, as well as all allegations of unsolved extrajudicial killings

3. Impunity of the Military

(1) Impunity of the High-Ranking Official

The report of a special investigative commission established by the President (the Melo Commission), suggests that the Former General of the AFP, Mr. Palparan was responsible for a series of killings in his capacity as a senior military official.

In the cases we investigated, four cases of extrajudicial killings, as well as two cases of abduction occurred in locations where General Palparan was assigned. Military officials, presumably under the leadership of General Palparan, were identified by several witnesses as participants in the cases. Some witnesses also identified participation by the CAFGU, the militia group under the control of the national military. Furthermore, Mr. Palparan himself admitted that he encouraged or instigated the killing to his subordinates in the AFP. 131

Despite these circumstances, however, there has been no investigation into the culpability of General Palparan.

The TFU argues that it cannot investigate senior army officials because it has no jurisdiction over them and has consequently never questioned or investigated Palparan. Moreover, Palparan has never been investigated by the AFP because “there is no official accusation against him”132. Given the “directive order” structure of the military, an inability to investigate senior military officials can be a hindrance to elucidating the complete truth of a given case.