Home / News / Urgent Appeals / UPDATE (Philippines): Four years after his murder a widow is still waiting for the investigation report of her activist husband's death
 

UPDATE (Philippines): Four years after his murder a widow is still waiting for the investigation report of her activist husband's death

November 23, 2009

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME
 
Urgent Appeal Update: AHRC-UAU-034-2009


 
23 November 2009
 
[RE: UA-147-2007: PHILIPPINES: More activists and widows helping victims facing threats in separate incidents]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
PHILIPPINES: Four years after his murder a widow is still waiting for the investigation report of her activist husband's death
 
ISSUES: Human rights defenders; witness protection; extrajudicial killings; freedom of information; right to justice; administration of justice
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Stop Extrajudicial Killings in the Philippines
http://www.pinoyhr.net/
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Dear Friends,
 
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) writes with deep regrets with regard to the lack of substantial progress in the investigation of the murder of an activist we reported to have been killed on November 28, 2005. His wife has yet to obtain a copy of the official reinvestigation report into his murder. Her inquiries into the inclusion of her husband's name to the military's document regarding the extrajudicial killings in the country also remain unanswered.
 
UPDATED INFORMATION:
 
On September 4, 2007, we issued an open letter (AHRC-OL-029-2007) regarding the failure by the Task Force Usig, a special investigating body of the Philippine National Police (PNP), to provide the family of the murdered activist Jose Manegdeg III a copy of the result of their reinvestigation they had conducted.
 
Apart from the PNP, the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), a special investigating body of the Department of Justice (DoJ), had also intervened by conducting their own separate reinvestigation into the case following the AHRC's appeal. But like Task Force Usig, they too failed to provide Manegdeg's family, particularly his wife Florence, a copy of the result of the reinvestigation they had done.
 
The prosecution of one of Manegdeg's gunman, Captain Joel Castro, who was formerly attached to the 50th Infantry Battalion, Philippine Army, was halted when the prosecution office dismissed the charge after an eyewitness retracted his earlier testimony. Strangely though, the witness' statement of retraction had been notarized by the lawyer of the accused.
 
As mentioned in our appeal in March 2007 (UP-116-2007), there were also delays into the conclusion of the prosecutor's investigation of the case. It took the Ilocos Sur Provincial Prosecutor's Office over a year to resolve whether or not to file the case in court, which should have been done 30 days from the time the complaint is filed, as stipulated by the Rule 112, Sections 3 and 4 of the Rules of Court.
 
In Florence's letter of appeal dated October 13, 2009 to Leila de Lima, chairperson of the Commission on Human Rights in the Philippines, she also sought the CHR's intervention into finding answers to her questions surrounding her husband's murder. Read the full text of her letter. On October 29, after Florence's dialogue with De Lima she was told that they would review her husband's case.
 
In her email sent to the AHRC, Florence said of her meeting with De Lima:
 
"While they will review the case, I specifically requested  assistance  for  dialogue  with  the  Armed  Forces  of  the  Philippines  for  clarification  of  report  they  released  on  "The  Truth  About  the  Extrajudicial  Killings" particular to  my  husband  and  another  government employee  killed  9  hrs  after  him."
 
Florence was referring to a document reportedly released by the Armed Forces of the Philippines in Northern Luzon (AFP-NolCom), entitled "The Truth Behind the Extrajudicial Killings", where they included her husband's name and another government employee, in explaining regarding the phenomenon of the killing of activist in the country. The document was reported to have been sent to a local human rights organization, the Cordillera Human Rights Alliance (CHRA).
 
Florence, however, was not aware of its justification and has not obtained its copy. Florence has sought the CHR's intervention to facilitate a dialogue with the AFP into the inclusion of her husband's name in the document.
 
In March 2009, the Committee on Human Rights of the House of Representatives (Philippine Congress) has conducted a public inquiry in Baguio City into the extrajudicial killings of human rights and political activists in aid of legislation. It is during this public inquiry that the Committee had come to know of the said military document. Florence took part in the public inquiry and read her statement regarding her husband's case (AHRC-FST-022-2009).
 
She has also sought their intervention over the possibility of affording her assistance, like legal aid, in seeking judicial remedy--a petition for writ of habeas data--to compel the military establishment in providing rational explanation to the inclusion of her husband's name in a military document. This writ of habeas data is a judicial remedy available to any persons, including the families of the dead, should they seek for the reproduction of documents they found violating the person's right to life, liberty and security.
 
SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write letters to the authorities listed below asking for their intervention in this case.
 
The AHRC has also written letters to the United Nation Special Rapporteurs on extra-judicial, summary, or arbitrary executions and on the situation of human rights defenders.
 
To support this appeal, please click here:
 
Dear _________,
 
PHILIPPINES: Four years after his murder a widow is still waiting for the investigation report of her activist husband's death
 
I am writing to express my deep concern to the continuing failure by the investigating authorities to have the family of the late Jose Manegdeg III, a human rights activist murdered on 28 November 2005 in San Esteban, Ilocos Sur, given with the copies of their official reinvestigation report into his murder.
 
The prosecution of one of Manegdeg's gunmen, Captain Joel Castro, a soldier formerly attached to the 50th Infantry Battalion, Philippine Army, had been halted in March 2007 when the Ilocos Sur Provincial Prosecutor's Office dismissed the charges laid on him after the eyewitness retracted his earlier testimony. It took the prosecutor's office over a year to resolve whether to file the case in court or not.
 
There were concerns that the delay at the prosecutor's level in the filing of the case in court witnesses could have exposed the witness to continuing threats and harassment prompting him to disassociate from the case by retracting his statement.  Also, there were irregularities that took place into the procedure when he had his statement signed: it was notarized by the lawyer of the accused.
 
However, despite the prosecutor's dismissal of the charges against the accused, the Task Force Usig, a special body of the Philippine National Police (PNP); and the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) of the Department of Justice (DoJ), have given their assurance to the victim's wife, Florence, that they would continue investigating his case to collect further evidence in pursuing its prosecution.
 
It is disappointing though that neither the PNP's Task Force Usig nor the NBI had given to Florence the official result of their reinvestigation.
 
Also, there was no information whether or not they have acted on the new information that Manegdeg's name had been included a military document, entitled "The Truth Behind the Extrajudicial Killings", reportedly explaining the phenomenon of extrajudicial killings of activists in the country. The said document was sent to a local human rights group by a source in 2007.
 
This document was also the subject of an inquiry by the members of the House of Representatives when they conducted an inquiry in aid of legislation into the extrajudicial of activist in Baguio City in March 2009.
 
I urged you to ensure that Manegdeg's wife, Florence, is given copies of the result of investigation by the PNP's and the NBI's. It is disappointing that the families of the dead would have to plead to obtain this copy when it should have been their duties to have them properly informed to the progress of the investigation.
 
Also, I urged the concerned authorities, in particular the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) to provide necessary legal aid to Florence should she decide in pursuing a judicial remedy, the writ of habeas data, regarding the inclusion of her husband's name into the reported military document.
 
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: ruth_cossid@yahoo.com
 
4. Ms. Agnes Devanadera
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@ahrc.asia)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Update
Document ID :
AHRC-UAU-034-2009
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.