Rewarding the war criminals
At the tribunal, prosecutors bewailed the Macapagal-Arroyo government’s predilection for rewarding the war criminals instead of punishing them, for refusing to prosecute the same perpetrators despite mountains of evidence and witnesses and for protecting those responsible by persecuting human rights defenders and lawyers instead. Particularly in the provinces, armed kangaroo courts actually proliferate – the perpetrators are the accuser, judge and executioner all rolled into one. A reign of terror has indeed replaced the rule of law and victims or their surviving families have nowhere else to turn to for justice.
If despite the piles of evidence not a single case has been pursued by the president’s own investigation and legal institutions, then that’s proof enough that Macapagal-Arroyo is culpable and criminally liable for the gross human rights violations. Capulong, an experienced trial lawyer and private impeachment prosecutor of former President Joseph Estrada, stresses that the “pattern and practice” of mounting atrocities committed by government forces against suspected rebels, alleged sympathizers and legitimate political dissenters shows a policy of politically-motivated killings that could not have taken place without the president, as commander-in-chief, encouraging or abetting them. That was the legal theory that won the class suit filed by 10,000 victims of torture against Marcos in Hawaii.
Macapagal-Arroyo, the tribunal’s prosecutors also stressed, has herself promoted or encouraged the human rights violations through her “war on terror” and for consistently refusing to uphold the civil and political rights of the victims and other targets. Alleged perpetrators, particularly Col. Jovito Palparan, have been promoted in rank by the president several times. Echoing this presidential policy, the president’s national security adviser and the Armed Forces of the Philippines have reportedly maintained hit lists, with target organizations and personalities named in a number of military journals, books and power point CDs that have circulated in recent years. Plans of political assassination have reportedly been taken up at Cabinet level.
Chief clerk of court Attorney Olalia said Macapagal-Arroyo and her co-defendant, President Bush, were served the official indictment through registered mail days earlier. If they chose, either of the two or their representatives and lawyers would have appeared for their defense. Indeed, a petite woman in black dinner attire and made-up all over – with security escorts – rushed hysterically toward the courtroom at the last minute to serve notice that the IPT was a hoax. Pandemonium. After reading her piece from what looked like a medieval-vintage paper, the woman – who introduced herself as a Malacañang official – left uttering some inaudible expletives at the judges.
Guilty
The jurors’ verdict, read by Rev. Barry Naylor, a Canon from Great Britain, found Macapagal-Arroyo and her co-accused guilty as charged for crimes against humanity. The jurors noted that Macapagal-Arroyo’s soldiers, policemen and other security forces violated the Bill of Rights of the 1987 Philippine Constitution; the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; the Convention against the Use of Torture and several other covenants to which the Philippines is a signatory; the Comprehensive Agreement on the Respect of Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law signed by the government and the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP) in 1998; the 1996 GRP-Moro National Liberation Front peace agreement; and other laws.
Mrs. Arroyo was found guilty not only as commander-in-chief of the AFP and PNP but also for her failure to prosecute the alleged perpetrators of the atrocities in four years of her presidency. She was also cited for her failure to uphold and protect the civil and political rights of the victims, among others.
Most of the victims of the human rights violations were unarmed civilians, including women and children, who were suspected by government forces as rebels or rebel sympathizers. Many came from militant people’s organizations and progressive party-list groups like Bayan Muna (people first) who were tagged by government authorities as either “communist fronts” or “terrorists.”
The tribunal judges said that the widespread abuses could serve as sufficient basis for the forfeiture of power and authority that Mrs. Arroyo continues to hold. They also asked the government to pay the victims or their surviving kin compensation and moral damages and to declare a public apology for the crimes committed.
The jurors and presiding judges faced the daunting tasks of not only rendering justice where it is due but of showing to the victims, their kin and rights watchdogs in the Philippines that all is not lost. It was explained during the presentation that the mandate, authority and legitimacy of the tribunal stemmed from a situation where a reign of terror has replaced the rule of law and where state political and legal institutions have consistently reneged on their duty to protect the weak and poor and to uphold the civil and political rights of the people.
The tribunal also served as a forum where people can express legitimate grievances against government and its instrumentalities and seek actions and remedies in the quest for justice.
Although symbolic and without any authority to enforce its verdict, the International People’s Tribunal has sent a powerful message to Macapagal-Arroyo and other perpetrators of human rights violations: You cannot forever silence truth and justice because the people’s justice will come after you in the final reckoning. (Bulatlat.com)
—————–
*Selma Benkhelifa, lawyer, Belgium; Peter Brock, lawyers, Australia; Victoria Corpuz, chair, UN Permanent Forum on IPs, Philippines; Sebnem Korur Fincanci, forensic doctor, Turkey; Roger Jowett, trade unionist, Australia; Barry Naylor, Canon, United Kingdom; Mary Ellen O’Connor, academe, New Zealand; Ai-jeen Poo, youth, USA; Danilo Ramos, peasant, Philippines; Hans Schapp, development workers, The Netherlands; Kawal Ulanday, Bayan-USA; and Barbara Waldern, human rights defender, Canada. Ms. Corpuz could not make it.
