Tag Archive: UPR


                     

Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines (CHRP)

SAAC Building, Commonwealth Avenue, U.P. Complex Diliman,

Quezon City, Philippines 1101

Submission to the Universal Periodic Review – Philippines

June 2012

A. The Commission on Human Rights 

1. The Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines (CHRP)  is the national human rights institution in the country with “A” status accreditation.  CHRP was created under the 1987 Constitution to investigate human rights violations, monitor government compliance with international human rights obligations, provide human rights education and training, among others.  This independent submission is a product of internal deliberations as well as regional and national consultations with Civil Society.[1]

 

B. Institutional and Legal Framework for Human Rights, New Developments

2. Since the first UPR session on the Philippines,[2] Congress has passed a number of laws on human rights related to the UPR recommendations.[3] Other major human rights laws have yet to be enacted including the Commission on Human Rights Charter, compensation to victims of human rights violations, and laws on protection against extra-judicial killings, enforced disappearance and protections for internally displaced persons.

3.  The CHR has been given additional substantive roles under the Magna Carta of Women, Anti-Torture Law, and IHL law. Without corresponding resources, these additional functions and the proposed prosecutorial mandate[4] would overburden the Commission and impair its effectiveness.  It still does not have full fiscal autonomy, its budget has been cut twice[5] and it lacks the power to determine its own organizational structure; all of which weaken its independence.  The long overdue CHR Charter bill[6] should be a priority as a long-term, institutional measure for human rights protection and promotion. Strengthening the National Human Rights Institution is a long-term measure for human rights protection and promotion.

C. Human Rights Protection and Promotion on the Ground

Related to UPR Recommendations

Recommendation  1[7] Violence against women, access to justice and rehabilitation and post-conflict care for women and children 

 4.  The Anti-Violence against Women and their Children Act[8] has been upheld by the Supreme Court as constitutional. Despite training programs for the judiciary, some court decisions seem to reflect the preference of some judges to not apply this law and other laws, including the 1997 special law on rape. A Court of Appeals decision shows gender stereotyping and high requirements for a woman to establish the occurrence of rape and lack of consent.[9]

5.  The Magna Carta of Women[10] addresses many of the issues related to discrimination and violence against women.[11]  However, though the law provides that “measures to prosecute and reform offenders shall likewise be pursued,” it does not establish how to accomplish this.

6.  Three cases have been filed in the CEDAW committee and the government has yet to respond to a request for an invitation from the CEDAW Committee.

7.  Addressing special needs for rehabilitation and post-conflict care of women and children in vulnerable situations and conflict areas remains a challenge. The CHR will adopt a monitoring tool[12] to systematically monitor the situation of vulnerable groups including women and children.                                                                                       

Continue reading

Advertisements

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submission by:   Front Line Defenders and Human Rights Defenders – Pilipinas

Related to:              The Philippines UPR Session: 13th Session of UPR, 21 May – 4 June 2012
Submitted:             28 November 2011

1.  The following submission has been prepared jointly by Front Line Defenders – the International Foundation for the protection of Human Rights Defenders, and the Human Rights Defenders – Pilipinas (HRDP) based on research carried out by these organisations and information received from independent human rights defenders in the Philippines from January 2008 to November 2011.

2.  Front Line Defenders (www.frontlinedefenders.org) is an international NGO based in Ireland with special consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. Front Line Defenders has particular expertise on the issue of security and protection of human rights defenders and works to promote the implementation of the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders adopted by General Assembly resolution 53/144 of 9 December 1998.

3.  HRDP is a membership organisation of individual human rights defenders actively engaging in the promotion, defence, protection and fulfilment of “human rights for all” in the Philippines on various issues including civil, political, economic, social, cultural spheres or in the field of development and peace. It focuses on the protection of human rights defenders.

General trends facing human rights defenders

4.  Ms Margaret Sekkagya, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, stated in her report to the 16th session of the Human Rights Council that “the Special Rapporteur remains seriously concerned regarding the persistent challenges faced by human rights defenders in the Philippines”.

5.  The threats against human rights defenders since the last UPR session on the Philippines in April 2008 remains unchanged.   Human rights defenders face extra-judicial killings, enforced disappearances, threats and intimidations, illegitimate restriction to the rights of freedoms of opinion and expression, peaceful assembly, and association. Human rights defenders working in the field of peasants’ rights, land rights, and indigenous human rights defenders continue to face specific threats. The state security forces, including the military and the police, continue to abuse human rights defenders with impunity. The cases mentioned in this report were not properly investigated by the authorities and the perpetrators remained unpunished.

6.  Human rights defenders disregards of their geographical locations continue to be branded as working as fronts for the Communist Party of the Philippines and its armed wing, the New People’s Army (CPP-NPA) as a way to dismiss their work and legitimate concerns. Defenders, working  specifically in the Southern Mindanao area, have been branded as members of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front or the Abu Sayyaf terrorist group. The security forces have used this rhetoric to implement their “shoot to kill” policy against human rights defenders.

Extra-judicial killings, enforced disappearances, and impunity

7.  At the first UPR review, the Philippines accepted the recommendation “to completely eliminate torture and extrajudicial killings” (Holy See) and “to intensify its efforts to carry out investigations and prosecutions on extrajudicial killings and punish those responsible” (Switzerland). Despite this commitment, 23 cases of extra-judicial killings were documented from 2008 to 2011, claiming 30 victims.  In the same period, 79 cases of enforced disappearance were reported. Of these, 50 ended with the victim reappearing alive; in five cases the victim was found dead; and 24 remain missing.

8.  The Philippines, despite being a party to international human rights treaties, which impose a duty on the state to investigate alleged violations of the right to life, including extra-judicial killings, has provided human rights defenders with little or no protection. While soldiers, police, and militia members have been implicated in many of these killings, no member of the military active at the time of the killing has been brought to justice.

9.  While different statistics exist relating to the exact number of human rights defenders killed in recent years, human rights lawyers, journalists, union and community leaders, continue to be targeted and extra judicially killed or disappeared with impunity. These cases have not been treated with priority by the government. The authors of these killings are usually unidentified individuals on motorcycles, suspected of having ties with the army, the police and other law enforcement agencies.

Continue reading

By: Dr. Renato G. Mabunga

(Note:  This article was first published in HUMAN RIGHTS FORUM, Volume 5, Number 1issue.  Updated and modified to incorporate latest developments and preparation on the Philippine 2nd Cycle Universal Periodic Review slated on the 13th HRC/UPR Working Group session in May to June 2012.)

……………………………………………………………………………………..

“Every day we are reminded of the need for a strengthened United Nations, as we face a growing array of new challenges, including humanitarian crises, human rights violations, armed conflicts and important health and environmental concerns. Seldom has the United Nations been called upon to do so much for so many. I am determined to breathe new life and inject renewed confidence in a strengthened United Nations firmly anchored in the twenty-first century, and which is effective, efficient, coherent and accountable.”

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon

IN 1997, and again in 2002, reforms in the United Nations gained ground in Geneva and New York, respectively. These reforms came in the heels of then-Secretary General Kofi Annan’s challenge to the UN’s “continued significance” in the face of 21st century realities. He called for improvements in how the UN conducts its work, implements its mandate and manages the funds entrusted to it by its Member States in order to bring human rights to all peoples of the world.

These reforms took a significant turn during the General Assembly’s 60th session. The world’s leaders adopted UNGA Resolution 60/251 on the 15th of March 2006, which created the Human Rights Council (HRC). The HR Council is now a subsidiary organ of the General Assembly, taking over the role of the Commission on Human Rights, which was created under article 68 of the UN Charter on Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). The HRC was mandated to conduct a Universal Periodic Review (UPR), a mechanism to evaluate each member state’s human rights commitments. The said review shall be a cooperative mechanism, based on an interactive dialog, with the full involvement of the country concerned and with consideration given to its capacity-building needs. The UPR is intended to complement and not duplicate the work of treaty bodies.

Continue reading

%d bloggers like this: