Home / News / Urgent Appeals / UPDATE (Philippines): Possible irregularities in police investigation; survivor details brutal killings of peasants

UPDATE (Philippines): Possible irregularities in police investigation; survivor details brutal killings of peasants

February 2, 2006

UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Update on Urgent Appeal

2 February 2006

[Re: UA-216-2005: Soldiers kill nine farmers in Leyte, Visayas; UP-141-2005: Peasants were brutally massacred by soldiers; pregnant woman among the dead]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
UP-019-2006: PHILIPPINES: Possible irregularities in police investigation; survivor details brutal killings of peasants

PHILIPPINES: Extra-judicial killings; witness protection; inadequate government action; collapse of rule of law
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received updated information from a reliable source regarding the killing of peasants in Palo, Leyte, Visayas on 21 November 2005. (Please visit our previous appeals: UA-216-2005; UP-141-2005). Concerns of irregularities in the investigation taken by the Palo Police Station and inadequate handling of the victims have been raised.

In a letter dated 20 November 2005 addressed to the AHRC, Police Chief Superintendent Charlemagne Alejandrino, deputy director of the Directorate for Investigation and Detective Management of the Philippine National Police (PNP), provided a different account of events to the details given by the victims. In his letter Alejandrino wrote that the incident took place on November 20 at 11.25pm, which is contrary to the victims’ statement that it occurred on November 21 at 5am.

According to a reliable source, during the police investigation police investigators primarily acted on the military’s account of the incident. There was limited involvement by the victims and witnesses during the inquiry which was conducted by police investigators of the Palo Police Station. Thus, the final report can not be said to be impartial as it strongly favours the police’s version of events. In a police report dated November 24 signed by Police Senior Superintendent Manuel Enage Cubillo, chief of the Regional Intelligence and Investigation Division (RIID), he labeled those wounded victims as “captured enemies”, which violates the victims’ right to be presumed innocent.

The firearms allegedly recovered from the victims’ possession and used by the police as evidence in filing charges against them in court may have been planted as the victims claim they were only carrying farm tools at the time of incident. No further investigations were taken regarding this claim. The firearms were also not subjected to ballistic examination or any other means of forensic examination. The military has also failed to produce the firearms before the court for proper handling of evidence.

In an affidavit dated 23 November 2005 signed by Richard Margallo, one of the survivors said that he and his companions were inside a hut at the time of the incident when they were fired upon by the military. A police report revealed that the military concerned was headed by 2 Lieutenant Luel Adrian Benedicto, attached to the 19th Infantry Battalion, Philippine Army (PA). Seven persons, including a pregnant woman were killed on the spot while several others were wounded. (Please see our previous appeal: UP-141-2005). Please find below the unofficial translation of Margallo’s affidavit below.

We urge your intervention by asking the relevant agencies to request for a fresh investigation into this case. Please ask them to conduct an adequate investigation to look into the allegations of irregularities in the police investigation. If found that the evidence used against the victims was fabricated, the charges against them in court must be dropped unconditionally. The military concerned should be held accountable if it is proven that they violated the victim’s rights.

Finally, please request the authorities to ensure that the victims and witnesses are involved in the process of their investigation. Additionally, the victims must be reimbursed their medical expenses if found to have been denied adequate medical assistance. The families of the dead must likewise be afforded with adequate compensation without delay.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission
--------------------------------------------------------------

Note: Below is the unofficial translation from Tagalog of the affidavit signed by Richard C. Margallo on 23 November 2005

Republic of the Philippines )
Province of Leyte  ) S.S.
Municipality of Palo  )


SWORN STATEMENT

I, Richard Margallo, 30- years-old, married, Filipino citizen and a resident of Barangay San Agustin, Palo, Leyte after solemnly swear accordance to law do hereby depose and voluntarily state that;

1. I am the Chairperson of the San Agustin Farmer Benefeciaries Multi-Purpose Cooperative with membership of 60 farmers whose farmlands are within the area of Barangay (village) San Agustin, Palo, Leyte. I was elected to serve a second term as Chairperson of the cooperative in March 2005.

2. In June 2004, Rene Margallo, Renato Dizon, Fe Muriel Obejas, Bernabe Burra, Francisco Cobacha and Ariel Santiso brought to our attention the grabbing of their farmlands by Pedro Margallo and his children namely Roque Margallo and Nestor Margallo, both are residents of Barangay Cogon, Palo, Leyte. The farmland that they intend to grab is composed of over 12 hectares. I said that the cooperative must do something to help the victims.

3. In 2001 the aggrieved six farmers won ownership of the land in a case filed before the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) Regional Office-8 and DAR-Provincial Office in Leyte. However, Pedro Margallo and his children have continued to grab the said land.

4. On September 2005, one of our members, Bernabe Burra, sought assistance from Bayan Muna – Metro Tacloban Chapter in order to find a solution to our problem regarding the grabbing of land by Pedro Margallo. Bayan Muna responded positively to our request and expressed interest in helping us. On October 2005, our group decided to hold a ‘balik uma’ (resumption of farming) in order to help return the six farmers to their lands.

5. We decided to start cultivating the land on 21 November 2005. On 20 November 2005, at 8pm forty six of us were inside the hut owned by my father, Rene Margallo, in preparation for the activity the next day. The hut is close to the farmland that we were supposed to cultivate. We planned to start cultivating the farmland by dawn on November 21. We did not carry firearms. What we had were farm tools and three hand tractors that would be used in cultivating the soil.

6. At around 5am on 21 November 2005, one of our companions saw several individuals positioned close to our hut. Ramy Cumpio said, “leave them alone. It’s almost morning anyway. We could see them later.” We continued on drinking coffee. Five minutes later, they started firing at us.

7. I saw Roel Obejas who was hit first. After that, they continued on firing at us. At least five objects, which looked like grenades, were thrown at us. I was standing near a tree and covering myself. Even though we shouted “We’re civilians, we won’t fight with you!” they continued on firing at us. I heard one of them, “You mother f**ker, come out!” After that, I heard another of those firing at us shout “We should call for reinforcement…helicopter”.

8. After 30 minutes they entered inside the hut. I stood up and told them “Sir, we won’t fight you. We don’t have guns.” Only at that time I saw that the persons who are firing at us were wearing military uniforms, with combat boots, and in full battle gear. The others were hooded with bonnets and wearing caps. I then realised that they were soldiers. They shouted at us: “Don’t stare at us, put your heads down!”

9. I saw Joselito Tobe and Arnel standing. I also saw when they kicked and hit them with their riffle butts. While lying with our faces to the ground, all of us were stepped on by the soldiers. I also saw when they hit Eulogio Pilapil with their rifle butt and accused him of being a supplier of firearms.

10. Afterwards, one of them said “What now, are you not going to surrender your firearms? If not, then we will kill one of you here!” “Sir, we should kill the wounded”. Their team leader however said “No, several people could see us”.

11. The team leader instructed two of the soldiers to proceed to the village to get some people to help them in carrying the wounded and the dead.

12. We were taken to the roadside, about 200 meters from the hut. They first took the wounded but they refused to have them taken by an ambulance until their leader, Major Daguy, had come.

13. I went ahead of them to have myself treated. I forced myself together with Ronilo Orcida and we both rode on a motorcycle and headed towards the municipal hall of Palo.

14. We were not armed, contrary to what they (military) are accusing us of. I have been farming for nine years in Barangay (village) San Agustin. Presently I am also a member of the village council.

15. I am issuing this affidavit as proof of my complaint and for whatever legal actions thereof.

IN WITNESS THEREOF, I am affixing my signature and full name this 23rd day of November 2005.


        Richard C. Margallo (sgd.)
           Affiant

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

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please write letters to the relevant authorities below and raise your concern regarding this case. In your letter please request that a fresh investigation be conducted regarding this case in order for the military men concerned to answer to the allegations victim Richard Margallo made against them.

Suggested letter:

Dear _________,

PHILIPPINES: Possible irregularities in police investigation; survivor details brutal killings of peasants

I am writing to express my deep concern regarding the authority’s handling of the investigation into the killing of seven farmers and the wounding of several others in Palo, Leyte on 21 November 2005. It has come to my attention that the result of the investigation conducted by the police investigators may have been partial and concluded on the statement of the military. I am deeply concerned that the victims and families of the dead had only limited involvement in the investigation.

There are also inconsistencies between the police report and the victims’ account. I have learned that in a letter dated 30 November 2005, by police chief superintendent Charlemagne Alejandrino, deputy director for Directorate for Investigation and Detective Management of the Philippines National Police (PNP), he wrote that the incident took place on 20 November at 11.25pm, which is contrary to the victims’ account stating that it happened on November 21 at 5am.

Additionally, in the police report dated November 24 signed by Police Senior Superintendent Manuel Enage Cubillo, chief of the Regional Intelligence and Investigation Division (RIID), the wounded victims were labeled as “captured enemies”. Such labeling in the absence of proper investigation and a trial violates the principle of presumption of innocence. This practice is totally unacceptable and prejudicial to a person’s Constitutional rights.

I have also learned that the firearms allegedly recovered from the victims’ possession and used by the police as evidence against them in court may have been planted. No further investigation, however, has been taken to look into this claim. The firearms were also not subjected to ballistic examination or any other means of forensic examination, which may help in the investigation. The military concerned have also failed to turn over the firearms to court for proper handling of evidence.

In an affidavit dated 23 November 2005 signed by Richard Margallo, one of the survivors, he said that he and his companions were inside a hut at the time of the incident when they were fired upon by the military. A police report revealed the military concerned was headed by 2 Lieutenant Luel Adrian Benedicto, attached to the 19th Infantry Battalion, Philippine Army (PA). Despite this serious allegation, no immediate sanctions were imposed on the military concerned and they have not been placed under investigation to answer to the allegations made against them.

I am extremely disappointed by the manner in which the authorities, in particular the Palo Municipal Police Station (PMPS), have handled this case. I therefore urge the relevant authorities to commence a fresh investigation. The victims and families of the dead must be involved in the process of the investigation. If it is found that the allegations and evidence against the victims were fabricated, the charges against them must be dropped and their release called for immediately.

Finally, I urge you to ensure that the victims are reimbursed their medical expenses if it is found that they have not been afforded adequate medical assistance. Immediate compensation must also be given to the families of the dead. Additionally, the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) Regional Office VIII should take a pro-active role to ensure that the affected victims are afforded appropriate assistance.

I trust that your intervention in this case will be forthcoming.


Yours sincerely,


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

1. Ms. 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

2. P/DIR Gen. Arturo Lumibao
Chief, Philippine National Police (PNP)
Camp Crame
Quezon City
PHILIPPINES
Tel: +63 2726 4361/4366/8763
Fax: +63 2724 8763

3. Mr. Orlando Casimiro
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
Tel: +632 926 9032
Fax: +63 2 926-8747

4. Mr. Raul Gonzalez
Secretary
Department of Justice
DOJ Bldg., Padre Faura
1004 Manila
PHILIPPINES
Fax: +63 2 521-1614
Email: sechbp@infocom.com.ph

5. Mrs. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo
President
Republic of the Philippines
Malacañang Palace
JP Laurel Street, San Miguel
Manila 1005
PHILIPPINES
Tel No: +63 2 735 6201 / 564 1451 to 80
Fax: +63 2 736 1010

6. Mr. Philip Alston
Special Rapporteur on Extra-judicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Executions
Atten: Lydie Ventre
Room 3-016, c/o OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9155
Fax: +41 22 917 9006 (general)
Email: lventre@ohchr.org


Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Update
Document ID :
UP-019-2006
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.