PHILIPPINES: Economic gains do not justify strength of democracy

A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission
March 22, 2007

Not only is democracy being subverted in the Philippines, but its meaning is also misunderstood. While the country may have made economic gains in recent times, to declare them as proof of a ”strong democracy” belies democracy’s true meaning, for the strength of democracy is measured, not by economic gains, but by the strength of the country’s rule of law and its justice system. To omit the worsening attacks against the Filipino people that they are experiencing daily in defence of their basic rights--whether they are prominent figures, influential parties or just ordinary citizens--misconstrues the meaning of genuine democracy.

It is difficult for an ordinary Filipino to believe that a democratic system is, indeed, functioning in the Philippines. There cannot be genuine democracy when almost daily activists are targeted for extrajudicial executions, people are forcibly disappeared and tortured without legal redress and leftists or rightists are often subjected to attacks. The violence directed at prominent and influential personalities in recent times is a symptom of a rotten and decaying system of justice. For instance, illegal arrest and detention, the filing of fabricated charges, torture and disappearances, among other human rights problems, are a fact of life in the Philippines. The inability of the country’s political and judicial systems to adequately respond to this violence subverts democracy.

When perpetrators--in particular the police and military--are not punished and victims of human rights violations and their families are denied the possibility of redress and justice, distrust and skepticism among them intensifies. Deepening distrust of the justice system should be considered a challenge to restoring democracy and the rule of law in the Philippines. Instead, the victims and their family members are often isolated by unjustly denying them the possibility of redress and frequently accusing them of being accomplices of, as well as influenced by, the ”enemies of the state” and “destabilisers”. Consequently, the Philippines is a country where democracy has not fully developed. Why it is failing is where the discussion should begin.

A victim of human rights violations perpetrated by government security forces soon realises that the possibility of seeking justice within the country’s legal system is difficult, if not impossible, today. If even prominent and influential people have been subjected to persecution and attacks, imagine how many thousands, if not millions, of ordinary Filipinos have continued to suffer the same plight but remain silent. Not that they do not want to speak, but they are rarely given a platform from which to do so, and no one speaks for them. Worst of all, they perhaps may not yet realise that their issues are legitimate, that they have the right to fight back, that their issues are similar to other Filipino victims. If the government can tolerate extrajudicial killings, the filing of false and arbitrary charges, torture and enforced disappearances and attack those critical of the government, ordinary Filipinos who do not have any influence at all can easily suffer the same fate.

When the martial law and dictatorial regime of Ferdinand Marcos was toppled by the people’s peaceful revolt in 1986, these were the very same atrocities and injustices that the people resisted and fought for. But even after democracy was restored, still human rights violations are occurring in the Philippines, and, in some instances, they are even worse and onerous today. This reality is one of the clear indications that democracy cannot be achieved by merely changing the leadership alone but must involve an improvement in the functioning of the democratic system itself. In the Philippines, the country’s democratic system has not fully matured, and the present system of justice is still unable to deal effectively with the country’s problems. For instance, torture victims and the families of the disappeared know from their experience that their complaints are not even afforded any rudimentary investigation by the police. The system of police investigation and the laws themselves do not provide any assurance for justice for the victims. Torture and enforced disappearance, for example, are not criminal offences.

One characteristic of the present government is its intolerance of those critical of its actions and policies and its manipulation of the political and legal systems to justify its illegal acts. Basic to a democratic country, however, is the ability of its citizens to freely exercise their right to criticise the government without fear of being persecuted, avenues for victims to seek redress and justice exist and function, mechanisms are available for complaints of human rights violations and crimes to be properly investigated and prosecuted, the life of every citizen is protected by exhausting the government’s resources. These features of a political and legal system are among the many ways of measuring democracy; economic gains alone are not enough to ensure democracy. Moreover, every public official and every member of the security forces are accountable to every citizen. Therefore, any attempt by those in government to subvert democracy by using their influence and power must be held accountable for their actions. No one is above the law. The problem in the Philippines today, however, is the political and legal systems themselves are failing to effectively respond to the crises within the country. It is a country where perpetrators of the worst forms of abuse can continue to enjoy their freedom in a climate of impunity without fear of punishment.

Most of those today in the government service, politics, the police and military had intense experiences during the martial law period of the former dictatorial regime. They either cooperated with—in particular the police and military--or fought against the oppressive Marcos regime. The failure of the present democratic system to control and reject the strong influence of these personalities, to reject their biased and arbitrary practices and to monitor and constrain their self-interest dilutes and subverts democracy. For instance, the newly enacted Human Security Act of 2007 was endorsed by a person who once cooperated with Marcos during the martial law period. Although he contributed to the country’s democratisation process, the present system failed to control and reject this person’s militaristic ideology and entrenched bias toward the violation of people’s rights. This mentality has continually influenced the fabric of Filipino society. It is likewise deeply rooted among the police and military establishment.

The recent desire by the chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) to revive laws from the martial law period that have been repealed because of their oppressive nature, in particular the Anti-Subversion Act, is an expression of the bias he and others have long held. The police and military are finding it difficult to be “efficient” by gathering evidence and properly investigating and filing strong cases in court. Thus, the enactment or revival of oppressive laws is believed by them to be necessary to do their job. Although the chief of the Philippine National Police (PNP) rejects proposals for the revival of oppressive laws, he nevertheless endorses the newly enacted Human Security Act of 2007, a law which contains provisions that violate the basic civil liberties of the Filipino people and tolerates abuses with impunity. One of the shocking proposals by the military is to introduce amendments to the law before it even takes effect to reduce the penalty imposed on government officers for wrongly arresting and detaining a person.

In short, the Philippines is a country claiming to be democratic but instead weakens the protection of the rights of its citizens and their civil liberties and subsequently strengthens the authority of the police and military establishment. It is a country that is a victim of manipulation and the monopoly of power by a small group of people, a democratic system that is either unable to or not allowed to fully mature because of the domination of a few people and that sadly victimises the majority of the Filipino people. Those in government are not serious about genuinely addressing the cause of the people’s problems by going beyond empty rhetoric and taking concrete action. They either fail to implement the countless recommendations made to address the worsening condition of human rights in the Philippines or to closely monitor those that are put into practice. The Philippines unfortunately is a country taken hostage by those in the government and even those critical of its abuses and atrocities where discussion of what went wrong and what to do is not a priority or is absent.

The failure to rectify the human rights problems of the Philippines is clearly reflected in the number of independent investigations conducted by the government itself, the United Nations and the international community, investigations whose recommendations either are not adequately acted upon or are simply ignored. The findings of the possible involvement of the police and military in the country’s wave of extrajudicial killings by the Melo Commission appointed by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and the U.N. special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Philip Alston, has not led to any effective prosecutions, for example. The assurance given by the government to strengthen the witness protection programme has led to few, if any, changes, and people continue to distrust the ability of the authorities to protect them. The government also announced the appointment of special prosecutors and the introduction of special courts, but again, little, if any, movement has been made to realise these pronouncements.