Kin of victims of drug-related killings file complaints vs. government

“We believe that the vulnerable poor, marginalized and exploited sectors of society must be afforded every respect of their human rights—for these are the rights of the toiling majority.”

By RONALYN V. OLEA
Bulatlat.com

MANILA – With their faces hidden by black veil, families of three victims of drug-related killings and one survivor of police operations filed complaints against the government for violating the human rights of their loved ones.

The families accompanied by Church people under the Rise Up for Life and for Rights, filed complaints with the Joint Monitoring Committee (JMC) of the Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP), Jan. 17.

Formed in June 2004, the JMC is tasked to monitor the implementation of the Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law (CARHRIHL). The CARHRIHL is the first substantive agreement signed by the GRP and the National Democratic Front of the Philippines in March 1998.

One of the complainants, Anne (not her real name), told the media she wanted justice for her father. “Why kill drug suspects when they can be detained instead?” Anne said in Filipino.

Anne’s 47-year-old father, who worked in a slaughterhouse, was killed on December 2 inside their home in barangay Bagong Silangan, Quezon City. He left behind three children and a grandson.

Rise Up convener Fr. Ben Alforque said the war on drugs of the Duterte administration shows how the “state uses its agencies, machinery to kill its citizens.”

Data from the Philippine National Police showed that 2,170 have been killed in government’s anti-drug operations from July 1 last year until Jan. 2. More than 2,000 more were executed by vigilante groups.

Rise UP cited one of the CARHRIHL objectives “to guarantee the protection of human rights to all Filipinos under all circumstances especially the workers, peasants and other poor people.”

“We believe that the vulnerable poor, marginalized and exploited sectors of society must be afforded every respect of their human rights—for these are the rights of the toiling majority,” the group said.

Xyl Aguilar (center), legal assistant of the Joint Monitoring Committee of the Government of the Republic of the Philippines, receives the complaints filed by the families of victims of the war on drugs, Jan. 17. (Photo by Ronalyn V. Olea / Bulatlat)
Xyl Aguilar (center), legal assistant of the Joint Monitoring Committee of the Government of the Republic of the Philippines, receives the complaints filed by the families of victims of the war on drugs, Jan. 17. (Photo by Ronalyn V. Olea / Bulatlat)

Xyl Aguilar, legal assistant of the JMC-GRP, said they would forward the complaints to the GRP Human Rights Committee chairperson Efren Moncupa and other members of the GRP peace panel.

Rise Up urged both the GRP and the NDFP to include in the peace talks the issue of drug-related killings. The GRP and the NDFP are set to meet again for the third round of peace talks in Rome, Italy from January 19 to 25.

Copies of the complaints were also given to the JMC-NDFP.

Ruben Saluta, NDFP consultant for socio-economic reforms, said the problem of illegal drugs is not a simple police matter. “At the root of the problem of illegal drugs is landlessness, lack of decent jobs,” he said.

Saluta said the solution should not be repressive measures but socioeconomic reforms that will benefit the poor. He said the NDFP would raise the matter with the GRP panel. (https://www.bulatlat.com)

Share This Post

One Comment - Write a Comment

  1. Not only are human rights being violated, but Philippine law is also being violated. Most of the extra-judicial killings by the police are very suspicious, and there are credible reports that police are planting guns and drugs on their murder victims. Duterte is violating the law by encouraging those under his command to violate the law by killing suspects without the due process of legal procedures. He is a guilty as those who pull the trigger.

    The legal doctrine of “command responsibility” was applied to the war crimes prosecution of WW2 Japanese General Tomoyuki Yamashita in 1945 for atrocities committed by troops under his command in the Philippines. In 1995, President Ramos enshrined that legal doctrine into Philippine law.

    According to that legal doctrine of “command responsibility”, Duterte is responsible for the wide-spread murders by the police that have been committed without any due process within the rule of law, in other words, extra-judicial killings. Not only has Duterte and his subordinates in charge of the police ordered and encouraged such lawless killings by the police, he has personally ensured those policemen who have committed murders outside of the law that he will protect them from prosecution. Here is the Philippine law that Duterte himself should be prosecuted under:

    Executive Order No. 226, s. 1995
    BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE PHILIPPINES

    INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF THE DOCTRINE OF “COMMAND RESPONSIBILITY” IN ALL GOVERNMENT OFFICES, PARTICULARLY AT ALL LEVELS OF COMMAND IN THE PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE AND OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES

    SECTION 1. Neglect of Duty Under the Doctrine of “Command Responsibility”. Any government official or supervisor, or officer of the Philippine National Police or that of any other law enforcement agency shall be held accountable for “Neglect of Duty” under the doctrine of “command responsibility” if he has knowledge that a crime or offense shall be committed, is being committed, or has been committed by his subordinates, or by others within his area of responsibility and, despite such knowledge, he did not take preventive or corrective action either before, during, or immediately after its commission.

    SECTION 2. Presumption of Knowledge. A government official or supervisor, or PNP commander, is presumed to have knowledge of the commission of irregularities or criminal offenses in any of the following circumstances:

    a. When the irregularities or illegal acts are widespread within his area of jurisdiction;
    b. When the irregularities or illegal acts have been repeatedly or regularly committed within his area of responsibility; or
    c. When members of his immediate staff or office personnel are involved.

Comments are closed.