Home / News / Urgent Appeals / PHILIPPINES: Trial of three men yet to begin after three years

PHILIPPINES: Trial of three men yet to begin after three years

May 4, 2005

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

4 May 2005
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UA-74-2005: PHILIPPINES: Trial of three men yet to begin after three years

PHILIPPINES: Illegal detention; Right to speedy trial; Failure of judicial system
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information regarding the long delay in the trial of three men named Jejhon Macalinsal, Aron Salah and Abubakar Amilhasan. They were arrested by the police of General Santos City on 24 April 2002, who accused them of being involved in the 21 April 2002 Fitmart Mall bombing in General Santos City. They are all Muslims and affiliate members of party list Bayan Muna in Socsksargen.

The three men were reported to have been illegally detained at the Pendatun Police Station (PP1) for three months without any arrest warrant. The police also allegedly forced the men to admit their involvement in the Fitmart Mall bombing, which they continuously refused to do. Strangely, the three men were not charged for murder in relation to the bombing. Instead, the police charged them for illegal possession of firearms before the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) Branch 3 and illegal possession of explosives in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 35.

Later, the three men were released on bail but their trial did not start following their arraignment on 26 February 2003. The pre-trial, however, was cancelled on several occasions due to frequent leaves or seminars of the presiding judge, the appointment of a new judge, seminar of lawyers and simply the absence of a court stenographer. Recently, the pre-trial was again postponed until 2 June 2005.

This violates the right to speedy trial of the three men and also illustrates the failure of the judicial system in Philippines. The Action Program for Judicial Reform (APJR) adopted by the Philippine Supreme Court in December 2000 ensures a speedy disposition of cases. It is therefore the duty of all judges to ensure the prompt access to an judicial system as part of the reforms.

We urge your urgent intervention in this case. Please urge the court to expedite the trial in accordance with Republic Act 8493, which ensures the speedy trial of criminal cases.

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

DETAILED INFORMATION:

Names of the victims: 1) Jejhon Macalinsal, 2) Aron Salah, 3) Abubakar Amilhasan; all are Muslims and affiliate members of party list Bayan Muna in Socsksargen (Provinces of South Cotabato, Sarangani, Sultan Kudarat and General Santos City)
Place and date of arrest: at 3:00am on 24 April 2002, Barangay Calumpang, General Santos City, Mindanao, Philippines
Arresting officers: General Santos City Police Office
Courts handling the case: Municipal Trial Court (MTC), Branch 3, Regional Trial Court Branch (RTC), Branch 35, all in General Santos City, Mindanao
Status of the case: The case has not started for over three years due to several cancellations and postponements in the schedule

At around 3:00am on 24 April 2002, Jejhon Macalinsal, Aron Salah and Abubakar Amilhasan were arrested by General Santos City police at a house where they were staying in Barangay Calumpang, General Santos City. All three men are Muslims. The police had come with a search warrant issued by the court against suspects of the 21 April 2002 Fitmart Mall bombing in General Santos City. The police later publicly pronounced that the three persons were arrested due to their alleged involvement in the Fitmart Mall bombing. Firearms and explosives were reportedly recovered at the house. However, the three men denied these charges and claimed that that evidence was planted during the police raid.

After their arrest, the three men were detained at the Pendatun Police Station (PP1) for three months in absence of any arrest warrant. While detained at the police station, one of the suspects, Jejhon Macalinsal who is a pro-gay rights activist, reported that he experienced verbal sexual humiliation from a police custodian. He also said that the police forced him to admit his responsibility to the Fitmart Mall bombing and to point out Aron Salah and Abubakar Amilhasan as masterminds, which he repeatedly refused to do. It is also alleged that the three men were maltreated and tortured by the police during their arrest and detention.

Despite their claim of the victims' involvement in the Fitmart Mall bombing, the police did not file murder charges against them but charged them for illegal possession of firearms before the Municipal Trial Court (MTC), Branch 3 and illegal possession of explosives in Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 35. They were later released on bail.

The three men were finally arraigned on 26 February 2003, ten months after their arrest; on three previous occasions, it had been cancelled due to public holidays and the judge being on leave on 4 October 2002, 4 December 2002 and 3 February 2003.

Following their arraignment, the pre-trial was also cancelled and postponed on seven occasions on 1 July 2003, 12 August 2003, 28 October 2003, 10 December 2003, 15 March 2004, 5-7 May 2004 and 5 August 2004. This was reportedly because the judge was either on leave, attending a seminar, and the case was endorsed to another judge.

Following the appointment of new presiding judge on 5 August 2004, the court observed that there had been no pre-trial order issued by the former presiding judge. Hence, upon a motion of the government prosecutor and with the conformity of the defense counsel, the proceedings were reverted to pre-trial and the parties were directed to appear before the Clerk of Court for a preliminary pre-trial conference. This conference was finally conducted on 31 August 2004.

After the preliminary conference, the pre-trial was scheduled for 30 September 2004, 27 October 2004, 19 November 2004, 24 March 2005 and 11 and 18 April 2005. However, all these dates were continuously cancelled because the presiding judge was either on leave, the counsels were not present, the days were holidays, the lawyers were on seminars, or simply the court stenographer was absent. The pre-trial has now been postponed for 2 June 2005.

The Action Program for Judicial Reform (APJR) adopted by the Philippine Supreme Court in December 2000 ensures a speedy disposition of cases. The Republic Act 8493 also ensures speedy trial of criminal cases.  It is therefore the duty of all judges to ensure prompt access to judicial remedies as part of the reforms. The AHRC strongly urges the Government of Philippines to take appropriate action to expedite the trial to prevent any further delay.


SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please send a letter, fax or email to the relevant government authorities asking them to speed up the conduct of trial of the three above men in accordance to the Republic Act 8493.

Sample letter:

Dear__________,

Re: PHILIPPINES: Trial of three men yet to begin after three years

Names of the victims: 1) Jejhon Macalinsal, 2) Aron Salah, 3) Abubakar Amilhasan Place and date of arrest: at 3:00am on 24 April 2002, Barangay Calumpang, General Santos City, Mindanao, Philippines
Arresting officers: General Santos City Police Office
Courts handling the case: Municipal Trial Court (MTC), Branch 3, Regional Trial Court Branch (RTC), Branch 35, all in General Santos City, Mindanao
Status of the case: The case has not started for over three years due to several cancellations and postponements in the schedule

I am writing to raise my serious concerns regarding the delay in the trial of the three men named above. They were arrested by the police on 24 April 2002 on the suspicion of their involvement in the Fitmart Mall bombing, which they continuously deny. Later, they were charged for illegal possession of firearms before the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) Branch 3 and explosives Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 35, all in General Santos City.

I was informed that the three men were later released on bail but the court has not conducted a trial for more than three years since their arrest on 24 April 2002, due to the
Judge being on leave, attending seminars, absence and replacement of another judge to handle the case, absence of lawyers and absence of court stenographer. Recently, the pre-trial was again postponed for 2 June 2005.

I was also informed that the three men were illegally detained at the Pendatun Police Station (PP1) for three months in absence of any arrest warrant after their arrest. It is further alleged that they were maltreated and tortured by the police.

Under these circumstances, I strongly urge you to take the appropriate action to expedite the trial to avoid further delay in accordance with Republic Act 8493, which ensures speedy trial of criminal cases.

Further, speedy disposition of cases is one of fundamental principles of reforms in the judicial system stipulated in the Action Program for Judicial Reform (APJR) adopted by the Supreme Court in December 2000. I therefore request you to urge the Program Management Office (PMO), which monitors the implementation of APJR, to conduct an inquiry of the delay in relation to APJR implementation.

I further urge you to inquire into the allegations of irregularities during the raid, acts of torture and of illegal detention. The Commission on Human Rights (CHR) Regional office in Cotabato City should further conduct an investigation into the allegations of torture in this case.

Yours truly,


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


PLEASE SEND A LETTER TO:

1. Ms. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo
President
Republic of the Philippines
Malacanang Palace
J.P. Laurel St., San Miguel, Manila
NCR 1005 Philippines
Fax: +632 2929 3968
Email: pgma@compass.com.ph or opnet@ops.gov.ph

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

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

4. The Presiding Judge
Municipal Trial Court (MTC) Branch 3
Hall of Justice, Barangay Lagao
9500 General Santos City
PHILIPPINES

5. Justice Oscar Noel
The Presiding Judge
Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 35
Hall of Justice, Barangay Lagao
9500 General Santos City
PHILIPPINES

6. Evelyn T. Dumdum
The Program Director
Office of the Program Management (OPM)
Action Program for Judicial Reform (APJR)
New Supreme Court Building Annex Padre Faura St., Ermita,
1000 Manila
PHILIPPINES
Tel. No.: +632 552 9578
Fax: +632 552-9586/

7. Prof. Manfred Nowak
Special Rapporteur on the Question of Torture
Attn: Mr. Safir Syed
c/o OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9230
Fax: +41 22 917 9016 (general)

8. Mr. Leandro Despouy
Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers
Room: 3-060, c/o OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
Switzerland
Tel: +41 22 917 9160
Fax: +41 22 917 9006


Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)
Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-74-2005
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.