Home / News / Urgent Appeals / PHILIPPINES: Police take no action against fleeing gunmen who shot and killed a human rights activist
 

PHILIPPINES: Police take no action against fleeing gunmen who shot and killed a human rights activist

December 17, 2008

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION – URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-264-2008

17 December 2008
---------------------------------------------------------------------
PHILIPPINES: Police take no action against fleeing gunmen who shot and killed a human rights activist

ISSUES: Extrajudicial killings; human rights defenders
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) deeply regrets to inform you of yet another killing of a peasant activist. Witnesses to the incident reported that when the shooting took place, local police had no men deployed there and the police who responded did not pursue the fleeing attackers.

CASE DETAILS: (According to information from the Task Force Detainees of the Philippines (TFDP-Mindanao))

On 22 November 2008 at 5:30pm, the victim, Vicente T. Paglinawan, was talking to a colleague at a place in the Poblacion (the center of the village) Malabog, Paquibato District, Davao City when a lone gunman approached and shot him dead. The gunman was seen together with another man, wearing a helmet and driving a motorcycle when they arrived at the scene.

According to a witness, the gunman alighted from the motorcycle and walked towards Vicente shooting him from a distance of about one meter. Vicente died on the spot.

Vicente suffered gunshot wounds to his right forehead that exited at the back portion of his head and to the left lower portion of his ear that exited to his right eye. After the shooting, the gunman walked casually to the get- away motorcycle where his companion was waiting. They were seen fleeing to an unknown destination.

However, according to witnesses, the police in the area failed to take immediate action to pursue the attackers. At the local police outpost, located just three meters from where the shooting took place, no police officers were actually deployed at the time.

 Had the villagers not informed the police of the shooting incident they would not have responded; and it then took them about 15 minutes to respond.

When the shooting took place, people were busy roaming around the village for their feast or Araw ng Barangay. No one noticed the approach of the gunmen riding on a motorcycle.

According to Aida, the victim's wife, a neighbor, two weeks prior to the murder of her husband, informed her of having seen two persons on a motorcycle. They were asking about the whereabouts of the victim's family. This happened on two occasions. They suspected that those looking for Vicente and his family could be the same persons responsible for his murder.

Although it was not immediately known whether the attack on the victim was directly connected to his work, there have been a pattern of targeted attacks against political and human rights activists in the country. In the Philippines in recent years, having an affiliation with activists groups or persons had become a justification for murder.

Like other victims of activists' extrajudicial killings, Vicente, at the time of his death, was regional vice president in Mindanao of the Pambansang Kilusan ng mga Samahang Magsasaka (PAKISAMA) for six years. He was also the section chair of a political party, Akbayan, in Paquibato District in Davao City.

Being a farmer since the1980s, he had become a board member of the Malabog Integrated Enterprises Development Cooperative. While carrying on his activist's duties, he was also a member of the Lupong Tagapamaya (which is part of the Barangay (Village) justice System) which mediates and settles disputes among villagers. He was a church lay-leader and active officer of the Parents-Teachers' Association (PTA) in his  childrens' schools.

It was learned that prior to his murder, Vicente had applied for a certificate of stewardship under the Integrated Social Forestry (ISF) Program of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR.) He sought an aggregate area of five hectares of forested land in his area. Together with his wife, he cultivated his farmland to provide for the growing needs of his family. He used diversified upland farming techniques, planting fruit trees, coconut, cacao, banana, root crops and vegetables.

Those who knew him, some of whom are close to the AHRC, described him as a good and committed person. He had no known enemies. This actually made it difficult for both his family and his colleagues to comprehend the reason why he had been targeted for assassination.


SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write letters to the concerned authorities, in particular the Philippine National Police (PNP), requesting them to take action in this case. The failure of the local police to pursue the attackers at the time of the shooting should also be investigated. They should be held to account if found guilty of wrong-doing.

The AHRC has also written letters to the UN Special Rapporteurs on Extra-judicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Executions and for the Human Rights Defenders calling for intervention in this case.

To support this appeal, please click here:

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear ___________,

PHILIPPINES: Police take no action against fleeing gunmen who shot and killed a human rights activist

Name of victim:  Vicente T. Paglinawan (alias Roger); 51 years old; married with four children; a resident of Sitio (a sub-section of the village) San Miguel, Malabog, Paquibato District, Davao City. He was regional vice president for Mindanao of the Pambansang Kilusan ng mga Samahang Magsasaka (PAKISAMA); section chair of a Akbayan partylist in Paquibato District; board member of Malabog Integrated Enterprises Development Cooperative; member of Lupong Tagapamaya (Barangay (Village) Justice System); church lay-leader; and an active officer of the Parents-Teachers' Association (PTA) in the schools of his children.
Date of incident: 22 November 2008 at 5:30pm
Alleged perpetrators: Two unidentified gunmen
Place of incident: Poblacion Malabog, Paquibato District, Davao City

I am writing to express my grave concern about the killing of a peasant leader, Vicente Paglinawan, on 22 November 2008 in Davao City.

According to information received, Vicente was seen talking to a colleague when a lone gunman approached and shot him. He died on the spot. The gunman was seen arriving on a motorcycle together with another man. According to a witness, the gunman alighted from the motorcycle, walked towards the victim and from a distance of about one meter fired point blank.

Vicente suffered fatal gunshot wounds to his forehead that exited at the back portion of his head and to the left lower portion of his ear that exited to his right eye. After the shooting, the gunman walked casually towards the waiting motorcycle and fled to an unknown destination.

However, what I am extremely disappointed about is the failure of the police deployed in the area to pursue the fleeing attackers on their motorcycle.

I have learned that the local police outpost had no men deployed there. Those officers responding to the shooting took action only after the villagers informed them of the shooting.

I fail to comprehend that if indeed the policemen were on alert at the time, they should have also been able to respond more quickly to the shooting incident.  They actually did not do so.  Witnesses said the policemen responding to the crime did not pursue the fleeing attackers.

I therefore urge the concerned authorities to look into police negligence in this case. Should it found that they have indeed failed in their duty of care, they should be held accountable according to the law.

Also, I urge that the victim's family be afforded the adequate protection they require.  Prior to the shooting, Vicente' family were under surveillance by unknown persons. Two people were observed looking for the family and they believe them to be the same persons who shot the victim.

I know that you will take all necessary action in this case.

Yours sincerely,

-----
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. Mrs. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo
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
E-mail: corres@op.gov.ph

2. Ms. Leila De Lima
Commissioner
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: chr.delima@yahoo.com or mtm_rodulfo@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: bluetree73@gmail.com

4. Mr. Raul Gonzalez
Secretary
Department of Justice (DoJ)
DOJ Bldg., Padre Faura
1004 Manila
PHILIPPINES
Fax: +63 2 521 1614
E-mail: raulgonzalez_doj@yahoo.com

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@ahrchk.org)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
AHRC-UAC-264-2008
Countries :
Campaigns :
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.