Japan Group Releases Report on Killings in Philippines

(2) Writ of amparo

On September 25, the Philippine Supreme Court unanimously adopted the new rules governing the issuance of the writ of amparo. The new rule took effect on October 24, 2007.

The approval by the Supreme Court of the rules on the writ of amparo was its response to the unabated incidents of extrajudicial killings and involuntary disappearances.

This writ compels government, particularly security forces, to undertake all efforts to find victims of enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings instead of resorting to mere denials as they can when faced with petitions for habeas corpus.
Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno, in one of his earlier speeches, said that “the writ of amparo will deny to the authorities the defense of simple denial when they are sued to produce, before the courts, the bodies of victims of involuntary disappearances” and “will hold public authorities to a high standard of official conduct, failing which they will be held accountable to our people.”145

Under the new rules, a petition for a writ of amparo may be filed anytime with the Regional Trial Court, Sandiganbayan (anti-graft court), Court of Appeals or Supreme Court, depending on the place where the threat occurred. There will be no filing fees.

The new court rules allow the families of missing activists to seek court action ordering the military to explain disappearances and deaths. They may compel the military to disclose the whereabouts of missing people allegedly abducted by soldiers. This writ compels government, particularly security forces, to undertake all efforts to find victims of enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings instead of mere denials as they can when faced with petitions for habeas corpus.

The judiciary issued several writ of amparo, including in the following cases:

1) On Oct 25, 2007, the Supreme Court issued a writ of amparo in the case of the two UP students Karen Empeño and Sherlyn Cadapan; farmer Manuel Merino; and brothers Raymond and Reynaldo Manalo. 146 In the hearing of the UP students’ case, Raymund Manalo testified that the military personnel abducted the two students, and tortured them in the military custody. 147 To date, however, the two students are still missing.

2) On October 27, 2007, the Supreme Court, upon the authority of Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno, issued a writ of amparo to protect Lourdes D. Rubrico, the 63-year old urban poor leader who had been allegedly abducted in Dasmariñas, Cavite on April 3 2007, illegally detained, and subsequently released by military agents. 148

3) On November 7 2007, Judge Reinerio B. Ramas of Branch 18 of the Regional Trial Court of Pagadian City issued a writ of amparo in the case of Ruel Muñasque, 33 years old and a leader of the Christian Youth Fellowship of the United Church of Christ in the Philippines (UCCP). The writ resulted in the release of Ruel after 14 days in military custody. 149

4) On November 7, 2007, the writ of amparo was issued with respect to 22-year-old farmer Luicito Bustamante. The writ required the respondents, which included President Macapagal-Arroyo, AFP Chief of Staff Gen. Hermogenes Esperon and several other military and police officials in the Davao region to produce Luicito in court on November 14, 2007.

On November 14, Luicito appeared in the court hearing in Davao City Regional Trial Court. He initially told Judge Robillo that he was a former NPA who voluntarily surrendered to the military, but later recanted in court. He later admitted that he has been tortured by the military and followed the military’s instruction by lying before the judge because he was too scared. Judge Robillo declared that Luicito can now “move freely” without further restrictions on his liberty and security.150

5) On December 27, 2007, the Court of Appeal of Manila in the case of Jonas Burgos ordered the respondents, led by Armed Forces Chief General Hermogenes Esperon, to file a return, or an official report in response to the writ. The hearing of the case has started, presided over by Justice Remedios Hernando of the 7th Division. 151 To date, Mr. Burgos is still missing.

The writ creates positive change in the cases of enforced disappearances. The writ brought about successful results, resulting in the actual release of two activists. Court hearings on the issuance of the writ in several cases helped in establishing the truth that the military has forcibly taken the activists in its custody without any legal procedure. In particular, in the UP students’ case, the witnesses clearly stated that the victims were in the military’s custody. However, the vast majority of the victims of abduction including the UP students and Mr. Burgos are still missing.

(3) Writ of habeas data

In January 2008, the Supreme Court has promulgated rules governing the issuance of the writ of habeas data, which took effect on February 2, 2008. The writ of habeas data is a legal process by which an individual may petition, through the courts, that the government present to the petitioner all information gathered by the government on his person, and demand that the data be corrected if erroneous, or totally destroyed if malicious and false. The writ is an additional remedy to protect the right to life, liberty, or security of a person.