Extrajudicial Killings

The human rights situation in the Philippines remains dire amid extrajudicial killings, attacks against political activists and
journalists, and abuses committed during the armed conflict with the 54-year-old communist insurgency. The
government has increasingly constricted democratic space by using the justice system to target leftist activist groups.

Nonetheless, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s measured rhetoric about human rights is a stark contrast to the
unabashedly anti-rights positions of his predecessor, Rodrigo Duterte, whose catastrophic “war on drugs” killed
thousands. In several international forums, Marcos has affirmed his administration’s commitment to human rights. The
government has likewise begun engaging more openly with international actors, for example, by inviting UN human
rights experts to the country.

The Philippine government still refuses to cooperate with the investigation of the International Criminal Court (ICC) into
possible crimes against humanity committed in the context of Duterte’s “drug war” and when Duterte was mayor of
Davao City. In January 2023, the ICC’s pre-trial chamber authorized the Office of the Prosecutor to resume its
investigation following a request by the Philippine government to defer the inquiry to national authorities. The
government appealed, contending that the ICC judges erred by dismissing Manila’s position that the court no longer has
jurisdiction over the situation in the Philippines after its withdrawal from the court’s founding treaty took effect in
March 2019. In July 2023, the ICC appeals chamber confirmed the prosecutor’s resumption of the investigation, paving
the way for the next step toward justice for the thousands of victims of extrajudicial killings and their families in the
government’s “war on drugs.”

Extrajudicial Killings

Marcos has not ended Duterte’s “drug war.” Law enforcement officers and their agents continue to conduct raids using
the former president’s orders as justification. The official “drug war” death toll from July 1, 2016, to May 31, 2022, is
6,252; unidentified gunmen murdered thousands more. The Philippine government has not updated its statistics since
May 2022.

While the killings have significantly dropped overall since Marcos took office on June 30, 2022, they have continued.
According to monitoring by the University of the Philippines Third World Studies Center, more drug-related killings
occurred in the first year of the Marcos administration than in the Duterte administration’s final year. As of November
15, 471 people have been killed in drug-related violence under Marcos, perpetrated both by law enforcers and
unidentified assailants. Most of these cases, as with the previous ones, remain uninvestigated. In Davao City, a hotspot
of drug-related killings according to the University of the Philippines’ data, police have perpetrated most killings.

Many extrajudicial killings have taken place in the context of political violence, particularly linked to elections. On March
4, ex-military men stormed the residence of Negros Oriental governor Roel Degamo and killed him and nine others. A
political rival has been implicated in the massacre, which is the worst incident of political violence in the Philippines
since the Maguindanao Massacre in 2009.

Journalists have also been targeted, with 4 killed so far under Marcos, bringing the death toll since 1986, when
democracy was restored, up to 177. The latest fatality reported was Cresenciano Bunduquin, a broadcaster in Oriental
Mindoro province who was gunned down on May 31. The killing in October 2022 of popular radio commentator Percy
Mabasa remains unsolved.

Insurgency-related killings have noticeably worsened, particularly on the island of Negros, which has long been a hotbed
of the communist movement. In June, a couple and their two children were killed by gunmen in Negros Occidental;
relatives and witnesses said the military had earlier accused the couple of working for the communist New People’s
Army (NPA).

The security forces have also killed children during operations. In August, police shot dead Jemboy Baltazar, 17;
witnesses alleged the police claimed Baltazar had illegal drugs to justify the shooting. Also in August, a police officer shot
dead John Frances Ompad, also 17.

Attacks on Activists, Unionists, and Journalists

Incidents of “red-tagging” by the authorities and government supporters and pro-government media continued. Getting
red-tagged is often a prelude to physical attack, raising fears among activists and constricting democratic space.
Government actors have red-tagged activists, unionists, environment defenders, Indigenous leaders, teachers, students,
and journalists.

In May, the hosts of a pro-government TV program accused the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines and its
chair, Jonathan de Santos, of working with communist insurgents. In June, several activists and environmental defenders
in the northern Philippines sought protection from the Supreme Court after they were red-tagged by the military and
the police. Some victims of red-tagging are bringing lawsuits in response: In July, Carol Araullo, a longtime leftist activist,
sued the hosts of a pro-government TV show for red-tagging her and her family. In September, her son, journalist Atom
Araullo, also brought a case.

In some cases, the red-tagging has turned into “terrorist”-tagging, with the government using the country’s harsh and
overbroad Anti-Terror Act to target civil society organizations, accusing them of terrorist financing. In September, the
military filed a complaint against CERNET, a nongovernmental organization (NGO) in the central Philippines, for allegedly
providing funds to the New People’s Army, a charge the group denied.

The targeting of unions and labor activists was the focus of a high-level mission of the International Labour Organization
in January. The mission denounced red-tagging and other forms of harassment against trade unionists. In April,
President Marcos signed Executive Order 23, which promises protection to workers and respect for their right to
organize.

There was some good news, however. Former senator Leila de Lima, a prominent political prisoner and staunch human
rights activist, was released in November after a court granted her bail in the last drug case filed against her by the
Duterte administration. She was arrested and detained nearly seven years ago on bogus drug charges. In September, a
Manila court acquitted Nobel Peace Prize laureate and Rappler CEO Maria Ressa of tax evasion charges, leaving two
cases pending in courts against her and her colleagues.

Enforced Disappearances

Enforced disappearances remain a persistent human rights violation in the Philippines. Two infamous enforced
disappearance cases—of peasant activist Jonas Burgos in 2007 and two University of the Philippines students, Karen
Empeno and Sherlyn Cadapan, in 2006—remain unresolved.

In January, labor rights activists Dyan Gumanao and Armand Dayoha were abducted in broad daylight at a port in Cebu
City. They surfaced a few days later and accused the police of kidnapping them and mistreating them.

In April, activists Gene Roz Jamil “Bazoo” de Jesus and Dexter Capuyan were allegedly abducted by government
operatives in Taytay, just southeast of Manila. They remain missing.

In September, two environmental activists, Jonila Castro and Jhed Tamano, went missing. The government later publicly
presented them and claimed that they were NPA fighters who had surrendered. But the two activists, during a
government-organized press conference, said that the military had abducted them.

Key International Actors

Despite ongoing serious abuses and the lack of accountability, the Philippines continue to benefit from the European
Union’s Generalised Scheme of Preferences Plus (GSP+), which grants tariff preferences for exports to the EU market
conditioned on the country’s compliance with 27 rights conventions.

In an April visit to Manila, EU Special Representative for Human Rights Eamon Gilmore highlighted shortcomings in the
Philippines’ compliance with its GSP+ human rights obligations and stressed that “doing business with the EU means
addressing human rights issues.” Members of the European Parliament also remained highly critical of the Philippines’
rights record and questioned its eligibility for the GSP+ program.

In August, EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen visited Manila and praised the Marcos administration for
“improving” the human rights situation in the country. Von der Leyen announced the resumption of negotiations for a
bilateral free trade agreement, which had been frozen under Duterte due to human rights abuses. In November, the EU
released a report on the human rights situation in the Philippines, as required under the GSP+ program, which
highlighted major rights shortcomings and emphasized the need for progress.

The UN Joint Program (UNJP), created in 2020, has continued to build the capacity of accountability mechanisms in the
country. Although it has trained law enforcement officers on proper methods to investigate rights abuses, particularly
extrajudicial killings, the UNJP has had little impact because of the Covid-19 pandemic and initial lack of cooperation
from the Philippine government.

The UNJP’s mandate will end in July 2024. If extended, the program needs monitoring and reporting mechanisms.

After eight years of negotiations, in April, the United States Biden administration signed an enhanced cooperation
agreement with the Philippines to fund and provide rapid support to respond to humanitarian, climate, and “other
shared challenges.” In October, the US and the Philippines held two weeks of military exercises amid rising tensions with
China over the territory of the South China Sea.
HUMAN RIGHTS

Section 17. (1) There is hereby created an independent office called the Commission on Human Rights.

(2) The Commission shall be composed of a Chairman and four Members who must be natural-born citizens of the
Philippines and a majority of whom shall be members of the Bar. The term of office and other qualifications and
disabilities of the Members of the Commission shall be provided by law.

(3) Until this Commission is constituted, the existing Presidential Committee on Human Rights shall continue to exercise
its present functions and powers.

(4) The approved annual appropriations of the Commission shall be automatically and regularly released.

Section 18. The Commission on Human Rights shall have the following powers and functions:

(1) Investigate, on its own or on complaint by any party, all forms of human rights violations involving civil and political
rights;

(2) Adopt its operational guidelines and rules of procedure, and cite for contempt for violations thereof in accordance
with the Rules of Court;

(3) Provide appropriate legal measures for the protection of human rights of all persons within the Philippines, as well as
Filipinos residing abroad, and provide for preventive measures and legal aid services to the underprivileged whose
human rights have been violated or need protection;

(4) Exercise visitorial powers over jails, prisons, or detention facilities;

(5) Establish a continuing program of research, education, and information to enhance respect for the primacy of human
rights;

(6) Recommend to Congress effective measures to promote human rights and to provide for compensation to victims of
violations of human rights, or their families;

(7) Monitor the Philippine Government’s compliance with international treaty obligations on human rights;

(8) Grant immunity from prosecution to any person whose testimony or whose possession of documents or other
evidence is necessary or convenient to determine the truth in any investigation conducted by it or under its authority;

(9) Request the assistance of any department, bureau, office, or agency in the performance of its functions;

(10) Appoint its officers and employees in accordance with law; and
(11) Perform such other duties and functions as may be provided by law.

Section 19. The Congress may provide for other cases of violations of human rights that should fall within the authority
of the Commission, taking into account its recommendations.

Right to life, liberty, and security of person

The right to life, liberty, and security of a person is a fundamental human right. It guarantees every person the right to
live free from any form of violence or abuse. The Philippine Constitution prohibits arbitrary arrest and detention,
torture, and extrajudicial killing. The country has laws and institutions in place to protect individuals from these abuses,
such as the Anti-Torture Act of 2009, the Human Security Act of 2007, and the Commission on Human Rights.

Right to due process of law

The right to due process of law is the right to a fair trial, the presumption of innocence, and the right to legal
representation. The Philippine legal system ensures that individuals are not subject to unfair treatment by the state. The
country has established courts and other legal institutions that guarantee that individuals can defend themselves in
court and are protected against arbitrary actions by the state.

Right to freedom of expression

The right to freedom of expression includes the freedom of speech, press, assembly, and association. It allows
individuals to express themselves freely without fear of reprisal. The Philippine Constitution guarantees these freedoms,
and there are laws and institutions in place to protect individuals who exercise them, such as the Human Rights Victims
Reparation and Recognition Act of 2013 and the Freedom of Information Act of 2016.

Right to privacy

The right to privacy guarantees individuals the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures and to keep
personal information confidential. The Philippine Constitution protects these rights, and there are laws and institutions
in place to enforce them, such as the Data Privacy Act of 2012 and the Anti-Wiretapping Law.

Right to equal protection of the law

The right to equal protection of the law guarantees that all individuals are treated equally under the law, regardless of
race, gender, religion, or other characteristics. The Philippine Constitution prohibits discrimination, and there are laws
and institutions in place to enforce this principle, such as the Magna Carta of Women and the Anti-Discrimination Act.

Legal remedies for human rights violations

If you believe that your human rights have been violated in the Philippines, there are legal remedies available to you.
You can file a complaint with the Commission on Human Rights, an independent government agency tasked with
protecting human rights. You can also seek legal assistance from a lawyer or a human rights organization, such as Human
Rights Watch and Amnesty International.

Conclusion

It is crucial to know your rights and assert them when necessary. By doing so, you can help ensure that your freedoms
are protected and that those who violate your rights are held accountable. Protecting human rights is essential to
promoting a just and equitable society in the Philippines. It is our duty to respect and uphold human rights, for the
benefit of ourselves and future generations.