Home / News / Urgent Appeals / PHILIPPINES: 127 families lost their homes due to illegal demolition in Davao City
 

PHILIPPINES: 127 families lost their homes due to illegal demolition in Davao City

November 15, 2004

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION 

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAM

15 November 2004
---------------------------------------------------------------------
UA-152-2004:  PHILIPPINES: 127 families lost their homes due to illegal demolition in Davao City

PHILIPPINES: Urban poor; Right to adequate housing
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information from the Task Force Detainees of the Philippines (TFDP)-Mindanao, a human rights organization, regarding an illegal demolition by Dacudao & Sons that took place in Dacudao Compound, Davao City, Mindanao, Philippines on 19 October 2004 and on 4 November 2004.

Having nowhere else to go, these evicted people built shanties along the road just in front of the demolition site, and slept and ate along the road inhaling all the toxic vehicle fumes for 16 days. As of present, there are only 89 families left.  Others stayed with their relatives in various parts of the city.  The remaining families were given refuge in Gov. P. Bangoy Barangay Hall. According to the victims, Dacudao & Sons' staff and other government officials did not show any court order for the demolition in spite of their queries.  

We call for your urgent action into this matter. Please urge the state and provincial government to take immediate and proper action to resettle the evicted families.

Urgent Appeals Desk
Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)
------------------------------------------------------

DETAILED INFORMATION:

On 19 October 2004, 127 families (254 individuals, excluding children) from the Gov. P. Bangoy Sitio Dacudao Homeowners Association and 30 families renting, were affected by the illegal demolition that took place in Dacudao Compound, Davao City, Mindanao, Philippines at around 8:00 in the morning. The demolition was conducted by 800 men hired by the Dacudao & Sons, along with some 200 government officials, who arrived with dump trucks and bulldozers. 

According to the victims, on the morning of October 19, a group of 1,000 people came and started to demolish all their houses and properties. Shirley Paraguya, a resident, asked for the demolition order but this was never produced.  In fact, none of the residents were shown the order. Most of the people had been residing there since the 1960s-70s.  

Not only were their homes demolished, but some residents also lost their possessions as a result.  Rupina Piano, a resident since the 1960s, laments the loss of not only her property and material things, but also the "wonderful memories of the place where she grew old and raised her children".  After a week, Rupina got sick and started having difficulties walking.

Having nowhere else to go, these people built shanties along the road just in front of the demolition site.  Furthermore, they were deprived of their water services a week later.  In turn, residents had to go 100 meters way from their shanties to their neighboring communities to ask for water.  Everyone slept and ate along the road inhaling all the toxic vehicle fumes.  They all lived in this condition for 16 days. The estimated damage incurred by the demolition is about 8,952,000 pesos (about $162,763.63).

On November 4, the shanties were also demolished by the City Engineers Office of Davao City, who said the shanties were road obstacles/hazards.  

As of present, there are only 89 families left. Others stayed with their relatives in other parts of the city.  The remaining families were given refuge in Gov. P. Bangoy Barangay Hall after marching to the City Hall of Davao City to voice out their grievances.  These people are still deprived of their right to adequate housing as relocation has not been given to them.  There was even violation in the conduct of the demolition as there was no court order issued by the court during the conduct of the demolition.


BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

The victims were members of the Gov. P. Bangoy Sitio Dacudao Homeowners Association, who petitioned and filed claim over a public space on 20 November 2002.  Their petition was addressed to the City Council of Davao to adopt a city ordinance to formally declare the public space a permanent relocation site in accordance to R.A. 7279 or the Urban Development and Housing Act of the Philippines.  This act was to provide for a comprehensive urban development plan and its implementation.  However, they were denied of their claim and subsequently, illegally demolished.  These people had built their dwellings since 1960 to late 70s and are residents of the said lot ever since.

The contested property is about 12,863 sq. meters or 1.2863 hectares, allocated as open space for public market by Dacudao & Sons, in its duly approved subdivision plan on 9 September 1957, which is dominated as Block 3, lot 1 in the approved subdivision plan of Dacudao & Sons, by which the express provision of law was supposedly automatically donated to the City Government of Davao.

Some of the dwelling units built by informal occupants in certain portions of the land of Dacudao & Sons Subdivision were demolished to give way to big businesses and/or Chinese lot buyers. The informal occupants were then resettled and or relocated in the open space officially allocated as the public market site.  Some of them built their dwelling units since 1963 and some entered in the early 1990s, others are either renters or sharers within the built dwelling units (data taken from the Committee Against Squatting Syndicates and Professional Squatters (CASSPS), as per their resolution no.6 series of 2004).

On 27 November 1992, they officially registered their organization namely the Gov. P. Bangoy Sitio Dacudao Homeowners Association at the office of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

The Philippine Government is a signatory to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and its Optional Protocols, therefore, it is duty bound to observe and implement the provisions embodied therein that it agreed upon in the convention, specifically, on respecting the rights of the people not to be deprived of their right to adequate housing. 

Furthermore, under Article XII, Section 10 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution states, "urban and rural poor dwellers shall not be evicted nor their dwellings demolished, except in accordance with law and in a just and humane manner".  Finally, Section 28 of the same article states, "eviction or demolition as a practice shall be discouraged." Eviction or demolition are only allowed under specific circumstances, one being the evidence of a "court order for eviction and demolition".


SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please send a letter, fax or an email to the Davao City Mayor and express your concern about this case.

Suggested letter:

Hon. Rodrigo Duterte
City Mayor
City Hall, Davao City
PHILIPPINES
Telefax: +63 82 227 8077

Dear Hon. Rodrigo Duterte,

Re: PHILIPPINES: 127 families lost their house due to illegal demolition in Davao City

I am writing to bring to your attention the illegal demolition in Dacudao Compound, Agdao, Davao City, Mindanao on October 19 and November 4, 2004. As a result, 127 families (254 individuals, excluding children), in whom are also members of the Gov. P. Bangoy Sitio Dacudao Homeowners Association, lost their houses and properties.

According to the report I received, during the process of the demolition, Dacudao & Sons' staff nor other government officials, involved in the demolition, gave any notice of demolition or demolition order from the court to the residents who have been residing in that place for several decades. Moreover, before the demolition, the Davao City government did not a conduct proper consultation with the affected families regarding any demolition plan.  

The evicted families were not rehoused, and lived on the open street, without any access to water for 16 days. As of present, there are only 89 families left. Others stayed with their relatives in other parts of the city.  The remaining families are currently staying in Gov. P. Bangoy Barangay Hall without any relocation or compensation.

The government of Philippines as well as the Davao City government has obligations under international and national law to all persons residing in the Davao city to respect, protect and fulfill the right to housing. Especially, Article XII, Section 10 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution clearly states, "urban and rural poor dwellers shall not be evicted nor their dwellings demolished, except in accordance with law and in a just and humane manner".  Section 28 of the same article further states, "eviction or demolition as a practice shall be discouraged." Eviction or demolition are only allowed under specific circumstances, one being the evidence of a "court order for eviction and demolition".

I therefore request you to pay particular attention to this case and ensure that immediate and full assistance be provided to the families affected by these demolitions for the concern of their security and health.  I also request you to initiate dialogue with the evicted families including consultation with civil society groups to find alternatives. I further urge you to provide proper housing to the families without delay in accordance with Philippines' Constitution and its international obligation under the ICESCR. All affected families should be provided with adequate compensation and rehabilitation.

I look for your urgent intervention into this matter.

Yours truly,


--------------------------


SEND LETTER TO:

Hon. Rodrigo Duterte
City Mayor
City Hall, Davao City
PHILIPPINES
Telefax: +63 82 227 8077

SEND A COPY TO:

1. Hon. Luzminda B. Salcedo
Commissioner
Presidential Commission for the Urban Poor
Field Operations Division for Mindanao
D-12, Pelayo Bldg., J. Luna Street
8000 Davao City,
PHILIPPINES
Telefax: +63 82 226 2492
Email: pcup@skyinet.net

2. Vice-Pres. Noli de Castro
Chairman
Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council
Office of the President
6th Floor Atrium Building, Makati Avenue
Makati City  1200
PHILIPPINES
Fax: +63 2 811 4118
Email: mis@hudcc.gov.ph

3. Hon. Antonio E. Valenzuela
Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for Mindanao
4th Floor H&C Bldg., Alvarez St.
Ramon Magsaysay Avenue, Sta. Ana
Davao City  8000
PHILIPPINES
Tel: +63 82 221 3431
Fax: +63 82 221 3038

4. Ms. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo
President
Republic of the

Philippines
Malacañang Palace
JP Laurel St.
, San Miguel
Manila NCR  1005
PHILIPPINES
Fax: +63 2 929 3968

5. Atty. Alberto B. Sipaco, Jr.
Regional Director
Commission on Human Rights (CHR XI)
Trinity Bldg. II,
Quimpo Blvd.
, Ecoland
Davao City 8000
PHILIPPINES

6. Purificacion Quisumbing
Commissioner
Commission on Human Rights (CHR)
SAAC Bldg., Commonwealth Ave.
U.P. Complex, Diliman, Quezon City
PHILIPPINES
Fax: +63 2 929 0101 / 928 0848
E-mail: drpvq@chr.gov.ph

7. Mr. Miloon Kothari
Special Rapporteur on adequate housing
Att: Ms. Cecilia Moller
Room 4-066/010
C/o OHCHR, 1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland
Tel: +41 22 917 9265
Fax: +41 22 917 9010
E-mail:cmoller@ohchr.org


Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-152-2004
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.