On Valentine’s Day , Feb. 14, 2014, the Office of the Ombudsman ordered an immediate execution of a Preventive Suspension of CHR Commissioner Cecilia Rachel V. Quisumbing without pay for the period of six (6) months pending investigation of cases filed against her. According to the Ombudsman, preventive suspension can be meted if the evidence of guilt is strong and that the charges involved oppression and grave misconduct which may eventually warrant removal from office. The order shall not be un interrupted within the prescribed period notwithstanding appeal, motion of petition that may be filed by Com. Quisumbing.
The Office of the Ombudsman is investigating Com. Quisumbing for administrative and criminal cases which stemmed from a formal complaint filed by Ms. Regina Eugenio last September 24, 2013 against her former employer Com. Quisumbing ( OMB-C-A 13 -0334 : Violation of RA 6713 Sec. 7(d) or Solicitation or Acceptance of Gifts ) and Criminal case (OMB-C-C- 13-0354: Violation of RPC 210- Direct Bribery, RA 3019 Sec 3(b), 3(c), 3 (e) 6713 Sec. 7(d) ) and RA 6713 Sec. 7(d) . The complaints were corroborated by three (3) other former co-personnel of Ms. Eugenio. Com. Coco Preventive Suspension
The Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates (PAHRA) welcomes the long-delayed Presidential announcement of the newly appointed members of the Human Rights Victims’ Claims Board, the formation of which was mandated in Republic Act 10368 - An Act Providing for Reparation and Recognition of Victims of Human Rights Violations During the Marcos Regime, Documentation of Said Violations, Appropriating Funds Therefore and For Other Purposes.
With due respect to President Benigno S. Aquino’s prerogative to appoint the composition of the Claims’ Board, PAHRA would like to point out that President Aquino has overlooked two aspects. One is the vital qualification in appointing the members of the Board, much more to be sought of the Chairperson, as cited in RA 10368, Chapter II, Section 8, that each of the members, among others:Claims Board statement
The Task Force Detainees of the Philippines (TFDP) is forwarding to you an appeal regarding the harassment case involving a human rights defender in the student sector.
Case Title: Quisora HAR
Case: Harassment/Physical Injury
Name of Victim: Ernie Gonzales Quisora
Date of Incident: December 20, 2013
Place of Incident: Marikina Polytechnic College, Marikina City
Alleged Perpetrators: Mr. Joseph Quiles
Motive: One of the Alleged Instigators of Student Protest Action
Account of the Incident:
Ernie Quisora, 20 years of age, of 57 B.G. Malina Street, Parang, a student of Marikina Polytechnic College taking up Industrial Technology Major in Automotive and a Student Council volunteer, suffered minor injuries during a scuffle between him and a college professor.UAA - Harassment Student
URGENT APPEAL - THE OBSERVATORY
BGD 001 / 0813 / OBS 074.4
January 10, 2014
The Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders, a joint programme of the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) and FIDH (the International Federation for Human Rights), has received new information and requests your urgent intervention in the following situation in Bangladesh.
The Observatory has been informed by reliable sources that charges were framed against Messrs. Adilur Rahman Khan and ASM Nasiruddin Elan, respectively Secretary and Director of the human rights non-governmental organisation Odhikar. Mr. Rahman Khan is also a member of OMCT General Assembly.
According to the information received, on January 8, 2014, Messrs. Adilur Rahman Khan and ASM Nasiruddin Elan appeared before the Cyber Crimes Tribunal. Messrs. Khan and Elan’s lawyers requested Judge Shamsul Alam of the Cyber Crimes Tribunal for a discharge of the application under Section 265C of the Code of Criminal Procedure. However, the judge rejected their plea and took into cognisance the Prosecution report/charge sheet submitted by the police on September 11, 2013.update ODHIKAR on cybercrime case
FIDH - International Federation for Human Rights
The ECtHR is increasingly led to examine and deliver decisions on breaches of LGBTI rights in Member States of the Council of Europe. Facing inequalities in status and rights, discrimination, intimidation, persecution and other ill treatments, LGBTI persons are turning to the ECtHR to see their rights recognised and obtain justice. Since 2005, FIDH, through the mechanism of the third-party intervention (« amicus curiae »), intervened in almost 15 cases to support the rights to equity and non-discrimination of LGBTI persons and contribute to the positive development of the Court’s jurisprudence.
"Every person is entitled to equal rights and treatment, regardless of his or her sexual orientation or gender identity. The European Court of Human Rights, in its recent decisions, enabled some important progress, in particular regarding adoption for same-sex couples. We call upon the Court to continue in this direction and to ensure that sexual orientation and gender identity cannot be grounds for discrimination nor persecution" , said Karim Lahidji, FIDH President.
Today, only 15 States in the world, among which 9 are found in Europe, have enabled same-sex couples to have access to civil marriage. 80 States, including one in Europe, continue to criminalise same-sex relations. "Under these conditions, clarification through jurisprudence or legislations, on the rights to equal treatment and non-discrimination remains critical and should be supported" , said Dan Van Raemdonck, FIDH Secretary General.
FIDH intervened as a third-party, alongside partner organisations, in particular ILGA-Europe and the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), on various issues relating to LGBTI rights. It supported the access to adoption for LGBTI persons and underlined that the access to marriage or any other form of legal recognition of same-sex couples should be guaranteed without any form of discrimination. FIDH also welcomes the ECtHR position on the importance of the pinciple of non-discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation in the work place.
Another issue at stake relating to LGBTI rights concerns the rights of asylum seekers. Each Council of Europe Member State has a specific approach to processing requests for asylum from persons who claim they run the risk of being persecuted on the grounds of their sexual orientation in their country of origin. It is important that the Court takes a position in favour of clear, precise and harmonised criteria to evaluate the asylum seeker’s risks of returning to his/her country of origin on the grounds of his/her sexual orientation.