of the Philippines the criminal justice system is - Article 2

Although Task Force Usig has publicly recognised that it has a problem with
cooperation by witnesses and relatives of victims, it has not yet recognised that
the reason for this is the lack of effective witness protection in the Philippines. In
fact the failing undermines the country’s entire judicial system. The government
and Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines too have publicly accepted
that these killings are a “gross violation of rights” and a “failure of the justice
system” without making this connection, and taking steps to remedy the situation
by legislative and judicial means.
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) recalls the recommendations of
the UN Human Rights Committee in its concluding observations on the Philippines’
compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in
December 2003. The Committee clearly stipulated that, “The State party
[Philippines] should adopt legislative and other measures to prevent... violations,
in keeping with articles 2, 6 and 9 of the Covenant, and ensure effective
enforcement of the legislation” (para. 8a). This means giving witness protection
as stipulated under the existing law, and through constant application of the law,
improvements in procedures and measures as necessary.
Without witness protection there can be no fight against impunity. A legal system
that promotes justice but does not set in place the means to protect witnesses is a
fraud. When victims of human rights abuses understand this, naturally they do
not come forward to assert their rights against the perpetrators. No attempt is
even begun to make complaints and assert rights. The victims remain silent,
inert and fearful. If fear prevails, evidence cannot be collected. When evidence is
not collected, the courts either do not take up cases or dismiss the charges against
the accused, as the judge can only consider what is brought before the court. In
this manner, the perpetrators of torture, extrajudicial killings and forced
disappearances routinely escape justice...
Protecting witnesses is a duty of the state. This is a fundamental and globallyestablished
principle. Where the state declines to protect witnesses, it denies
justice to society. The state must find the people, money and means to do this. A
state that talks about witness protection but does not allocate funds and resources
for that purpose fails in its duty. But the real problem in setting up a witness
protection programme is not money; it is about the place of witness protection in
state policy. Where the importance of protecting witnesses to obtain justice is
understood and articulated, an authority to give effect to this policy can be quickly
established and developed. There are many available resources for such work
these days. Where witness protection is limited or non-existent it is primarily a
question of understanding and official will. This is the real problem that now faces
Task Force Usig...
Forming a task force is one thing, going to the root problem is another. While Task
Force Usig is a welcome initiative, it will be meaningless unless accompanied by
a firm effort to provide witness protection. Task forces come and go, but the unsolved
killings continue. The task force set up to look into the murder of human rights
lawyer Norman Bocar on 1 September 2005, for instance, has not made any progress
for the same reason that no other cases have been resolved: the failure to recognise
witness protection as the precondition to effective investigations and fair trial.
The credibility of Task Force Usig depends upon it starting by recognising and
addressing this primary obstacle to justice for the victims of killings in the
Philippines...
16
article 2 • February 2007 Vol. 6, No. 1