|
Bu-lat-lat (boo-lat-lat) verb: to
search, probe, investigate, inquire; to unearth facts
Vol. VI, No. 29 Aug.
27 - Sept. 2, 2006 Quezon City, Philippines |
|
HOME
ARCHIVE
CONTACT
RESOURCES
ABOUT BULATLAT
|
READER FEEDBACK
(We encourage readers to dialogue with us.
Email us
your letters complaints, corrections, clarifications, etc.)
|
|
|
DEMOCRATIC SPACE
(Email us your
letters statements, press releases, manifestos, etc.) |
|
|
For
turning the screws on hot issues, Bulatlat has been awarded
the Golden Tornillo Award.
Iskandalo
Cafe
|
|
Copyright 2004 Bulatlat bulatlat@gmail.com |
|
|
|
|
Analysis
Going After Serial Killers
outside RP
There are
legal and political courses of action available internationally which the
victims' families, rights groups, lawyers and civil libertarians can take
to seek redress for the unmitigated killings including the prosecution of
those responsible. There have been legal precedents under which state
governments, prime ministers and individual generals who have committed
war crimes and crimes against humanity are hailed to an international
court or tribunal.
BY BOBBY TUAZON
Bulatlat
The remaining option for possibly stopping
the summary executions of patriotic activists all over the country is to
hold the Macapagal-Arroyo regime accountable before the international
community, including international bodies and courts, alongside broad
mobilizations in the Philippines.
The presumptive president, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, stands accused of
being responsible for the unmitigated political killings of at least 730
activists, progressive party-list organizers, rights volunteers, human
rights lawyers and others, and for the disappearance of 181 others. Many
of the victims were killed because of their political beliefs and for
calling for the ouster of Macapagal-Arroyo whose constitutional legitimacy
remains in question. They were tagged as "communist terrorists" or members
of "front organizations" of the revolutionary underground which is a
target of government's U.S.-backed "war on terror."
The reason why Amnesty International (AI), the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU),
the World Council of Churches (WCC), Asian Human Rights Council (AHRC) and
other reputable organizations have raised alarms over the killings is not
only because they found strong evidence proving the involvement of
security forces in the extra-judicial killings but also because their
commander in chief, Macapagal-Arroyo, has done nothing to stop the
murders. The reason why the presumptive president has, on the other hand,
finally taken a move by creating a fact-finding commission, is that public
clamor is growing in the United States including inside its Congress
calling on President Bush to withdraw his support for the Philippine
president because of the killings.
In September, the United Nations Committee on Human Rights will meet in
Geneva to receive and hear complaints from Philippine rights watchdogs
about the summary executions. The UN committee recently castigated the
Manila government for its failure to submit yearly reports on its human
rights performance. The Geneva hearings that would confirm charges that
the government has violated international law on account of the killings
would be enough to disqualify its seat in the new UN Human Rights Council
in New York. This would be a slap on the face of Macapagal-Arroyo herself
who is set to attend the General Assembly even as she awaits confirmation
of her solicited meeting with Bush.
Presidential order
In a loaded statement, a senator last week noted that the only way the
killings will stop is simply for the president to issue an order. Instead
of doing this, Macapagal-Arroyo created a presidential commission to look
into the killings. But Administrative Order 157 only empowers the
commission "to summon witnesses" and "deputize military, police and
justice officials to help in its probe." The order does not empower the
body to summon the President and top armed forces generals, most
especially Maj. Gen. Jovito Palparan, accused by rights groups as having a
role in the killings.
The work of the commission ends with a recommendation regarding possible
judicial remedies. Previous presidential commissions – the Agrava
commission, which investigated the 1983 assassination of Benigno Aquino,
Jr.; Davide Commission, on the coups d'etat of late 1980s; Gancayco
Commission, on the OFW Flor Contemplacion case; and the Feliciano
Commission, on the 2003 Oakwood mutiny – never became conclusive. The
mastermind in the Aquino assassination was not officially named let alone
punished while institutional reforms sought by the probe bodies never saw
the light of day.
Members of the new commission, which is headed by retired Supreme Court
justice Jose Melo, are affiliated with the president either as fellow
Pampangueños or as direct subordinates. Two members, Director Nestor
Mantaring of the National Bureau of Investigation and Chief State
Prosecutor Jovencio Zuño, are subordinates of Justice Secretary Raul
Gonzales who has prejudged the killings as "necessary collateral damage."
Nelia Gonzalez, according to University of the Philippines (UP) insiders,
is a Macapagal-Arroyo "hard-core loyalist" and mole in the UP Board of
Regents.
With the required independence and impartiality of the commission stained
by the pro-Arroyo reputation of its members and its powers limited, it is
not surprising that the body itself has been called by critics from the
church and other sectors as a "rubber stamp" and its purported
investigation a sham. The political motive behind the order is to gain
short-term media mileage for the president, defuse local and international
indignation and eventually clear the executive department and generals of
any possible accountability. One suspects that that is the least she could
do to save herself. The commission's investigation can drag on for years,
while the executions will continue.
International dimension
Yet the extra-judicial executions in the Philippines have acquired an
international dimension, as shown in the strong concerns raised by the UN
and other world organizations. There appears a patent obstructionism in
the investigation and prosecution of the cases precisely because powerful
state authorities are the prime suspects based on evidences and
testimonies submitted to fact-finding missions here and abroad and as
cited by AI and other international organizations. The fact alone that
even rights volunteers and lawyers have also been silenced shows the
impunity the killings have reached and its mastermind's sheer contempt of
the law. It can only be inferred that whoever are the architects and
executioners in these systematic and nationally-coordinated killings are
promised immunity from prosecution and that such orders can only come from
higher authorities based on the chain of command.
In relation to the summary executions, there is thus a total breakdown of
law and judicial process. There is even a renewed crackdown on the press
following its expose' of the killings and reportage of international
concerns. The executions, abductions and other of human rights violations,
including the forced evacuation of rural villages, illegal arrests and
torture that have victimized tens of thousands more civilians blatantly
violate not only the people's constitutional bill of rights and civil
liberties but also international laws and protocols of war of which the
Philippines is a signatory. These incidents likewise ridicule the
internationally-recognized Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human
Rights and International Humanitarian Law (CARHRIHL) signed between the
Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the National Democratic
Front of the Philippines. The agreement was intended to protect the rights
of civilians even with the ongoing conflict and that the civil war
conforms to standards of international humanitarian law.
Broad options
There is a broad range of legal and political courses of action
available in the international community which the victims' families,
rights groups, lawyers and civil libertarians can take to seek redress for
the unmitigated killings including the prosecution of those responsible.
There have been legal precedents under which state governments, prime
ministers and individual generals alleged to have committed war crimes and
crimes against humanity are hailed to an international court or tribunal.
Likewise, political, legal and diplomatic sanctions against a repressive
regime – but not civilians - can be availed upon. A strong world public
opinion sparked by senseless and genocidal killings and supportive of
campaigns against political repression in a country where such barbarism
is taking place has been proven to bring about the ouster of a despot.
Bulatlat
BACK TO
TOP ■
PRINTER-FRIENDLY VERSION ■
COMMENT
© 2006 Bulatlat
■
Alipato Media Center
Permission is granted to reprint or redistribute this article, provided
its author/s and Bulatlat are properly credited and notified.
|
|
|