DOCSLIB.ORG

Action Against Torture Action Against Torture

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Action Against Torture Action Against Torture ActionAction against Torture A Practical Guide to the Istanbul Protocol forfor Lawyers in the Philippines NovemberNovember 20072007 This Manual was written by the REDRESS TRUST as Part of the Prevention through Documentation Project, an initiative of the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims (IRCT), the World Medical Association (WMA), the Human Rights Foundation of Turkey (HRFT), and Physicians for Human Rights USA (PHR USA) For further information on this manual, please contact REDRESS at: 87 Vauxhall Walk, London SE11 5HJ Tel: +44 (0)20 7793 1777 Fax: +44 (0)20 7793 1719 [email protected] (general correspondence) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This manual is the outcome of a collaborative effort spanning several years of cooperation and involving lawyers, human rights defenders, doctors and others in the Philippines and elsewhere. REDRESS is especially grateful to all those who have contributed to the drafting of the manual by providing information, comments and/or suggestions, in particular Ellecer E. Carlos, Balay Rehabilitation Center, Inc.; Neri Colmenares, Associate (Asian Law Centre), Faculty of Law, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Maria Socorro I. Diokno, Secretary General, FLAG (Free Legal Assistance Group); Rogel ‘Gil’ Navarro, Chairman, Peace Advocates for Truth, Healing and Justice (PATH); Atty. Soliman Santos; Antonio Villasor, Peace & Human Rights Coordinator, Asian Cultural Forum for Development (ACFOD), as well as David Gates and Varsha Goyal for their research assistance. The manual was written by Lutz Oette, and edited by Carla Ferstman. IINNDDEEXX PART 1: OVERVIEW OF THE ISTANBUL PROTOCOL .......................................... 6 A. INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................................6 B. THE IMPORTANCE OF LEGAL PROFESSIONALS IN THE DOCUMENTATION AND INVESTIGATION OF TORTURE...............................................................................................8 C. THE IMPORTANCE OF MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS IN THE DOCUMENTATION OF TORTURE AND THE NEED FOR LAWYERS TO UNDERSTAND THE MEDICAL SYMPTOMS OF TORTURE..................................................................................................................................8 D. KEY INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS IN THE ISTANBUL PROTOCOL.........................................9 PART 2: GENERAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND PRACTICE OF TORTURE IN THE PHILIPPINES.................................................................................................. 12 A. THE PRACTICE OF TORTURE IN THE PHILIPPINES.................................................................12 B. PROHIBITION AND DEFINITION OF TORTURE IN THE PHILIPPINES......................................13 PART 3: INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS CONTAINED IN THE ISTANBUL PROTOCOL............................................................................................................ 17 A. GENERAL MEASURES OF PREVENTION IN THE PHILIPPINES..............................................17 B. SPECIFIC SAFEGUARDS IN PLACES OF DETENTION AND RIGHTS OF PERSONS DEPRIVED OF THEIR LIBERTY.............................................................................................19 I. SAFEGUARDS DURING ARREST PROCEDURES ...............................................................................................19 II. CUSTODIAL SAFEGUARDS ..................................................................................................................................20 (i) Right to access a lawyer of one’s own choice.........................................................................................................20 (ii) Right to communicate with and notify a third person of detention..........................................................................22 (iii) Right to access a doctor ........................................................................................................................................23 III. FURTHER SAFEGUARDS.....................................................................................................................................25 (i) Challenging the lawfulness of detention..................................................................................................................25 (ii) Lawfulness of confessions extracted under torture................................................................................................27 C. RIGHT TO COMPLAIN AND OBLIGATION TO EFFECTIVELY INVESTIGATE TORTURE ALLEGATIONS........................................................................................................................28 I. International standards.............................................................................................................................................28 II. Legal framework and practice in the Philippines.....................................................................................................29 1. Criminal offences applying in lieu of a specific offence of torture and penalties.....................................................29 2. Right to lodge complaints and to protection ............................................................................................................30 3. Investigating torture allegations "promptly", “impartially” and “effectively”..............................................................32 4. The Role of the Commission on Human Rights ......................................................................................................34 D. PROSECUTION OF ALLEGED PERPETRATORS OF TORTURE AND PUNISHMENT OF THOSE RESPONSIBLE ..........................................................................................................36 I. International standards.............................................................................................................................................36 II. Legal framework and practice in the Philippines.....................................................................................................36 E. RIGHT TO AN EFFECTIVE REMEDY AND REPARATION .........................................................37 1. International standards............................................................................................................................................37 2. Domestic remedial avenues/mechanisms available to torture survivors.................................................................38 2.1. Constitutional Law ................................................................................................................................................38 2.2. Civil Law ...............................................................................................................................................................38 2.3. Criminal Law.........................................................................................................................................................40 2.4. The Board of Claims.............................................................................................................................................41 2.5. Financial assistance provided by the Commission on Human Rights..................................................................43 2.6. Assistance to Victims of Sexual Violence.............................................................................................................45 2.7. Reparation for torture and other serious violations committed during the Marcos regime...................................45 2.8. Findings................................................................................................................................................................46 Effectiveness of remedies................................................................................................................................46 Adequate reparation ........................................................................................................................................46 PART 4: INTERNATIONAL REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO TORTURE SURVIVORS ................................................................................................................................ 46 1. International Human Rights Complaints Procedures ..............................................................................................46 UN Human Rights Committee .........................................................................................................................46 Committee against Torture ..............................................................................................................................50 2. International Human Rights Reporting Procedures.................................................................................................51 UN Committee against Torture........................................................................................................................51 UN Human Rights Committee .........................................................................................................................52 UN Special Rapporteur on Torture ..................................................................................................................53 ADDENDUM: TORTURE BY NON-STATE ACTORS IN THE PHILIPPINES ......... 55 PartPart 1: Overview of the Istanbul Protocol A.A. Introduction Recognising the prevalence of torture in the world
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Access to Remedy Practical Guidance for Companies
    ACCESS TO REMEDY: PRACTICAL GUIDANCE FOR COMPANIES 1 Access to remedy Practical guidance for companies A guide for companies to establish and participate in effective UNGP-informed remedy mechanisms for workers who may be adversely impacted by business operations, products, services or relationships in the entirety of their supply chains Supported by Lead authors: Cindy Berman, Ben Rutledge (ETI), and Samir Goswani. Editing: Katharine Earley Research contributors: Michele Law (Cerno Solutions Ltd), Laura Curtze and Steve Gibbons (Ergon), Dr Aidan McQuade, Jesse Hudson, Mark Winters Photos: ILO, World Bank, Claudia Janke ACCESS TO REMEDY: PRACTICAL GUIDANCE FOR COMPANIES 1 1. Executive Summary 2 2. Overall Guidance 5 3. Ensuring access to remedy in supply chains 6 STEP 1: Take responsibility 6 STEP 2: Provide remedy 9 STEP 3: Assess state-based and other remedy options 14 STEP 4: Develop a corporate remedy strategy 17 4. Developing Operational Grievance Mechanisms (OGMs) 22 A. Considering gender equality in designing OGMs 22 B. Guidance from the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights 22 C. Key factors for consideration 31 5. Country Factors 36 A. Roles and responsibilities of states and companies 36 B. Understanding the local context 36 C. Supporting state justice systems 36 D. Committing to sourcing countries 37 6. ANNEX: Additional Resources 40 ACCESS TO REMEDY: PRACTICAL GUIDANCE FOR COMPANIES 2 1. Executive summary Modern supply chains are complex, multi-tiered and span the globe. Production typically occurs in developing countries, where labour rights policy may not be sufficiently evolved or enforced, and workers may not be able to freely negotiate improved working conditions with their employers.
    [Show full text]
  • Roe V. Leis, Not Reported in F.Supp.2D (2001)
    Roe v. Leis, Not Reported in F.Supp.2d (2001) 2001 WL 1842459 4. If the Medical Director, in consultation with the Only the Westlaw citation is currently available. Area Medical Director, judges that an abortion is United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western therapeutically indicated, the medical care will be Division. arranged following the procedure established at the institution providing specialty care. Jane ROE, et al. Plaintiffs v. Joint Ex. 2. Defendants and their medical contractors Simon L. LEIS, Jr., et al. Defendants have interpreted “therapeutically indicated” to permit abortions only to save the life of the mother. The No. C–1–00–651. | Jan. 10, 2001. Defendants do not provide abortion services within any of their detention facilities. In July 2000, while an inmate at 1617 Reading Road, Opinion Plaintiff Jane Roe advised Defendants that she was pregnant. They promptly transported her to University Hospital, where an ultrasound confirmed her pregnancy. ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR She then requested access to abortion services, which A PERMANENT INJUNCTION Defendants denied. In an August 7, 2000 letter to Ms. Roe’s attorney, Sheriff Leis explained this denial by stating that “the Hamilton County Sheriff’s Office does DLOTT, J. not transport inmates for elective procedures without a court order. Upon receipt of a court order, the Hamilton *1 This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs’ County Sheriff’s [sic ] will transport inmate [Jane Roe] to Motion for a Preliminary Injunction. By agreement of the her chosen health care provider.” Joint Ex. 1. Having parties, the Court will treat this Motion as one for a exhausted her administrative remedies, Ms.
    [Show full text]
  • Case 1:17-Cv-02542-KPF Document 61 Filed 07/26/18 Page 1 of 70
    Case 1:17-cv-02542-KPF Document 61 Filed 07/26/18 Page 1 of 70 USDC SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DOC #: _________________ SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DATE FILED: July______________ 26, 2018 ------------------------------------------------------X : KATE DOYLE, NATIONAL SECURITY : ARCHIVE, CITIZENS FOR : RESPONSIBILITY AND ETHICS IN : WASHINGTON, and KNIGHT FIRST : AMENDMENT INSTITUTE AT COLUMBIA : UNIVERSITY, : : Plaintiffs, : 17 Civ. 2542 (KPF) : v. : OPINION AND ORDER : U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND : SECURITY and EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF : THE PRESIDENT, ; : Defendants. : : ----------------------------------------------------- X KATHERINE POLK FAILLA, District Judge: Plaintiffs Kate Doyle, National Security Archive (“NSA”), Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (“CREW”), and Knight First Amendment Institute (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) initiated this action against the United States Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) and the Executive Office of the President (“EOP,” and with DHS, “Defendants”), after Doyle unsuccessfully attempted to obtain, under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552, records related to visitors of President Trump at the White House Complex, as well as at his properties at Trump Tower, in New York, and Mar-a-Lago, in Florida. The operative complaint brings claims under FOIA, the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. ch. 5, the Federal Record Act (“FRA”), 44 U.S.C. §§ 2102-2118, 2901-2910, 3101-3107, Case 1:17-cv-02542-KPF Document 61 Filed 07/26/18 Page 2 of 70 3301-3324, and the Presidential Records Act (“PRA”), 44 U.S.C. §§ 2201-2209; it seeks injunctive relief and, under the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201-2202, declaratory relief.
    [Show full text]
  • Privacy Remedies
    Indiana Law Journal Volume 94 Issue 2 Article 7 Spring 2019 Privacy Remedies Lauren H. Scholz Florida State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ilj Part of the Privacy Law Commons, Property Law and Real Estate Commons, and the Torts Commons Recommended Citation Scholz, Lauren H. (2019) "Privacy Remedies," Indiana Law Journal: Vol. 94 : Iss. 2 , Article 7. Available at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ilj/vol94/iss2/7 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Indiana Law Journal by an authorized editor of Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PRIVACY REMEDIES LAUREN HENRY SCHOLZ* When consumers sue companies for privacy-intrusive practices, they are often unsuccessful. Many cases fail in federal court at the motion to dismiss phase because the plaintiff has not shown the privacy infringement has caused her concrete harm. This is a symptom of a broader issue: the failure of courts and commentators to describe the relationship between privacy rights and privacy remedies. This Article contends that restitution is the normal measure of privacy remedies. Restitution measures relief by economic gain to the defendant. If a plaintiff can show the likely ability to recover in restitution, that should be sufficient to pass muster at the motion to dismiss phase even if the court is unconvinced that the plaintiff could show a case for compensatory damages flowing from harm.
    [Show full text]
  • The Business Response to Remedying Human Rights Infringements: the Current and Future State of Corporate Remedy
    The business response to remedying human rights infringements: The current and future state of corporate remedy Human Rights Remedy | June 2018 Australian Business Pledge against Forced Labour i Table of contents 1. Executive summary ...................................................................................................................................................... 1 2. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................. 2 2.1 About this Report .................................................................................................................................................. 2 3. Context ......................................................................................................................................................................... 3 3.1 The Remedy Challenge ........................................................................................................................................ 3 4. Existing frameworks and guidance on the provision of remedy ................................................................................... 4 4.1 International Frameworks and Guidance ............................................................................................................. 5 5. Legal Context ..............................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A Popular Strongman Gains More Power by Joseph Purugganan September 2019
    Blickwechsel Gesellscha Umwelt Menschenrechte Armut Politik Entwicklung Demokratie Gerechtigkeit In the Aftermath of the 2019 Philippine Elections: A Popular Strongman Gains More Power By Joseph Purugganan September 2019 The Philippines concluded a high-stakes midterm elections in May 2019, that many consider a critical turning point in our nation’s history. While the Presidency was not on the line, and Rodrigo Duterte himself was not on the ballot, the polls were seen as a referendum on his presidency. Duterte has drawn flak for his deadly ‘War on In midterm elections, voters have historically fa- Drugs’ that has taken the lives of over 5,000 vored candidates backed by a popular incumbent suspects according to official police accounts, and rejected those supported by unpopular ones. but the death toll could be as high as 27,000 ac- In the 2013 midterms for instance, the adminis- cording to the Philippine Commission on Human tration supported by former President Benigno Rights. The administration has also been criti- Aquino III, won 9 out of 12 Senate seats. Like cized for its handling of the maritime conflict Duterte, Aquino had a high satisfaction rating with China in the West Philippine Sea. heading into the midterms. In contrast, a very unpopular Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, with neg- Going into the polls however, Duterte, despite ative net satisfaction ratings, weighed down the all the criticisms at home and abroad, has main- administration ticket. In the Senate race in 2007, tained consistently high popularity and trust the Genuine Opposition coalition was able to se- ratings. The latest survey conducted five months cure eight out of 12 Senate seats, while Arroyo’s ahead of the elections showed the President Team Unity only got two seats and the other two having a 76 percent trust score and an 81 percent slots went to independent candidates.
    [Show full text]
  • ACLU's Opposition to Motion for Preliminary Injunction
    1 Edward W. Swanson (Bar No. CA-159859) [email protected] 2 Carly Bittman (Bar No. CA-305513) [email protected] 3 SWANSON & MCNAMARA LLP 300 Montgomery Street, Suite 1100 4 San Francisco, CA 94104 Tel: (415) 477-3800 5 Fax: (415) 477-9010 6 [ADDITIONAL COUNSEL LISTED ON FOLLOWING PAGE] 7 Attorneys for Defendant 8 CHRISTIAN NOEL PADILLA-MARTEL 9 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 11 PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ) CASE NO. CGC-20-586763 12 by and through Dennis J. Herrera, City Attorney ) for the City and County of San Francisco, ) DEFENDANT CHRISTIAN NOEL 13 ) PADILLA-MARTEL’S OPPOSITION Plaintiff, ) TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR 14 ) PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION vs. 15 ) Date: April 27, 2021 CHRISTIAN NOEL PADILLA-MARTEL aka ) Time: 9:30 a.m. 16 CHRISTIAN PADILLA-MARTEL, an ) Dept: 302 individual, ) Judge: Hon. Ethan P. Schulman 17 ) Defendant. ) Complaint Filed: September 24, 2020 18 ) Trial Date: Not Set ) 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DLA PIPER LLP (US) SAN F RANCISCO 1 DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION CASE NO.: CGC-20-586763 1 David F. Gross (Bar No. CA-83547) [email protected] 2 Robert Nolan (Bar No. CA-235738) [email protected] 3 Mandy Chan (Bar No. CA-305602) [email protected] 4 Katherine Thoreson (Bar No. CA-327443) [email protected] 5 DLA PIPER LLP (US) 555 Mission Street, Suite 2400 6 San Francisco, California 94105-2933 Tel: (415) 836-2500 7 Fax: (415) 836-2501 8 Anne Decker (Bar No.
    [Show full text]
  • Equity Will Not Enjoin a Libel”: Well, Actually, Yes, It Will
    SEVENTH CIRCUIT REVIEW Volume 11, Issue 2 Spring 2016 “EQUITY WILL NOT ENJOIN A LIBEL”: WELL, ACTUALLY, YES, IT WILL ∗ ANN C. MOTTO Cite as: Ann C. Motto, “Equity Will Not Enjoin a Libel”: Well, Actually, Yes, It Will, 11 SEVENTH CIRCUIT REV. 271 (2016), at http://www.kentlaw.iit.edu/Documents /Academic Programs/7CR/11-2/motto.pdf. INTRODUCTION “If there is one amendment, that is literally first among equals, then it is truly the First Amendment.”1 The First Amendment prohibits prior restraints on speech, i.e., judicial suppression of material that would be published or broadcast, on the grounds that it is libelous, defamatory, or harmful.2 However, the imposition of subsequent liability for defamation does not abridge the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment.3 It is this important distinction drawn by the United States Supreme Court—subsequent punishment vs. prior restraint—that denotes the permissible remedies and punishments in a court of law for defamation. One question remains unanswered by the Supreme Court: while the First Amendment allows for after-the-fact punishment for defamation in the form of money damages, or even imprisonment, does the First Amendment permit ∗ J.D., Chicago-Kent College of Law, May 2016. 1 Cailah E. Garfinkel, The Importance of an Independent Judiciary and a Free Press, 22 SUM DEL. LAW. 28 (2004). 2 There are a few exceptions to the prohibition on prior restraint discussed infra Part I. 3 New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 301–02 (1964). 271 SEVENTH CIRCUIT REVIEW Volume 11, Issue 2 Spring 2016 permanent injunctions against published or spoken speech that has been found to be defamatory by a judge or jury? Permanently enjoining defamatory speech is preventing speech before it happens.
    [Show full text]
  • Eu Directive on Legal Aid for Suspects and Accused Persons in Criminal Proceedings and for Requested Persons in European Arrest Warrant Proceedings
    EU DIRECTIVE ON LEGAL AID FOR SUSPECTS AND ACCUSED PERSONS IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AND FOR REQUESTED PERSONS IN EUROPEAN ARREST WARRANT PROCEEDINGS TRANSPOSITION TOOLKIT 1 About Fair Trials Fair Trials is an international human rights organisation with offices in London, Brussels and Washington, D.C., focused on improving the right to a fair trial in accordance with international standards. Our work is premised on the belief that fair trials are one of the cornerstones of a just society: they prevent lives being ruined by miscarriages of justice, and make societies safer by contributing to transparent and reliable justice systems that maintain public trust. Although universally recognised in principle, in practice the basic human right to a fair trial is being routinely abused. Fair Trials’ work combines: (a) helping suspects to understand and exercise their rights; (b) building an engaged and informed network of fair trial defenders (including NGOs, lawyers and academics); and (c) fighting the underlying causes of unfair trials through research, litigation, political advocacy and campaigns. About the Legal Experts Advisory Panel The Legal Experts Advisory Panel (or LEAP) is an EU-wide network of experts in criminal justice and human rights which works to promote fair and effective judicial cooperation within Europe. There are currently over 185 organisational members, with representatives from law firms, CSOs, and academic institutions, covering all 28 EU Member States. Through Fair Trials’ coordination, LEAP is able to offer an expert view on a broad range of EU criminal justice topics, while also boosting cooperation between human rights defenders in crossborder work. LEAP’s importance has been acknowledged by the EU, which has recognised the network’s contribution to EU Justice.
    [Show full text]
  • Victims and Promise of Remedies: International Law Fairytale Gone Bad
    Victims and Promise of Remedies: International Law Fairytale Gone Bad SANJA DJAJIC* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRO D UCTIO N .................................................................................................. 330 ii. REMEDIES IN INTERNATIONAL LAW .................................................................... 330 A. Four-foldStructure of Remedies in InternationalLaw ............................ 330 B. European Human Rights System .............................................................. 333 C. Human Rights Committee and ICCPR ..................................................... 339 D. Committee Against Torture and U.N. Convention A gainst Torture........................................................................................ 34 1 E. GeneralInternational Law: InternationalCourt of Justice and InternationalLaw Commission ............................................. 344 F. Human Rights Commission and U.N. Documents .................................... 350 G. Addressees of the Obligation to Provide Remedy .................................... 353 II1. N ATIONAL COURTS AND REMEDIES .................................................................... 353 A. Damages vs. Specific Performance:Problems in Implementing the CA T View s .......................................................................................... 354 * Assistant Professor of Public International Law, Department for International Law at the University of Novi Sad School of Law (Serbia); Ph.D., University of Novi Sad School of Law (2003), LL.M.,
    [Show full text]
  • In Defense of Implied Injunction Relief in Constitutional Cases
    William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal Volume Volume 22 (2013-2014) Issue 1 Article 2 October 2013 In Defense of Implied Injunction Relief in Constitutional Cases John F. Preis Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj Part of the Courts Commons Repository Citation John F. Preis, In Defense of Implied Injunction Relief in Constitutional Cases, 22 Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 1 (2013), https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol22/iss1/2 Copyright c 2013 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj IN DEFENSE OF IMPLIED INJUNCTIVE RELIEF IN CONSTITUTIONAL CASES John F. Preis * ABSTRACT If Congress has neither authorized nor prohibited a suit to enforce the Constitution, may the federal courts create one nonetheless? At present, the answer mostly turns on the form of relief sought: if the plaintiff seeks damages, the Supreme Court will nor- mally refuse relief unless Congress has specifically authorized it; in contrast, if the plaintiff seeks an injunction, the Court will refuse relief only if Congress has specifi- cally barred it. These contradictory approaches naturally invite arguments for reform. Two common arguments—one based on the historical relationship between law and equity and the other based on separation of powers principles—could quite foreseeably combine to end implied injunctive relief as we know it. In this Article, I defend the federal courts’ power to issue injunctions in con- stitutional cases without explicit congressional authorization—a practice known as “implying” a suit for relief.
    [Show full text]
  • FINAL REPORT of the NATIONAL FACT-FINDING and SOLIDARITY MISSION in NEGROS ORIENTAL, PHILIPPINES April 4-8, 2019
    FINAL REPORT OF THE NATIONAL FACT-FINDING AND SOLIDARITY MISSION IN NEGROS ORIENTAL, PHILIPPINES April 4-8, 2019 CONTEXT On March 30, 2019, between 2:00am to 5:30am, fourteen (14) persons were killed by State security forces during their operations in Canlaon City, Manjuyod, and Sta. Catalina towns in Negros Oriental province in the Philippines. At least fifteen (15) persons were also reportedly arrested in the said localities, according to relatives of the victims and peasant organizations in the province. In a report by Bombo Radyo Cebu, the PNP Region 7 said that it launched its Simultaneous Enhanced Managing Police Operations (SEMPO) or Oplan Sawron in Negros Oriental. Central Visayas Police Regional Office (PRO-7) Chief Debold Sinas said that the police served 37 search warrants to “various personalities due to illegal possession of firearms.” He also said that they were able to serve 31 search warrants; 14 were killed when these personalities resisted arrests, while 12 others were arrested.1 In another article, Sinas also reportedly said that those who were killed were members of the CPP-NPA and that the 14 refused to surrender and engaged the police in a shoot-out. “They really fought. Even in Oplan Sauron Part 1, there was a directive from the top leadership of the rebels to fight it out with the police. They were not ready to surrender because they were hardcore rebels,” Sinas said.2 On April 1, 2019, PNP Chief Oscar Albayalde and Presidential Spokesperon Salvador Panelo said that these are legitimate police operations.3 1 http://www.bomboradyo.com/14-killed-12-arrested-in-series-of-pnp-operation-in-negros-oriental/ 2 https://www.philstar.com/the-freeman/cebu-news/2019/03/31/1906104/negros-oriental-14-rebels-dead 3 http://cnnphilippines.com/news/2019/4/1/pnp-probe-negros-oriental-operation-not-massacre.html 1 The mass killings and illegal arrests of farmers in Negros Oriental are the latest of the attacks against human rights defenders and of the long list of human rights violations documented under the Duterte administration.
    [Show full text]