Home / News / Urgent Appeals / PHILIPPINES: Court orders trial of five torture victims detained over two years without trial
 

PHILIPPINES: Court orders trial of five torture victims detained over two years without trial

April 25, 2005

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

26 April 2005
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UA-69-2005: PHILIPPINES: Court orders trial in the case of five torture victims detained after two years of delay

PHILIPPINES: Torture; Right to speedy trial; Rule of Law;
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information from Task Force Detainees of the Philippines (TFDP) regarding the detention of five torture victims for over two years without trial. The victims were arrested on 8 April 2003 in Cotabato City, Mindanao and were charged in connection with the March and April 2003 bombings in Davao City. Two of them were minors at the time of arrest.

No trial was conducted due to the slow progress in the conduct of reinvestigations and the prosecutor’s unclear declaration of probable cause. Under Philippine laws, before a case can go on trial the prosecutor should establish a 'probable cause'. On 31 March 2005, the Regional Trial Court Judge Paul Arcangel issued a ruling on the case that there is a need to go on trial.

Under these circumstances, we urge your intervention to ensure the trial of the five persons will be in accordance with Republic Act 8493, known as the speedy trial of criminal cases. The delay in the conduct of trial and detention of persons for years without trial is a serious problem within the Philippine justice system. Several detainees have long been deprived of their liberty and right to speedy trial. Please see our previous appeals (UA-66-2005)

Please also urge the Court handling the case to ensure that further delays, cancellation and postponement of hearings in their case, as a result of prosecutor's inefficiency, as has previously happened, should not be tolerated. Also please ask the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) to reconsider its previous decision and to take necessary action in relation to the complaint of torture by the suspects.

Urgent Appeals Desk
Asian Human Rights Commission
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DETAILED INFORMATION

Name of the victim/s: Tohamie Ulong (minor), Ting Idar (minor), Jimmy Balulao, To Akmad and Esmael Mamalangkas, presently detained at the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP) Maa, Davao City
Place and date of arrest: 8 April 2002, at Poblacion Dos, Cotabato City, Mindanao
Status of the case: The Regional Trial Court has already issued a ruling of the need to conduct a trial after two years of delay and postponement

The five detained were illegally arrested on 8 April 2003, in separate joint police and military operations in connection with the Davao International Airport (DIA) and Sasa Wharf bombings at a pump boat terminal in Almonte Extension, in Purok Bualan, and in Poblacion Dos, in Cotabato City.

Arrested were Tohamie Ulong (minor), Ting Idar (minor), Jimmy Balulao, To Akmad and Esmael Mamalangkas.  Upon arrest, they tortured and were forced to admit to the bombings in Davao City. While under custodial investigation, they were blindfold, electric shock, beaten, and they experience dry and wet methods of suffocation.

Among the perpetrators are members of Presidential Anti-Crime Emergency Response (Pacer), a special presidential task force with headquarters in Davao City. They victims were detained at the headquarters of Criminal Investigation and Detection Group in Davao City for several months before they were turned over to the City jail.

The case has had already gone through a very long and slow process of reinvestigations to prosecutor’s unclear declaration of probable cause. It was only in the latter part of 2004 that they were arraigned. A pre-trial was set for 2 December 2004, but was postponed

Since December 2004, the pre-trial has been postponed on several occasions. On 4 January 2005, it was postponed due to the existence of two sets of suspects in the same case.  The judge had to order the City Prosecution Office (CPO) to decide who among them will be tried first.  On 7 January 2005, the CPO decided that the five torture victims would undergo trial before the new suspects.

On 18 January 2005, the hearing was set, but it was cancelled due to the absence of the Prosecutor who was confined to a hospital due to a heart ailment. Succeeding postponements occurr as the prosecutor had not established yet 'probable cause'. The hearing on 4 February 2005 was postponed when the defense counsels argued that a probable cause should be established before a trial can occur.

On 18 February 2005, the prosecutor was about to present his witnesses during the pre-trial but this time the suspects were not made available to appear in Court based on the previous directive from the Regional Trial Court Branch 12 citing security reasons of postponing the trial.

On 31 March 2005, Judge Paul T. Arcangel of the Regional Trial Court Br. 12, Davao City ruled that there is a need to go to trial because there exists probable cause, and the probability of the guilt or innocence of the suspects will be determined in a proper trial.


Suggested Action:

Please send a letter, fax or e-mail to the relevant authorities
Sample letter:


Dear Sir/Madam:

Re: PHILIPPINES: Court orders trial in the case of five torture victims detained after two years of delay

I am writing to express my concern over the delay in the case of five torture victims who have been detained for two years without trial following their arrest on 8 April 2003. The victims, two of whom are minors, are presently detained at the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology in Maa, Davao City.

The detainees are Tohamie Ulong (minor), Ting Idar, To Akmad, Jimmy Balulao (minor) and Esmael mamalangkas.  They were illegally arrested, tortured and charged in relation to their alleged involvement into two bombings in Davao International Airport (DIA) in March 2003 and Sasa Wharf in April 2003.

According to information I received, Regional Trial Court Judge Pail Arcangel who is handling their case, issued a ruling on 31 March 2005 about the need to hold the suspects for trial. The Court has not conducted a trial in more than two years due to the delay in the reinvestigation and because the prosecutor has not established a 'probable cause' yet to bring the suspects to trial.

However, with the ruling of Judge Arcangel, the Court is now obliged and duty-bound to initiate a continuous trial in accordance with Republic Act 8493, which ensures speedy trial of criminal cases. By so doing, the Court must not tolerate further delays in the trial without justifiable cause.

I urge your intervention to ensure a speedy trial on this case, in accordance to law. The detainees have already suffered enough, and have been deprived of their liberty and right to speedy trial as a result of their prolonged detention. The Court must appropriate action immediately.

The Philippine Government is a state party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The government is duty-bound to ensure that the provisions in the Covenant, in particular Article 14. This article guarantees the speedy disposition of case in Court.

Further I urge the Commission on Human Rights, Regional Office XI, in Davao City to take appropriate action into the complaint of torture by the five victims. The Government is signatory to the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The Commission should take appropriate action for victims who seek redress and justice.

I am hoping for your immediate action in this matter.

Respectfully yours,

_________________

PLEASE SEND A LETTER TO:

1. Ms. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo
President of the Republic of the Philippines
Malaca?ng Palace
J.P. Laurel St., San Miguel
Manila, NCR 1005 Philippines
Fax: +63229293968
Email: pgma@compass.com.ph or opnet@ops.gov.ph

2. Mr. Raul Gonzales
Secretary
Department of Justice
DOJ Bldg., Padre Faura
1004 Manila, Philippines
Fax: +6325211614
Email: sechbp@infocom.com.ph

3. Mr. Purificacion Quisumbing
Commissioner
Commission on Human Rights (CHR)
SAAC Bldg., Commonwealth Ave.
U.P. Complex, Diliman, Quezon City
PHILIPPINES
Tel: +63 2 928-5655/926-6188
Fax: +63 2 929-0102
Email: drpvq@chr.gov.ph

4. Jovencito R. Zuno
Chief State Prosecutor
Department of Justice (DOJ)
DOJ Bldg., Padre Faura Street
1004 Manila
Philippines
Direct line: +63 2 525-0952
Trunk line: +63 2 523-8481 locals 219; 218
Telefax: + 63 2 525-0952
E-mail: jrz@doj.gov.ph

5. Atty. Alberto Sipaco
Commission on Human Rights, Region XI
Trinity Bldg., Quimpo Boulevard,
Davao City
Philippines
Telefax: +63 2983749/2982233

6. Ms. Manuela Carmema Castrillo
Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
Switzerland
Fax: +41229179006

7. Mr. Leandro Despouy
Special Representative on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers
OHCHR-UNOG, Palais Wilson
Rue de Paquis 52, Geneva
Switzerland
Fax: +41 22 9179006


Thank you

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-69-2005
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.