uphold, assert and defend all human rights for all!
uphold, assert and defend all human rights for all!
Nearly all men can stand adversity,
but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power.
-Abraham Lincoln
Secretary Jesse Robredo is laid to rest. Good governance standards had been raised. Secretary Robredo’s “tsinelas” leadership and example empowered and is empowering people, especially the vulnerable and the marginalized, to hold accountable political leaders who give them less service and to make the latter restless in their political tenure. His governance was noted for the broadest participation, with transparency and accountability. His conduct of public service revealed his character as humble, sincere and self-less. And he molded power accordingly. Secretary Robredo lifted to a new level the fulfilling of the State obligation of giving utmost priority to uphold human dignity as contained in the 1987 Constitution (Section 11, Article II,). The coming elections present an opportunity to multiply Robredo-like good governance and leadership.
It is thus odious to have a government official arrogate to oneself powers beyond that which has been provided for in the Constitution. It is also revolting that Sulu Governor S.A. Tan vested upon himself through his Proclamation No. 1the calling-out powers provided by the Constitution exclusively to the Chief Executive, the President of the Republic of the Philippines.
It must be recalled that Gov. Tan issued on August 2009 Proclamation No. 1 declaring a State of Emergency in the whole of Sulu in the context of the kidnapping of three staff members of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) by the Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG) in Patikul, Sulu. With the concurrence of the territorial commands of both the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and the Philippine National Police (PNP), Gov. Tan set up and deployed the Civilian Emergency Forces (CEF).
By its silence the then administration of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo in effect did nothing to restrain and to review the actions of Gov. Tan. Instead of applying extraordinary due diligence out of command responsibility for the act and consequences of Proc. No. 1, President Arroyo, as Chief Executive and Commander-in-Chief of the AFP, abetted a culture of impunity and exacerbated an already coercive environment.
Civilian human rights defenders, led by Temogen “Cocoy” Tulawie, filed a petition at the Supreme Court questioning the Constitutionality of Proclamation No. 1 so as to prevent abuses against civil rights. Unfortunately, Cocoy Tulawie fell victim to that Proclamation against which he wanted to protect others.
In Justice’s own time, the Supreme Court (SC) en banc, on July 3, 2012, decided with finality, after answering the objections of Gov. Tan and co-implementors of Proclamation No. 1, and unequivocably stated:
Judgment is rendered commanding respondents to desist from further proceedings in implementing Proclamation No. 1, Series of 2009, and its Implementing Guidelines. The said proclamation and guidelines are hereby declared NULL and VOID for having been issued in grave abuse of discretion, amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. (emphasis by the Supreme Court)
SO ORDERED.
It must be made known to all in Sulu and to all human rights defenders that according to the Supreme Court:
… respondent provincial governor is not endowed with the power to call upon the armed forces at his own bidding. In issuing the assailed proclamation, Governor Tan exceeded his authority when he declared a state of emergency and called upon the Armed Forces, the police, and his own Civilian Emergency Force. The calling-out powers contemplated under the Constitution is exclusive to the President. An exercise by another official, even if he is the local chief executive, is ultra vires, and may not be justified by the invocation of Section 465 of the Local Government Code, as will be discussed subsequently.
What now is to be done about the adverse consequences in implementing Proclamation No. 1, such as harassments, arrests and detentions due to allegedly trumped up charges like that of Temogen “Cocoy” Tulawie?
PAHRA believes that it is of utmost importance that the Supreme Court Decision becomes an educative material on human rights and the rule of law not only for the entire constituency of Sulu but for all so that the people’s basic rights to freedom of expression, of assembly and of the press would be upheld and protected. This is especially relevant that as we remember the 40th year since Martial Law and its repressive martial rule.
In fact, it is stated in the SC Decision:
Moreover, the Court has the duty to formulate guiding and controlling constitutional precepts, doctrines or rules. It has the symbolic function of educating the bench and the bar, and in the present petitions, the military and the police, on the extent of the protection given by constitutional guarantees. (emphasis by the SC while the underlining is ours)
Rectification and reparation to victims of Proclamation No. 1 are to be done if justice and the rule of law are to prevail. Involved holders of political and military power are to respond so that repetition of similar arrogation of power is prevented. Failure to do so is to abet impunity.
PAHRA, among others, calls on the Human Rights Offices of both the AFP and the PNP to take initiative in immediately investigating and documenting the alleged violations committed during the implementation of Proclamation No. 1 so as to exact accountability which is an integral step to obtain restorative justice.
PAHRA calls on the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) to protect the victims and the witnesses to human rights violations during the implementation of Proclamation No.1.
