of the Philippines the criminal justice system is - Article 2

While it is acknowledged that there are certain guidelines regarding the
police’s Special Operating Procedure (SOP), under no circumstances can
the use of force or harm, or indeed the torturing of a person be justified,
as is stipulated in domestic law and in international human rights
standards. The Bill of Rights of the 1987 Philippine Constitution strictly
prohibits the use of torture and the Republic Act 7438 states the many
rights of detainees and persons under custodial investigation.
Furthermore, the Convention against Torture (CAT), to which the
Philippine government has acceded, gives no justification for the use of
torture under any circumstances. These rights entitlement can never be
compromised.
The manner in which Toroctocon is handling the victim’s complaint of
torture against his men is completely biased and inappropriate. By taking
sides and exonerating his men prior to the release of the result of the
investigation by the Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for the Military
and Other Law Enforcement Offices, Toroctocon is no longer acting in an
objective manner, nor in the professional one, which he should. His
failure to impose necessary sanctions and restrictions upon his men, in
particular the elements of Special Weapon and Tactics (Swat), despite the
standing complaints against them is totally unacceptable.
Allegations of torture against elements of the GSCPO are no longer new.
It can be recalled that on 24 April 2002, three persons, namely Jejhon
Macalinsal, Aron Salah and Abubakar Amilhasan were also tortured by
the GSCPO allegedly to force them into admitting an incident of bombing
in a mall. Likewise, on 12 December 2004, another five persons were
arrested and three of them were subsequently tortured by the GSCPO
while being investigated.
To date, none of the policemen from the GSCPO involved in allegedly
torturing persons following their arrest have been prosecuted and
punished. The investigation into the allegations against them did not
reach any conclusive findings nor did it lead to their prosecution in
court. The torture victims, meanwhile, have been forced to face trial to
charges laid against them by way of torture. The police’s repeated abuses
point to the failure by higher authorities to hold them accountable for
past indiscretions.
Buisan’s case is yet another example of the brutal torture and arbitrary
use of power by the local police. Not only was he deprived of his
constitutional right to have his complaint investigated and the
perpetrators prosecuted, but he was also denied appropriate medical
and trauma treatment. Although the concerned authorities, in particular
the regional Commission on Human Rights (CHR XII) is aware of this
case, they have failed to remedy this situation and to afford the victim
with the rights he deserves. It is frightening that although the government
is aware of the torture victim’s present situation they have not been held
accountable for their failings and inaction. Evidently, impunity is rife
within all areas of the law enforcement system in the Philippines.
With this in mind, we call upon all concerned people to pressure the
Philippine government, in particular the House of Representatives and
the Senate to consider as a priority the passage of the proposed law
against torture. The enactment of a domestic legislation on torture in
full conformity with the CAT is a precondition to the protection of human
rights in the Philippines. In a country where torture is not treated as a
crime, victims are deprived of their constitutional and human rights and
are further denied justice when seeking to legally pursue their
perpetrators. This practice must be stopped immediately and those
responsible for committing torture must be held accountable for their
crimes.
“
workers should
be able to do their
jobs without fear of
death—stop the
murders of trade
unionists
” —Calvin Allen,
Scotland
article 2 • February 2007 Vol. 6, No. 1 113