Home / News / Urgent Appeals / PHILIPPINES: Three brothers killed in another 'legitimate encounter'
 

PHILIPPINES: Three brothers killed in another 'legitimate encounter'

September 8, 2010

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-130-2010

send_button.gif

8 September 2010
------------------------------------------------------
PHILIPPINES: Three brothers killed in another 'legitimate encounter'

ISSUES: Extrajudicial killings; torture
------------------------------------------------------

STOP extrajudicial killings in the Philippines
http://www.pinoyhr.net/
------------------------------------------------------

Dear Friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) writes to inform you about the killing of three brothers, one of whom was a minor, on the pretext of a 'legitimate encounter'. The police claimed that the victims had exchanged fire with them. Thus, the police claim their deaths to be justifiable. However, this is questionable as none of the victims either owned or knew how to use a gun.

CASE NARRATIVE: (According to information received from the Task Force Detainees of the Philippines (TFDP) - Luzon)
 
On June 2, 2010, the three brothers--Eric Miraflores, 27; Raymond, 23; and Rosmil, 16; were on their way to their farm in Sitio (a sub-section of the village) Hobol, Masinloc town, Zambales onboard their three-wheeled motorcycle. Their father, Roosevelt, had asked the three to help him on the farm that day.

While his three sons went to their farm on a motorcycle, Roosevelt rode their improvised motor vehicle called 'kuliglig' (a motorised hand cart) to go to their farm. Roosevelt last saw his three sons alive overtaking him on the road on their way to their farm. Upon arriving at the farm at 8am, he did not see his sons but nevertheless carried on doing his own chores presuming that his sons had already started doing their respective tasks.
 
Shortly after, Roosevelt was stunned to hear extended gunfire from a place close to where he was farming. At that point, he was concerned about the safety of his three sons and wanted to check on them; however, he was scared that something might happen to him. He decided to take a shelter at the guard house of a mining firm nearby and after the gunfire stopped he went home.
 
After less than an hour, Roosevelt and his wife, Mila, saw the dead bodies of their three sons, Eric, Raymond, and Rosmil, on a hearse. The couple broke down in tears after seeing their corpses. The faces of their sons were barely recognizable because they were badly bruised and had suffered numerous gunshot wounds. The bodies of the victims showed visible signs of torture. When the corpses were presented, they were already wearing camouflage uniforms; clothes which the three were not wearing when they were last seen alive. It is believed that the corpses were dressed in camouflage uniforms to create the impression that they were members of an illegal armed group.

The Miraflores couple had later been told that their three sons were killed by the policemen attached to the Zambales Provincial Mobile Group (ZPMG) of the Philippine National Police (PMG-PNP). It was Inspector Rolando Delizo of the PMG-PNP who had said that the three victims were killed supposedly in an 'encounter' during a police operation.

The Miraflores couple argued that their sons could not be members of an illegal armed group. The three, according to their mother Mila, never affiliated themselves with any organizations. The family also stressed that none of their sons had ever owned a gun and did not know how to use one. They have submitted the bodies of the victims to the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) for autopsies and have asked for an investigation by the Commission on Human Rights Region (CHR) region 3. The CHR found a bag full of bullet cartridges allegedly fired against the Miraflores brothers. The PMG-PNP also confiscated the Miraflores' three-wheeler and a hand gun allegedly being used by the victims. The remains of Eric, Raymond and Rosmil were buried on June 10, 2010.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

The AHRC has documented numerous cases in which the killing of farmers; villagers and human rights activists has been justified as a result of a 'legitimate encounter'. This terminology is used by the police and the military in justifying their action of killing persons because according to them the persons opened fire at them.

However, in most cases, the claims by the police and the military cannot be independently verified; nevertheless, once this is announced the possibility of making the complaint that the victims were summarily executed is negligible.

In February 2005, three people were also killed and three others were wounded, all belong to the B'laan Tribe, in Barangay Abnate, Kiblawan, Davao del Sur. When the soldiers opened fire at them they were on a foot patrol. The soldiers claimed that victims' death and wounding were a result of a legitimate encounter; however, an investigation later revealed that the victims had been summarily executed. (UP-62-2005)

In November 2005, nine farmers and several others were wounded when soldiers in Palo, Leyte, Visayas opened fire on a group of people holding a protest vigil. The soldiers claimed the shooting was also a result of a legitimate encounter; however, an investigation later revealed it was not the case and led to the prosecution of the soldiers. (UA-216-2005)

On May 21, 2006, the killing of Reverend Andy Pawican, a human rights defender, had been justified as a result of 'legitimate encounter'. He was forcibly taken, allegedly by military agents after concluding a mass in Pantabangan, Nueva Ecija. His body, which bore visible signs of torture, was found six hours later. (UA-175-2006)

In February 2008, eight people, including a four year old girl and a pregnant woman, were killed by soldiers on the pretext of a legitimate encounter in a coastal village in Maimbong, Sulu. The soldiers claimed the shooting was supposedly exchanged with an illegal armed group holding a kidnap victim. (AHRC-UAC-027-2008)

On March 2009, two persons, a man and a woman, were killed under the pretext of a legitimate encounter that took place between rebels and government soldiers. The victims were farming villagers living in Maramag, Bukidnon. The body of one of the victims bore evidence that he could have been tortured and summarily executed. (AHRC-UAC-023-2009)


SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write letters to the authorities below requesting them to ensure that the investigation regarding the victims' death is conducted thoroughly.

The AHRC has also written letters to the Special Rapporteurs on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions for their intervention.

To support this appeal, please click here: send_small.gif

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear ___________,

PHILIPPINES: Three brothers killed in another 'legitimate encounter'
 
Name of the victims:
1. Eric Miraflores, 27 years old
2. Raymond Miraflores, 23
3. Rosmil Miraflores, 16, all of them are residents of Sitio Hobol, Masinloc, Zambales
Alleged perpetrators: Members of the Zambales Provincial Mobile Group-Philippine National Police (PMG-PNP)
Place of incident: Sitio Hobol, Masinloc, Zambales
Date and time of incident: June 2, 2010 between 12nn to 2pm
 
I am shocked to learn that three brothers, one of whom a minor, were killed on the pretext of a 'legitimate encounter' by the police in Masinloc, Zambales. The three, whose names are mentioned above, were last seen alive onboard a three-wheeled motorcycle on the way to their farm to help their father in the same town.
 
The three and their father, Roosevelt, were supposed to work in their farm that day; however, when their father came in late at the farm, the three were not there. Roosevelt thought that his sons might have already started doing their tasks that he had asked them to do, he carried on doing his own work as well. While working, he was stunned to hear extended gunshots coming from a place close to their farm.
 
Roosevelt, who last saw his three son alive riding on a motorcycle, started worrying about their safety. He wanted to check on his three sons and where the gunshot had come from; however, since he himself was so scared of his own safety, he decided to take shelter in a guard house of a mining firm close to their farm. It was only after the gunshots stopped that he went home by himself.
 
But shortly after coming home, he and his wife, Mila, saw the corpses of their three sons being carried on a hearse. Their corpses were badly bruised, suffered multiple gunshot wounds and their faces were barely recognizable due to bruises. The corpses were also dressed in camouflage uniforms, purposely to make an impression that that they were members of an illegal armed group. The victims did not wear those uniforms when they were last seen alive. The identification card, wallet and mobile phone of one of the victims, Eric, were also missing.
 
After the killing, Inspector Rolando Delizo of the PMG-PNP had said that the victims were killed in an 'encounter' during police operation. However, so far no explanations were given as to why the victims were wearing camouflage uniforms or the details about how the three, who themselves never owned firearms and do not know how to use firearms, would be able to exchange fire with them. There were also no details as to the nature of the criminal offense or an illegal armed group the victims had committed and are affiliated to respectively that could have explained the incident further.
 
I am deeply concerned that the victims could have been summarily executed on the pretext of a 'legitimate encounter'. I am aware of numerous cases in the past that the death of farmers, indigenous villagers and human rights activists, had been justified on this pretext despite strong allegations that they were summarily executed. While some of this cases had resulted to prosecution in court; however, many of this cases remains either unreported or the circumstances behind it were never known.
 
I therefore urge you to ensure that this case is thoroughly investigated to determine the circumstance behind the victims' deaths. There should also be an effective review into the police and military's procedure on rules of engagement, particularly of its accountability on deaths they admitted to have resulted from a 'legitimate encounter'. I am deeply concerned by this already routine use of this scenario to justify suspicious deaths of persons during the police and military operations.
 
I also urged you to afford adequate protection and needed assistance, particularly on legal matters, to the family of the victims should they decide in prosecuting the policemen involved in this case.
 
Yours sincerely,


---------------
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. Mr. Benigno Aquino III
President
Republic of the Philippines
Malacanang Palace
JP Laurel Street, San Miguel
Manila 1005
PHILIPPINES
Fax: +63 2 736 1010
Tel: +63 2 735 6201 / 564 1451 to 80

2. Ms. Loretta Ann Rosales
Commission on Human Rights
SAAC Bldg., Commonwealth Avenue
U.P. Complex, Diliman
Quezon City
PHILIPPINES
Fax: +63 2 929 0102
Tel: +63 2 928 5655 / 926 6188
E-mail: rep_lapr@yahoo.com

3. Deputy Director General Jesus A. Verzosa
Chief, Philippine National Police (PNP)
Camp General Rafael Crame
Quezon City
PHILIPPINES
Fax: +63 2724 8763
Tel: +63 2 726 4361/4366/8763
E-mail: ruth_cossid@yahoo.com

4. Ms. Leila de Lima
Secretary
Department of Justice (DOJ)
DOJ Bldg., Padre Faura
1004 Manila
PHILIPPINES
Fax: +63 2 521 1614
E-mail: soj@doj.gov.ph

5. Mr. Emilio Gonzalez
Deputy Ombudsman
Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for the Military
and Other Law Enforcement Offices
3rd Floor, Ombudsman Bldg., Agham Road, Diliman
1104 Quezon City
PHILIPPINES
Fax: +63 2 926 8747
Tel: +63 2 926 9032

Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrc.asia)

send_button.gif

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
AHRC-UAC-130-2010
Countries :
Issues :
Document Actions
Share |
Subscribe to our Mailing List
Follow AHRC
Extended Introduction: Urgent Appeals, theory and practice

A need for dialogue

Many people across Asia are frustrated by the widespread lack of respect for human rights in their countries.  Some may be unhappy about the limitations on the freedom of expression or restrictions on privacy, while some are affected by police brutality and military killings.  Many others are frustrated with the absence of rights on labour issues, the environment, gender and the like. 

Yet the expression of this frustration tends to stay firmly in the private sphere.  People complain among friends and family and within their social circles, but often on a low profile basis. This kind of public discourse is not usually an effective measure of the situation in a country because it is so hard to monitor. 

Though the media may cover the issues in a broad manner they rarely broadcast the private fears and anxieties of the average person.  And along with censorship – a common blight in Asia – there is also often a conscious attempt in the media to reflect a positive or at least sober mood at home, where expressions of domestic malcontent are discouraged as unfashionably unpatriotic. Talking about issues like torture is rarely encouraged in the public realm.

There may also be unwritten, possibly unconscious social taboos that stop the public reflection of private grievances.  Where authoritarian control is tight, sophisticated strategies are put into play by equally sophisticated media practices to keep complaints out of the public space, sometimes very subtly.  In other places an inner consensus is influenced by the privileged section of a society, which can control social expression of those less fortunate.  Moral and ethical qualms can also be an obstacle.

In this way, causes for complaint go unaddressed, un-discussed and unresolved and oppression in its many forms, self perpetuates.  For any action to arise out of private frustration, people need ways to get these issues into the public sphere.

Changing society

In the past bridging this gap was a formidable task; it relied on channels of public expression that required money and were therefore controlled by investors.  Printing presses were expensive, which blocked the gate to expression to anyone without money.  Except in times of revolution the media in Asia has tended to serve the well-off and sideline or misrepresent the poor.

Still, thanks to the IT revolution it is now possible to communicate with large audiences at little cost.  In this situation there is a real avenue for taking issues from private to public, regardless of the class or caste of the individual.

Practical action

The AHRC Urgent Appeals system was created to give a voice to those affected by human rights violations, and by doing so, to create a network of support and open avenues for action.  If X’s freedom of expression is denied, if Y is tortured by someone in power or if Z finds his or her labour rights abused, the incident can be swiftly and effectively broadcast and dealt with. The resulting solidarity can lead to action, resolution and change. And as more people understand their rights and follow suit, as the human rights consciousness grows, change happens faster. The Internet has become one of the human rights community’s most powerful tools.   

At the core of the Urgent Appeals Program is the recording of human rights violations at a grass roots level with objectivity, sympathy and competence. Our information is firstly gathered on the ground, close to the victim of the violation, and is then broadcast by a team of advocates, who can apply decades of experience in the field and a working knowledge of the international human rights arena. The flow of information – due to domestic restrictions – often goes from the source and out to the international community via our program, which then builds a pressure for action that steadily makes its way back to the source through his or her own government.   However these cases in bulk create a narrative – and this is most important aspect of our program. As noted by Sri Lankan human rights lawyer and director of the Asian Human Rights Commission, Basil Fernando:

"The urgent appeal introduces narrative as the driving force for social change. This idea was well expressed in the film Amistad, regarding the issue of slavery. The old man in the film, former president and lawyer, states that to resolve this historical problem it is very essential to know the narrative of the people. It was on this basis that a court case is conducted later. The AHRC establishes the narrative of human rights violations through the urgent appeals. If the narrative is right, the organisation will be doing all right."

Patterns start to emerge as violations are documented across the continent, allowing us to take a more authoritative, systemic response, and to pinpoint the systems within each country that are breaking down. This way we are able to discover and explain why and how violations take place, and how they can most effectively be addressed. On this path, larger audiences have opened up to us and become involved: international NGOs and think tanks, national human rights commissions and United Nations bodies.  The program and its coordinators have become a well-used tool for the international media and for human rights education programs. All this helps pave the way for radical reforms to improve, protect and to promote human rights in the region.