‘Ridiculous,’ SC says on drug war records as ‘national security’

Several times, President Rodrigo Duterte has proudly taken responsibility for the killings in his bloody campaign against illegal drugs. It goes without saying, therefore, that the prosecution of the drug-related killings would have to reach his level.

If he thinks that citing “national security” will save him and the top officials who implemented his war on drugs, including his first police chief, now Sen. Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa, from being accountable for all those killings, he is wrong.

The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) already used that line in the 2018 case of Aileen Almora, et al. Vs. Director General Ronald Dela Rosa, et al./Sr. Ma. Juanita R. Daño, et al. Vs. The Philippine National Police, et al. and the Supreme Court vehemently rejected it.
The Supreme Court’s words: “It is simply ridiculous to claim that these information and documents on police operations against drug pushers and users involve national security matter.”

In his Talk to the People last May 31, Duterte lengthily defended the Philippine National Police in refusing to make public records of police operations in the war on drugs.

He said: “Now this is really a lesson for the human rights; everyday until now nandiyan ‘yan. I suggest that you go to the police and look into the records of these deaths. Now gusto ninyong kunin, may — hindi namin maibigay lahat not because we are hiding some facts that [are] known to us, unknown to you. Eh kasali na dito ‘yong — eh national security issue ‘to eh kagaya rin ng mga NPA. We have records that those who have died but who have derogatory records in our files and may mga references sila na tao and what they do, we cannot divulge it to anybody but only to the military and to the police.”

He said he himself has not asked for it. “I do not even know kung sino ‘yang mga ‘yan. I do not ask [for] it and I do not bother to really go out of my way knowing because kasali ako sa mga tao na hindi alam. What I get is the result of the operations. But as to the basis and to the people involved and suspects and ‘yong mga references nila at ‘yong mga sources ng information, this cannot be revealed,” he added.

He further said: “As a matter of fact, ang sinabi ko itong mga pulis o military who perform their duties and had to kill their adversaries, lalo na sa droga pati itong mga NPA, hindi ho namin puwede ibigay lahat. You can go into the… maybe query as to how the battle was fought, how the gunfight started. But pero kung sabihin mo what prompted the police and the military to go into this kind of operation based on their reports and collated mga dossier, hindi ho ninyo puwedeng pakialaman ‘yan. Truth — as a matter of fact, sabihin ko totoo ‘yan. Maski tanungin ninyo, ni hindi ako minsan nagtanong kung ano-ano ‘yan.It’s because I know that it’s just confidential. And kung hindi nila ipresenta sa akin, I do not ask for it.
“Kaya ako mismo hindi naka — nakakakita ng mga records na ‘yan. And I can understand when the military and the police would withhold them kasi hindi talaga dapat malaman ninyo. Iyan ang na … you know … hindi dito sabihin mo na public documents. “
It is Duterte’s choice if he is not interested to see the documentation of the killings based on his orders. But the public should not be prevented from knowing the truth.
The Supreme Court was very clear about this when the OSG refused to submit documents demanded by the relatives of the victims which include, among others, list of persons killed in legitimate police operations from July 1, 2016 to Nov. 30, 2018; list of deaths under investigation from July 1, 2016 to November 30, 2017; list of Chinese and Fil-Chinese drug lords who have been neutralized; and, list of drugs involved, whether shabu, cocaine, marijuana, or opioids.
The OSG unilaterally categorized the documents and claimed that those under Category 1 “contain very sensitive information with law enforcement and national security implications.”

The Supreme Court reprimanded the OSG, saying it “cannot unilaterally arrogate to itself the power to determine which documents it should furnish petitioners.”

The High Court also reminded the OSG of its earlier Resolution that “the requested information and documents do not obviously involve state secrets affecting national security.”

“The information and documents relate to routine police operations involving violations of laws against the sale or use of illegal drugs. There is no showing that the country’s territorial integrity, national sovereignty, independence, or foreign relations will be compromised or prejudiced by the release of these information and documents to this Court or even to the public. These information and documents do not involve rebellion, invasion, terrorism, espionage, infringement of our sovereignty or sovereign rights by foreign powers, or any military, diplomatic or state secret involving national security,“ it added.

The High Court declared: “It is simply ridiculous to claim that these information and documents on police operations against drug pushers and users involve national security matter.”

Ridiculous, indeed!

***

This column appeared also in ABS-CBN online and VERA Files

Why does DOJ need PNP consent to probe cops in drug war?

Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra is very grateful and called it a “very significant milestone” because it “did not happen in previous years.”

This is no different from President Duterte thanking China for allowing Filipino fishermen to fish in the area of Scarborough Shoal, a Philippine territory. But that’s another topic that requires a separate discussion.

This so-called “very significant milestone” came after a meeting with newly installed PNP chief Gen. Guillermo Eleazar who said this is being done to dispel allegations that they are hiding facts on the killings from the public to protect the law enforcers involved in carrying out Duterte’s brutal banner program that has elicited international concern and condemnation.

No one is biting the bait, especially the families of the victims and their lawyers.

Not Joel Butuyan of Centerlaw, which represents families of the victims of the drug war in 28 barangays in San Andres Bukid.

Butuyan said: “The fact that the PNP’s consent is required for the DOJ to investigate the deaths in the hands of policemen is in itself anomalous.”

“The DOJ is supposed to have unobstructed leeway to conduct investigations when deaths occur in the hands of policemen. In fact, under DOJ rules, when death occurs during a police investigation, the police are required to submit all relevant documents to the prosecutors and the prosecutors are mandated to conduct a preliminary investigation. So, all deaths in the hands of policemen should have been investigated by the DOJ, and the police should submit all documents, not just the 61 deaths in question,” he added.

The 61 cases constitute less than 1% of the more than 7,000 that the government uses as the number of deaths during police anti-illegal drugs operations. Human rights advocates say the numbers could be higher.

The 61 cases, Guevarra said, had been reviewed and evaluated by the PNP Internal Affairs Service which had found administrative/criminal liability on the part of law enforcement agents.

Edre Olalia, secretary general of the National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers (NUPL)-Philippines that also represents several families of victims of Duterte’s drug war, is wary that “it might be another tokenistic and cynical mirage, a puny, even if sincere, desire at real institutional reforms that actually go far beyond them alone.”

He said victims, families and witnesses in the so-called drug war and rights advocates “cannot be euphoric at this supposed shift.”

“With grounded disbelief, they should see it for what it might be: a finger to plug the hole in the dam i.e. to deflect and dissipate overwhelming criticisms over the lack of immediate, fair and comprehensive accountability,” he said in a statement.

“That only 61 cases are currently seen with ‘clear liability’ out of the thousands of cases that are supposedly within the purview of the drug war panel review is simply incredible and scanty when seen in the context of the records, experience and reality over time,” he noted.

“The disclosure of the records, given the inordinate delay, the hemming and hedging, the issues of transparency, impartiality and independence, and the insultingly petty number to be made available, may even eventually validate the view that it may have been sanitized and cherry picked to be used as possible ‘showcases,’ inconclusive or not emblematic as they may turn out to be,” Olalia said.

The international Human Rights Watch describes the PNP-DOJ collaboration as “a breakthrough” while noting that Metro Manila police chief Eleazar was a key enforcer of Duterte’s drug war.

With only five months before his retirement, HRW said: “If Eleazar is serious about these reforms, he should ensure the police’s full cooperation with investigators into the ‘drug war’ killings and take more concrete steps to hold abusive officers accountable.”

Families of drug-war related extra-judicial killings had long ago demanded access to police records of the operation but were denied despite repeated orders from the Supreme Court.

Finally in May 2019, the PNP and the Office of the Solicitor General submitted to the High Court 289 compact discs supposedly containing information on the 20,322 drug-related deaths as mentioned in the government’s 2017 Accomplishment Report.

But the documents turned out to be “rubbish,” CenterLaw said, as discs contained irrelevant non-drug related cases like a “love triangle” in which the suspect was the live-in partner who got jealous of the deceased victim and a killing caused by a misunderstanding over a videoke song.

CenterLaw accused the PNP and OSG of resorting to “underhanded machinations.”

“What the OSG and PNP virtually want is for the Supreme Court and the petitioners to utterly waste valuable time and resources examining case files which are totally irrelevant and, in fact, absolutely rubbish insofar as the instant cases are concerned,” it said.

The timing of this PNP-DOJ cooperation makes us suspicious that it is more for the consumption of the International Criminal Court (ICC) that is expected to release its decision on the result of the preliminary examination of the situation in the Philippines before Chief Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda retires on June 15.

The ICC, in its website, states: “Specifically, it has been alleged that since 1 July 2016, thousands of persons have been killed for reasons related to their alleged involvement in illegal drug use or dealing. While some of such killings have reportedly occurred in the context of clashes between or within gangs, it is alleged that many of the reported incidents involved extra-judicial killings in the course of police anti-drug operations.”

Once the ICC decides to open an investigation, investigators would start collecting evidence. Summons would be issued. Refusal to cooperate could lead to issuance of warrants of arrest and freezing of assets.

The Rome Statute that created the ICC provides that it is the duty of every state to exercise its jurisdiction over those responsible for committing international crimes. The ICC can intervene only when it sees that the government is “unable or unwilling” to “genuinely” carry out the investigation and prosecution of the perpetrators.

Guevarra, addressing the United Nations Human Rights Council last Feb. 24 said: ”We reject any attempt by any external entity to assume jurisdiction over internal matters which are being addressed more than adequately by our national institutions and authorities.”

Does access to records of 61 out of more than 7,000 cases enough to disprove the inability and unwillingness of the Duterte government to prosecute those involved in the killings of thousands upon the orders of President Rodrigo Duterte?

###

This column appeared also in:
abs-cbnonline

VERA Files

Malaya Business Insight

Guevarra’s speech reveals concern on ICC probe of Duterte

Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra (inset) addressed the U.N.Human Rights Council.

Despite President Rodrigo Duterte’s bravado that he is not worried about the complaints of crimes against humanity filed before the International Criminal Court (ICC) against him and officials involved in the government’s bloody drug war, the speech of Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra before the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) last Feb. 24 betrayed the administration’s concern about it.

Toward the end of Guevarra’s speech delivered online, he enumerated what the Philippine government has done on the human rights aspect of Duterte’s brutal war on drugs. He said: “The PH strongly emphasizes its legal and judicial system, its domestic accountability mechanisms are functioning as they should. We reject any attempt by any external entity to assume jurisdiction over internal matters which are being addressed more than adequately by our national institutions and authorities.”

Are they concerned that outgoing ICC chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda’s report expected to come out before the end of her term on June 15 would recommend investigation of the more than 50 communications that her office had been examining since 2018 and from which it has found “reasonable basis to believe” that crimes against humanity were committed in Duterte’s drug war?

Guevarra’s assertion that “(the Philippine) legal and judicial system, its domestic accountability mechanisms are functioning” stands hollow beside the track record of insolence that government agencies had shown in their response to cries for justice and accountability by families of victims and human rights groups.

A reliable government source said they have investigated less than 2% of the more than 5,000 drug-related killings admitted by police authorities.

Private firm Center for International Law (CenterLaw), which represents families of the victims of the drug war in 28 barangays in San Andres Bukid, Manila in the cases filed before the Supreme Court, accused in 2019 the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) and the Philippine National Police (PNP) of “underhanded machinations” when they submitted what the lawyers described as “rubbish” documents unrelated to the drug war when they were compelled by the High Court to provide the petitioners’ records of police operations.

The Rome Statute that created the ICC provides that it is the duty of every State to exercise its jurisdiction over those responsible for committing international crimes. The ICC can intervene only when it sees that the government is “unable or unwilling” to “genuinely” carry out the investigation and prosecution of the perpetrators.

Guevarra admitted that there were lapses in the police operations against illegal drugs and tried to show that the government is doing something about it.

In that same Feb. 24 speech, the justice secretary said: “Our initial and preliminary findings confirm that in many of these cases, law enforcement agents asserted that the subject of anti-drug operations resisted arrest or attempted to draw a weapon and fight back. Yet, no full examination of the weapon recovered was conducted. No verification of its ownership was undertaken. No request for ballistic examination or paraffin test was pursued until its completion.

It was also noted that, among others, in more than half of the records reviewed, the law enforcement agents involved failed to follow standard protocols pertaining to coordination with other agencies and the processing of the crime scene.

“We have referred these initial findings to our national police authorities and we have been informed that the appropriate internal investigations of thousands of these incidents have been conducted. And scores of police officers have been recommended for administrative and criminal action. It is now the immediate task of the review panel to ensure that these recommendations have been acted upon and carried out by the proper disciplinarian authorities. And that measures are adopted to minimize loss of lives during legitimate law enforcement operations against illegal drugs. “

The ICC has shown that it is not easily impressed. In the case of Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo, leader of the Movement for the Liberation of the Congo (MLC) and former vice president of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, who was arrested in 2008 and convicted in 2016 (overturned two years later) of the charges of crimes against humanity, the international court dismissed as “grossly inadequate and not genuine” the supposed actions that the government undertook.

ICC also said: “Notably the Chamber found that the limited measures Bemba took were ‘primarily motivated’ by his desire to counter public allegation and rehabilitate the public image of the MLC.”
Doesn’t that sound familiar?

Two case dismissals but no release order

Senator Leila de Lima and journalist Lady Ann Salem

The case of illegal possession of firearms and explosives against journalist Lady Ann “Icy” Salem of Manila Today was dismissed last Feb. 5 but she continues to be in jail in Mandaluyong City.

A drug case against Sen. Leila De Lima was dismissed last Feb. 17. She, however, remains in detention at the Philippine National Police Custodial Center in Camp Crame, Quezon City because she still faces two other cases.

Salem’s lawyer, Kristina Conti of the Public Interest Law Center, speaking at a rally of the journalist’s supporters in front of the Mandaluyong City Regional Trial Court, said last Friday that the Feb. 5 dismissal of the case against Salem and trade unionist Rodrigo Esparago was not accompanied by a release order.

Conti said there’s no legal reason for Salem to stay a minute longer in jail for a case that is “walang ka kwenta-kwenta (senseless).”

Salem was arrested last Dec. 10, while the world was marking Human Rights Day, based on a search warrant issued by Judge Cecilyn Burgos-Villavert of the Quezon City Regional Trial Court.

In dismissing the case against Salem, Presiding Judge Monique Quisumbing-Ignacio declared the police officers’ search warrant void for being vague after they confiscated items not listed in the warrant.

News reports noted that instead of confiscating only one laptop and one unit of cellphone, as stated in the search warrant, the police took four laptops and five cellphones of different brands.

“The raiding team did not limit themselves to the items listed in the Search Warrants … The seizure of these items is unlawful as even the ‘plain view doctrine’ is clearly inapplicable to these cases,” said the court that also found substantial inconsistencies and contradictions in the testimonies of informants.

“Since the sole basis of the issuance of the Search Warrants w(as) their (informants) sworn statements and testimonies, the Court finds that probable cause was not sufficiently establish(ed),” the dismissal order stated.

In blocking Salem’s release, the prosecutor was insisting that the dismissal is not yet final because it is under appeal. Conti, however, said it does not hold water because the case can go on without keeping Salem in jail.

Conti said Salem, 35, is holding on admirably in detention. She shares an 8 feet by 3 feet detention cell in the Mandaluyong City jail with five other women detainees.

“To maximize the space, they have hung up hammocks up the steel bars where some of them sleep,” said Conti.
De Lima, on the other hand, is marking her four-year imprisonment by launching two books: “Dispatches from Crame I” and “Faith, Hope & Love: Dispatches from Crame II.”

Reacting to the dismissal of one of the three drug cases against her, De Lima, who investigated President Duterte’s alleged human rights violations when she was chair of the Human Rights Commission and Duterte was mayor of Davao City, said: “To be acquitted even in just one case, in the time of Duterte, is a moral victory. “

In the statement read by her lawyers during a press conference after the dismissal of Criminal Case No. 17-166, she took the opportunity to explain the two remaining cases and her situation in detention.

She said that even if the Demurrer to Evidence and Motion for Bail in her other criminal case (No. 17-165) was denied, she and her lawyers believe that the government does not have a strong evidence to prove their trumped-up charges.

In the case “conspiracy to engage in illegal drug trading,” De Lima said the prosecution has not come up with any evidence of the alleged crime. “Walang kahit isang testigo na nagpatunay na ako at ang aking kapwa akusado ay nakipagsabwatan sa mga drug lords para maglako o magbenta ng ilegal na droga sa Bilibid. (Not one of the witnesses proved that I and the other accused conspired with the drug lords to sell illegal drugs in Bilibid.),” she pointed out.

According to her, the prosecution’s witnesses whom it described as “drug lords” have denied that they were drug lords and asserted that they had never entered into any illegal deal with the senator.

She underscored the anomaly in the charges filed against her: “Ito lang din ang katangi-tanging mga kaso tungkol sa droga na kahit isang butil o gramo ng droga, ay walang naipresenta. (This is the only drug case in which not a single grain or gram of drugs was presented.”

“Ibig sabihin, puro laway lang ang basehan (It means their basis is all saliva),”she said.

De Lima explained it has been proven that Case 17-165 was not about drugs but about the unbridled corruption and malpractices in the Bureau of Corrections (BuCor) such as paying prison officials for the return of their privileges which she stopped when she was justice secretary.

De Lima said her accusers have not proven that she received money from the alleged sale of illegal drugs. “Puro tsismis. Puro haka-haka lang. (It was all gossip. Pure speculation.)”

She added: “Mula’t sapul, ang mga kasong ito ay ginagamit lamang na paraan para patahimikin ako at gambalain ang aking paglilingkod sa bayan bilang senador, sa paglaban sa kawalang hustisya at pagtataguyod ng karapatang mamuhay nang marangal at may dignidad ng ating mga kababayan, lalo na ang maralita. Subalit mula noon hanggang ngayon at sa darating pang mga araw, hindi ko hinayaan at hahayaang magtagumpay ang ganitong taktika.

(From the beginning, these cases were used to silence me and prevent me from serving the people as senator, to fight injustice and for the right of our countrymen to live with honor and dignity, especially the poor. But from the beginning up to now and in the coming days, I did not and will not allow this tactic to succeed.)”

De Lima said if those in power would be allowed to circumvent the law to imprison an innocent senator, what more when their target are the poor and the defenseless. “To jail one innocent person – whoever they may be – is an insult to every Filipino who deserves a better government, and an assault on the future of our country,” she said.

Salem and De Lima are two faces of courage against an insecure thug in power. They need and deserve the people’s support.

What’s the Duterte government up to with AFP’s reckless red-tagging?

Journalist Roel Landingin and lawyer Alex Padilla

Journalist Roel Landingin, one of the 28 named in the latest red-tagging offensive of the Duterte government, expressed concern over the credibility of information that the military has and uses.

“It’s concerning because it’s the type of info they use for military operations,” Landingin said in an online press conference on Saturday afternoon. “Imagine if nag-reunion tayo (we hold a reunion) and they misconstrued it as an NPA assembly and pwedeng maging subject ng military operation (it could be subjected to a military operation),” he added.

The presence of Landingin in the online presscon, along with five others in the list — lawyers Alex Padilla and Raffy Aquino, playwright Liza Magtoto, development worker Marie Lisa Dacanay, former journalist and government official Elmer Mercado — effectively debunked what was posted last Friday, Jan. 22, on the Facebook wall of the Armed Forces of the Philippines Information Exchange.

That post, which was taken down later but not after it had been widely shared, carried the heading: “Some of the UP students who became NPA (died or captured).”

On the list were: .Purification Pedro, Ishmael Quimpo, Rafael A. Japa, Rafael Angelo L. Aquino, Reynora R. Reyes, Roel Landingin, Behn Cervantes, Tanya Domingo, Christine Puche, Recca Noelle Monte, Rendell Caguia, Ian Maderazo, Josephine Anne Santiago Lapira, Gerald Salonga, John Carlo Capistrano Alberto, Emmanuel Llana, Vic Haway, Alexander Padilla, . a.k.a. “Gary,” Liza Magtoto,

Elmer Mercado, Marie Lisa Dacanay, Roberto Coloma, Ruben Veloso, Roan Libarios, Arnel Salva, Arthiur Samia, Jr., and Benedicto Villar.

All the six denied ever joining the New People’s Army, the military arm of the Communist Party of the Philippines.

But what makes the list scary was the inclusion in the list of names who were indeed captured and killed. VERA Files reporter Rick Berdos’ research yielded the following information:

Purification Pedro (died January 1977), Ishmael Quimpo (killed December 1981), Tanya Domingo (killed January 14, 2010),

Christine Puche (killed July 4,2013), Recca Noelle Monte (killed Sept. 4, 2014) , Rendell Cagula (killed Nov. 10, 2014),

Ian Maderazo (killed January 9, 2010), Josephine Anne Santiago Lapira (killed 2017), and John Carlo Capistrano Alberto (killed February 2019).

The list, for all its sloppiness, is dangerous in the context of the Anti-Terrorism Act which gives unbounded power and discretion to the police and the military in ascertaining and declaring what constitutes acts of terrorism, even assigning to them the authority to arrest mere suspects who may be detained for up to 24 days without filing charges against them in court.

Some 30 organizations have filed petitions before the Supreme Court asking the nullification of that law. One of them is Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG), where Raffy Aquino is a member.

(Disclosure: I, in my personal capacity, and our organization, VERA Files, together with CenterLaw, are petitioners against the Anti-Terror Act.)

The group noted that the red-tagging came out after the Department of National Defense (DND) unilaterally terminated the 1989 agreement with the University of the Philippines (UP), which prevented state forces from entering and conducting operations inside its campuses without prior notification.

What’s the end-game for the military and Duterte for all this lie and fear mongering?

The theories range from plain ineptitude of the military’s operators to the greed, ambition, and impunity of some military officials, to a cover-up of the COVID-19 related controversies, to Duterte’s desire to stay in power beyond June 30, 2022.

There’s even an elaborate theory about this being a handiwork of idealistic military officers who want to bring down the popular Duterte government by sowing fear and chaos.

Alex Padilla warned: “It’s all orchestrated and it’s not going to be a restful year.”

Be very vigilant!

This column also appears in:
https://news.abs-cbn.com/blogs/opinions/01/25/21/whats-the-duterte-govt-up-to-with-afps-reckless-red-tagging
https://malaya.com.ph/index.php/news_opinion/whats-the-duterte-government-up-to-with-afps-reckless-red-tagging/

https://verafiles.org/articles/whats-duterte-government-afps-reckless-red-tagging