Speech - National Consultative Summit on Extrajudicial Killings and Enforced Disappearances Searching for Solutions
July 16, 2007

WORKING OUTLINE PROPOSALS FOR THE NATIONAL CONSULTATIVE SUMMIT ON EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLINGS AND ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCES – SEARCHING FOR SOLUTIONS
JULY 16-17, MANILA HOTEL

It is the position of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines that we will be very active in addressing the issue of extrajudicial killings and the protection of our people’s civil, political, social and economic rights.

We believe that “No person shall be eliminated because of his beliefs political, religious or otherwise.”

We likewise believe that:

“The government has no moral and legal authority to prevent people from expressing their beliefs that are perceived as atrocious to or against the policies of government.”

It is my advocacy that the IBP will be at the forefront in defending the people’s liberties enshrined in the Constitution.

In the Report of the Melo Commission, the following recommendations were made, the salient features of which covers:

A. Political Will
B. Investigation
C. Prosecution
D. Protection of Witnesses
E. Special Law for Strict Chain-of-Command Responsibility
F. Enhancement of investigative capabilities of the PNP & NBI, and
G. Proper orientation & training of security forces

Given these recommendations, it is incumbent upon this conference to analyze the same, determine its relevance and adopt the necessary means to remedy this phenomenon.

In this regard, the IBP cognizant of its mandate of assisting in the administration of justice commit itself to this endeavor.

I firmly believe that the extrajudicial killings is a manifestation of lack of confidence in the judicial system, and to remedy this situation, the Supreme Court issued on 1 March 2007 Administrative Order No. 25-2007, entitled “Designation of Special Courts to Hear, Try and Decide Cases involving Killings of Political Activists and Members of Media,” designating 99 regional trial courts across the country.

Corollary to this action of the Supreme Court, the IBP intends to help in the prosecution of these cases.

The task that lies ahead is awesome but with the sincere effort and cooperation of the Bar & the Bench I am confident that we can make a breakthrough thereby help in stamping out this malady which is slowly eroding the people’s confidence in the judicial system.

In today’s summit, I came here to submit our proposals in two areas of concern.

1.) Prosecution of offenses; and
2.) Proper orientation and training of security forces.

PROSECUTION

It has been recommended by the Melo Commission that to ensure that those responsible for the extrajudicial execution of activists and media people are brought to justice and that the prosecution is handled with efficiency and dispatch , the Department of Justice must create a special team of competent and well-trained prosecutors to handle the trial of said cases. Also, the Department of Justice should request the Supreme Court to designate special courts to try and hear said cases and to require the courts so designated to give the highest priority to them, conduct daily hearings and resolve them within 6 months.

This has been answered by the Suopreme Court when it issued Administrative Order No. 25-2007.

I am not sure if the Department of Justice has created a special team of competent and well trained prosecutors to handle the trial of cases; but as far as the IBP is concerned, we will endeavor to provide lawyers, through the legal aid committee of every IBP chapter in the country, to handle these cases.

PROPER ORIENTATION AND TRAINING OF SECURITY FORCES

According to the Melo Report the failure of the proper and accountable officers to prosecute, investigate, or punish criminal acts by their subordinates stems from lack of proper understanding and emphasis on the present concept of command responsibility.

To address this concern, the IBP will coordinate with AFP/Police authorities in conducting seminars, orientations and training for mid- to high ranking officers to make them conscious of the prevailing doctrines of command responsibility and the ramifications thereof. This will hopefully foster responsibility and accountability among the offices concerned, as well as the men in command. This is to give a legal perspective to the problem.

Let me close by saying that the effectiveness of a democratic system of government in safeguarding human rights lies in its institutions. Salient among these institutions is the existence of a constitution which provide for a bill of rights, free and competitive elections run by an independent and reliable commission on elections, the existence of the doctrine of separation of powers between the co-equal branches of the government, an independent judiciary, accountability of public officers, an independent media free from coercion and corrupting influence and the vigilance of its citizenry.

END