Report on Extrajudicial Killings and Enforced Disappearances in the Philippines

Fact Finding Mission of Human Rights Now to Philippines

Human Rights Now

April 2008

Summary

In the Philippines, hundreds of social activists and human rights defenders have been unlawfully killed as well as subjected to enforced disappearances since the Arroyo Administration came into power. Human Rights Now (HRN), a Tokyo-based international human rights NGO, conducted an investigation of extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances in the Philippines on April 14-21, 2007.

The fact-finding mission conducted interviews concerning 15 cases of extrajudicial killings (involving 33 victims) and three cases of forced disappearances (involving 9 victims). Additionally, the team conducted interviews to understand the background to the series of human rights violations.

In most of the cases investigated, the HRN fact-finding team found that the killings, disappearances, and tortures could be attributed to or could most likely be attributed to the military or police forces of the Philippines.

First, among the cases the fact-finding team investigated, in 8 out of 15 cases of extrajudicial killings, the witnesses identified the perpetrators as elements of the AFP or belonging to the CAFGU, the army or paramilitary organization under the control of the army. In two of the three forced disappearance cases, witness and released victims clearly testified about the military’s involvement. 　

Second, all extrajudicial cases have several patterns in common with other cases, such as: (a ) the victims are limited to certain groups, (b) victims were condemned by the government or AFP as “enemy of state” or NPA front, (c) victims were publicly exposing the human rights violations allegedly committed by the AFP, (d) victims were harassed, threatened with death, encouraged by the military to stop their leftist activity, or under persistent surveillance. The team detailed its finding in the report.

In terms of the number of killings, we recognize that more evaluation and clarification is necessary to determine the exact number. What is important to note is that a number of extrajudicial killings were indeed committed by state agencies.

HRN has grave concerns about the characteristics of the targeted victims in these killings. In the cases we investigated, the victims include highly respected lawyers, human rights activists, union leaders, a church bishop, a city councilor and left-wing activists. Most of the victims were advocates for the rights of ordinary citizens. Such killings perpetuate fear among the people and have a chilling effect on the society as a whole. It undermines freedom of expression, and ultimately, democracy in society.

HRN also has grave concerned that despite the facts stated above, perpetrators within the government have not been brought to justice and human rights violators are enjoying impunity. The fact-finding team found that it is extremely uncommon for the perpetrators of extrajudicial killing and abduction to be arrested or face trail.

In the 15 killing extrajudicial cases we have investigated, only one case has been prosecuted, no case gained conviction, and the alleged perpetrators are still in active duty in the military. HRN found systematic failure of investigations of the extrajudicial killings cases by the police, and PNP Task Force continuously disregards the accounts of victims’ families. Although the judiciary established new procedure to address the enforced disappearances, such as writ of amparo and writ of habeas data, many victims of disappearances are still missing with little cooperation of the military.

The impunity has brought about future human rights violations. For instance, the mission found that a military personnel who allegedly perpetrated extrajudicial killing of human rights activists in 2003, is also the perpetrator of rape and torture of the abducted student.

As a State party to the ICCPR, the State of the Philippines has a legal duty to ensure the right to life. In the case of extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances, the government has obligation to investigate thoroughly, identify the responsible persons, not only the actual perpetrators, but also identifying the chain of command, as well as ensuring reparation for the victims. HRN urges the Philippines government to conduct thorough investigation of the human rights violation and fight against impunity to restore rule of law and to prevent recurrences.

The fact-finding team underscores that the root cause of the extrajudicial killing and enforced disappearances in the Philippines is the national counter- insurgency policy which does not differentiate between the NPA, armed rebels, and legal organizations and activists. HRN obtains the Oplan Bantay Laya, a document of the military’s counter-insurgency strategy, and found that it stated “neutralization of the target”. Legitimate civil society organizations, such as human rights group, farmers’ organization, labor organization, religious organization and leftist organization are labeled as “enemy of state” “NPA front” Accordingly, they are targeted for elimination in the course of counter-insurgency operation. Extrajudicial killing is a highly probable measure of such elimination. In order to protect the fundamental human rights of civilian in the country, the Arroyo administration must put an end of the counter insurgency policy which links legal organization and activists to the insurgents, and target civilian for neutralization.

HRN is aware of the human rights violations by non-state actors in the country. The fact that non-state actors are committing human rights violations does not negate the state’s own obligation to protect human rights. At the same time, HRN urge all party of the internal conflicts in the Philippines to adhere of international humanitarian law and refrain from attack and abuse of civilian.

Lastly, HRN would like to call upon the government and CPP/NPA to proceed with peace negotiations and to implement the CARHRIHL (Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law).


International Community, in particular the top donor Japanese government, should play a meaningful role to restore human rights and peace in the Philippines.

CONTENTS

I INTRODUCTION 　

................................................................................................................................................

Ⅱ　ACTIVITIES OF THE FACT-FINDING TEAM 　　

................................................................................................................................................

Ⅲ BACKGROUND TO THE EXTRAJUDICAIL KILLINGS IN THE PHILIPPINES 　　　　　　　　　　　　　

................................................................................................................................................

Ⅳ　OVERVIEW OF THE FINDINGS

................................................................................................................................................

Ⅴ　INTERVIEW 　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　

................................................................................................................................................

Ⅵ　EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLINGS AND ABDUCTION CONTINUE　　　

................................................................................................................................................

Ⅶ　IMPUNITY 　

................................................................................................................................................

Ⅷ　THE POLICY OF NEWTRALIZATION MUST BE STOPPED IMMEDIATELY　　　 　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　

................................................................................................................................................

Ⅸ　PHILIPPINE'S OBLIGATION UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW 　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　

................................................................................................................................................

Ⅹ　RECOMMENDATION　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　

................................................................................................................................................

Ⅰ　　Introduction

Human Rights Now (HRN), a Tokyo-based international human rights NGO, conducted an investigation of extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances in the Philippines on April 14-21, 2007.

In the Philippines, hundreds of social activists and human rights defenders have been unlawfully killed as well as subjected to enforced disappearances since the Arroyo Administration came into power. The majority of targets are people who are lawfully criticizing governmental policies by means of peaceful measures such as speeches, writing, and mobilizing people, for instance, lawyers, judges, human rights activists, leaders or activists of labor movements, farmers, priests, and activists of leftist parties.

As friends and fellow Asians, Japanese civil society is very concerned about these human rights violations. Human Rights Now shares this concern and decided to conduct a fact-finding mission in the Philippines.

Ⅱ　Activities of the Fact-finding Team

The HRN fact-finding team conducted a thorough investigation of several cases involving alleged victims and relatives of victims of extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances. The fact-finding mission conducted interviews concerning 15 cases of extrajudicial killings (involving 33 victims) and three cases of forced disappearances (involving 9 victims). Additionally, the team conducted interviews to understand the background to the series of human rights violations. For example, we conducted interviews to learn what countermeasures and preventive measures had been taken in the Philippines.

While we did not have an opportunity to meet senior officials of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (hereinafter AFP) or Task Force USIG (hereinafter TFU), we met with DILG senior personnel, the staff of the Commission of Human Rights, the president and attorneys of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and several rights groups: PAHRA (Philippines Alliance for Human Rights Advocates); Ecumenical　Movement for Justice and Peace; TFDP（Task Force Detainees of the Philippines; Philippine Human Rights Information Center; CODAL（Counsels for the Defense of Liberties); Medical Action Group; Ateneo Human Rights Center and most extensively, KARAPATAN (Alliance for the Advancement of Peoples’ Rights).

We also had a chance to exchange information with the Japanese Embassy.

We greatly appreciate the kind cooperation of all sectors involved.

Table 1: The Itinerary of the Fact-finding Mission

After the mission, the fact-finding team continued to closely monitor the human rights situation in the Philippines. HRN kept itself updated on the status of the cases which the team had investigated, as reported by the various human rights groups in the Philippines. HRN also conducted discussions with the Philippine Embassy in Japan on two occasions. Furthermore, HRN analyzed media reports, as well as reports issued by the governmental organs and the judicial branch of the Philippines.²

Ⅲ Background to the Extrajudicial Killings in the Philippines

1. Overview

In the Philippines, many lawyers, human rights advocates and left-leaning activists have been killed since the Arroyo Administration came to power in 2001. The series of killings can be considered as extrajudicial killings because of the pattern of victimization and impunity: victims were recognized or labeled as leftists and the perpetrators have not been prosecuted or punished³.

The targets of such killings include people who are lawfully criticizing the government policy with peaceful measures such as speeches and writings. The victims have included lawyers, judges, human rights activists, journalists, doctors, leaders or activists of labor movements, farmers, priests, and activists of leftist parties.

It has been pointed out that the counterinsurgency operation in the Arroyo regime is behind the extrajudicial killings. In the 1990s, the Philippine government engaged in peace negotiations with the National Democratic of Front (NDF). However, after the September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States, the Philippine government changed the policy.

The government recognized the CPP-NDF as “terrorists” and launched a counterinsurgency operation- the so-called “Oplan Bantay Laya (OBL, Operation Plan Freedom Watch)”- in January 2002. After the operation was launched, the situation of extrajudicial killings in the country became more serious. This fact may show who is responsible for the series of extrajudicial killings: our recent investigation have revealed that government agencies, such as the military and police, are involved in the killings.

The historical background to the HRN fact-finding mission is outlined in the following sections.

2. Political Situation

(1) Internal Conflict

Since the independence from the United States occupation, there have been conflicts between the Philippine government and rebels. Despite several peace agreements and negotiations, the peace process is often suspended. The main actors of the conflicts are the Philippine government and communist organizations, primarily the Communist Party of the Philippines (hereinafter CPP), its military sector, the New People’s Army (NPA), and their uniting organization, National Democratic Front (NDF).⁴ The Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) has continued counter-insurgency operations towards the CPP-NPA-NDF.

Meanwhile, Muslim secessionist groups⁵ also engaged in armed conflict with the government. Although ceasefire agreements have been concluded with the government in the 1990s and early 2000s, these have not yet been fully implemented.⁶

(2) Failure of peace process

The Philippine government has failed to reconcile with the CPP-NPA-NDF despite a number of negotiations and peace agreements in the 1980s and the 1990s. President Aquino made a temporary peace agreement with the NDF in 1986, however the peace negotiation broke down in 1987.

During the 1990s the CPP-NPA, was represented by the National Democratic Front (NDF) in peace negotiations. Under the Ramos Administration, the peace process made an important step forward: the CPP was legalized and an agreement was concluded between the government and NDF. In 1998, the parties entered into the “Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law”(CARHRIHL)⁷, which affirmed to apply the basic principles of international human rights law and international humanitarian law. Though CARHRIHL was not a cease-fire agreement, it was expected to promote the peace process through decreasing numbers of human rights abuses.⁸

(3) The Arroyo Administration

Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo launched her presidency in 2001. In Oslo in April 2001, the Arroyo Administration once resumed the peace negotiations with the NDF.⁹ However, in the wake of 9/11 and the launch of the US-led “global war on terror”, the CPP-NPA was listed as a terrorist organization by the USA and the EU in 2002. This served to be a major political impediment to negotiations and there have since been calls to remove the organization from the list. Meanwhile, the assassinations of a number of local electoral candidates by the NPA have been reported in 2001 and the series of unresolved political killings of members of legal leftist parties by unidentified armed men has increased.

In January 2002, one year after the Arroyo Administration came to power, the government launched a counter-insurgency operation against rebels －“Oplan Bantay Laya” (OBL, Operation Plan Freedom Watch)¹⁰－ a five-year plan setting forth the holistic counter-insurgency strategies toward the CPP-NPA-NDF to be employed by the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP).

Despite some progress, such as the establishment of the Joint Monitoring Committee (JMC) which was agreed　to by both parties in 2004, the parties have held no further negotiations; therefore, the JMC has virtually lost its function. The momentum for peace negotiations has thus declined.

In June 2006, President Arroyo declared an “all-out war” to eliminate the communist insurgency, particularly the CPP-NPA within two years. According to a presidential spokesman, the government would finally win the fight against the CPP-NPA by means of law and pro-poor programs. The government also budgeted one billion pesos to purchase war equipment and materials.¹¹ In 2007, OBL has been replaced by the new strategy called OBL Ⅱ, which is basically involves the same strategy as the first OBL.

(4) Recent Policies against leftists and “terrorists”

In 24 February 2006, President Arroyo declared a state of emergency by virtue of Proclamation No. 1017, stating that a coup plot was planned by the communist movement and top-ranking military officials. The declaration banned rallies and closed some media organizations. Six representatives from left-leaning parties were arrested or prosecuted. Representative Crispin Beltran of the party-list organization, the Anakpawis was arrested on 25 February.¹² Fifteen people including leftist congressmen, junior-grade officers of the army and major leaders of CPP were prosecuted on charge with insurgency¹³ on 27 February. They were suspected of conspiring with top rank officials of the NPA and the CPP¹⁴. Rebellion charges against six congressmen including Mr. Beltran were dismissed by the Supreme Court in June 2007. Though the state of emergency was called off on 3 March 2006, this incident provoked public criticism against the government.

In March 2007, the Human Security Act of 2007 (An Act to Secure the State and Protect Our People from Terrorism¹⁵) was enacted. This Act provides for tougher sentences for terror crimes as well as facilitating the seizure and sequestration of property belonging to terror suspects¹⁶, the interception and recording of communication between members of terrorist organizations or individuals suspected of the crime of terrorism¹⁷, detention for three days without arrest warrant¹⁸, and the establishment of the An Anti-Terrorism Council, which implements the government policy on terrorism¹⁹.

　　This law has been criticized by an independent UN expert, Mr. Martin Scheinin ²⁰. He has called on the Philippines to amend or repeal the Human Security Act because the Act’s definition of “terrorism” is too broad; it provides for the disproportionately strict penalty of 40 years imprisonment, and also restriction on travel including house arrest²¹.

3. Situation of Extrajudicial Killings

（１）　 Extrajudicial killings have increased under such situation. According to Amnesty International, the number of victims was increasing: there were 66 cases of extrajudicial killings in 2005 and the number of victims reached 51²² in the first six months of 2006. KARAPATAN, a local human rights organization, reported more than 800 extrajudicial killings since Arroyo took office in 2001²³. The lack of any government policies to stop the killings and investigate unsolved cases has provoked international criticisms. In response to the sharp criticisms from within the country as well as from the international community, President Arroyo publicly criticized extrajudicial killings in the state of the nation address in July 2006 and ordered that these incidents be investigated.

Subsequently, Interior and Local Government Secretary Ronaldo Puno ordered the creation of a national level Task Force, named Task Force USIG (TFU) to investigate the killings of “ party list /militant group members, media men and other high-risk personalities” for the past five years. .²⁴. The President also established a commission named “Independent Commission to Address Media and Activist Killings” (being headed by former Supreme Court justice Jose Melo, this commission is called “Melo Commission”) to investigate extrajudicial killings.²⁵

The Melo Commission submitted its report to the government on 27 January 2007.²⁶ However, the government refused to release it. President Arroyo said the report was “incomplete”²⁷ because of insufficient evidence and ordered the Commission to continue the investigation. She asked European Union countries²⁸ for cooperation with the Melo Commission for investigation.²⁹ The EU said they would not help the commission without receiving a copy of the report.³⁰

In February 2007, Professor Philip Alston, the Special Rapporteur of the United Nations Human Rights Council on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions visited the Philippines and conducted investigations of extrajudicial killings in the Philippines.

On 22 February 2007, he stated in his press statement that “Some killings may have been attributed to the AFP.” “There is little doubt that such killing has been committed”.³¹ He also urged the government to release the Melo report.³²

On the same day, the Melo Commission report was released to media, which concluded in its report that “there is some circumstantial evidence to support the proposition that some elements within or connected to the military are responsible for the killings” ^{33 34}

In response to Mr. Alston’s statement regarding military involvement in the extrajudicial killings, President Gloria Macapacal-Arroyo said that the cases “would be resolved and the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) would continue to protect the people.”³⁵ Subsequently, President Arroyo ordered several measures to address this human rights violation. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court declared the establishment of special tribunals for extrajudicial killings³⁶.

According to the UN Special Rapporteur Mr. Alston, the Philippine government has ordered a range of measures to respond to the problem including as follows. ³⁷

- The Department of National Defense (DND) and the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) have been requested to draft an updated document on Command Responsibility;

- The Department of Justice (DOJ), DND, and the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) have been asked to constitute a Joint Fact-finding body in relation to the alleged involvement of military personnel in the killings, and to charge and prosecute those responsible;

- The DOJ has been asked to broaden and enhance the Witness Protection Program (WPP);

- The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court has announced the creation of 99 Special Courts to try those accused of killings of a political or ideological　nature;

- The Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) has formally requested assistance from the European Union and others to provide funds to support government responses to the killings;

- An additional 25 million pesos (US$ 510,000) has been provided to the CHR to enable it to better address the problem; and

- The Presidential Human Rights Committee (distinct from the CHR) has been reactivated.

However, even after that the announcement of the above measures, the human rights situation has not been ameliorated. This will be discussed later.

Ⅳ Overview of the Findings

The fact-finding team of HRN conducted interviews concerning 15 cases of extrajudicial killings (involving 33 victims) and 3 cases of forced disappearances (involving 9 victims).

Table 2

1. The Evidence and Systematic Pattern Suggest the Involvement of Government Agencies

In most of the cases investigated, the HRN fact-finding team found that the killings, disappearances, and tortures could be attributed to or could most likely be attributed to the military or police forces of the Philippines. Details of each case will be provided later. Here, we will point out notable characteristics of our findings.

1. The Identity of perpetrators

Eyewitness Accounts:

In the majority of cases, witnesses comprising family members and/or neighbors were present during the victim’s Killing or abduction and identify perpetrators as belonging to the military.

Among the cases the fact-finding team investigated, in 8 out of 15 cases of extrajudicial killings, the witnesses identified the perpetrators as elements of the AFP or belonging to the CAFGU, the army or paramilitary organization under the control of the army.

The witnesses and relatives told the fact-finding mission the following:

• Case 1 – Eden Marcellana

  • The perpetrator of her Killing was identified as Master Sergeant Donald Caigas of the 204^th Infantry Brigade, 2^nd Infantry Division in Mindoro.

• Case 2 – Benjaline Hernandez

  • The sole survivor of the killing saw the perpetrators wearing military fatigues and bonnets.

  • The perpetrators were identified as Sergeant Antonio Torella of the 7^th Battalion (Airborne), the AFP and CAFGU members. Sergeant Torrela and two CAFGU members were indicted and the trial is currently ongoing.

• Cases 4 and 5 – Jesus Lasa and Juancho Sanchez

  • They were killed in the course of the Hacienda Luisita Massacre.

  • On the day of massacre, the PNP and AFP troops were deployed by the order of the Labour Secretary in front of the picket line and tried to disperse the picket line.

  • Thousands of striking workers in Hacienda Luisita witnessed that the PNP and AFP troops who were surrounding the strikers and using tear gas to disperse the strikers. They then, started firing, killing seven strikers, and injuring many other strikers.

• Case 6 – Ricardo Ramos

  • Two eye-witnesses identified Sergeant Joshua Dela Cruz and Romeo Castillo of the 48^th Infantry Battalion, the7^th Infantry Division as the perpetrator.

• Case 8 – Isaias Sta Rosa

  • The victim’s family (wife, children and siblings) were present when armed men dressed in military fatigue uniforms forcibly took the victim away.

  • Right after the abduction, the family heard a gunshot. When the family found the victim’s dead body, one of the abductors －Lordger Pastrana of the Military Intelligence Battalion of the 9^th Infantry Division was found dead besides the victim’s body. The family found military identification and a military mission order on the body.

• Case 10 – Felipe Lapa

  • Lapa’s son and wife identified two CAFGU members led by the 204^th Infantry Brigade, 2^nd Infantry Division as the perpetrators.

• Case 11– Expedito/ Manuela Albarillo

  • The Abarillos’ nine year old daughter witnessed men in military uniforms take her parents from their home just prior to their fatal shooting.

• Neighbors and other family members witnessed the crime.

• Lieutenant. Dimapinto and another soldier of 16^th Infantry Battalion, in Mindoro were identified as the perpetrators by a nephew of the victims.

• Case 16 – Sherlyn Cadapan

  • Witnesses observed the victims as they were taken away in a military jeep with the license plate number RTF 597. A witness identified elements of the 56^th Infantry Battalion under the7^th Infantry Division as the perpetrators. Human rights investigators then observed the same jeep in front of a military camp during their investigation of the victims’ abduction.

• Case 18 – TAGAYTAY 5

• Released victims told the fact-finding mission that they were abducted by armed men and tortured by the PNP inside and in areas around a military camp.

The case of Ms. Eden Marcellana is a clear example. Ms. Marcellana was a regional secretary general of a human rights group KARAPTAN (Alliance for the Advancement of Peoples’ Rights). She was killed when she was conducting a human rights fact-finding mission in Eastern Mindoro on 21 April, 2003. A military official was identified as a perpetrator by six witnesses who were members of the fact-finding mission.

Another example is the Hacienda Luisita Massacre which took place on 16 November 2004. Many witnesses in the Hacienda Luisita, Central Luzon area testified before the HRN fact-finding team that armed soldiers of the AFP and the Philippine National Police( hereafter PNP) were the ones who shot dead seven victims as well as leaving many others injured.

The military’s involvement also seems clear in several enforced disappearance cases. The abduction case of two students from the University of the Philippines is one example³⁸.

On 26 June 2006, Ms. Sherlyn Cadapan and Ms. Karen Empeño were abducted from the house they were staying at in Bulacan, central Luzon. They have been missing since then. The fact-finding team interviewed the mother of Ms. Sherlyn Cadapan as well as a witness who saw the crime scene. The witness clearly stated that he had identified the perpetrator as a military official belonging to the 56^th Infantry Battalion.³⁹ The fact-finding team found the testimony to be quite credible.⁴⁰

Acknowledgement of the AFP

In two cases, the AFP acknowledged that the elements of the AFP killed the victims and justified the killing as “legitimate encounter between the AFP and the NPA”. In theses cases, the victims were publicly tagged as being NPA members.

• Case 2 – Benjaline Hernandez

• After the killing, the AFP and the governor of North Cotabato held a press conference where they claimed the incident was a legitimate encounter between the military and the rebel group, New People’s Army (NPA). The group of Benjaline was accused of being NPA members and this accusation was used as an excuse for the killing. The perpetrators in the military were later indicted.

• Case 15 – Grecil Buya

• The military admitted killing of the victim, however, they claim the killing was justified because they accused her of being a member of communist rebels.

• According to the victim’s family, one soldier admitted that one of the soldiers with him shot the victim to the victim’s brother.

• The Commission on Human Rights denied military’s above allegation. Later the military changed its allegation to that the “NPA is the one who killed the victim.”

The case of Grecil Buya is clear example of the military killing a nine-year-old girl and then accusing her of being a communist rebel. The Commission on Human Rights (Philippines) has refuted the government’s allegation that Grecil was an NPA member. In the case of Benjaline, the elements of AFP have been prosecuted and are facing criminal trial.

(2) Profile of Victims:

Most of the victims of the extrajudicial killings appear to belong to certain groups, all of which have one common characteristic: their involvement in activities that seem to go against the interests of the Arroyo regime. They are human rights defenders investigating and condemning human rights violations allegedly committed by state agencies, students involved in human rights issues, union leaders, members of the political party-list group Bayan Muna, religious leaders who promote human rights, and in some instances, innocent bystanders that are later accused of being anti-government agents or members of the NPA.

1. Human Rights Group

The following victims that the HRN fact-finding team investigated were members/leaders of the human rights group KARAPATAN(Alliance for the Advancement of Peoples’ Rights), which vocally condemns human rights violations committed by the military.

• Case 1 : Eden Marcellana

• Case 2 : Benjaline Hernandez

• Case 3 : Leima Fortu

• Case 7: Alberto Ramento

Notably, Eden and Benjaline were killed in the course of their research of human rights violations allegedly committed by the military. They all were vocally criticizing the human rights violations committed by the AFP including increasing extrajudicial killings.

Additionally, we would like to highlight the killing of Juvy Magsino (Case 3), a well-known human rights lawyer who was actively working against human rights violations and the mobilization of the AFP.

2. Political Group -Bayan Muna:

The fact-finding team found that the victims of extrajudicial killing include lots of member of Bayan Muna. Bayan Muna is a legitimate political party registered with the party-list system, which is an election system providing the seats in the House of Representatives in proportional representation. There are currently three Bayan Muna representatives sitting in the 13^th Congress of the Philippines: Satur Ocampo, Teodoro Casiño, and Joel Virador. 　However, according to the Melo Commission report, former General Palparan of the AFP as well as PNP Deputy Director General Avelino Razon were of the same view that “KARAPATAN and BAYAN MUNA are ‘fronts’ of the NPA” and “unless we stop fooling ourselves that they are not fronts, we will not be able to solve the insurgency problem.”⁴¹

Among those killed who also belonged to Bayan Muna were:

• Case 3: Juvy Magsino,

Active member of Bayan Muna and candidate for town Mayor in MindoroProvince

• Case 7: Abelardo Ladera,

Leader of Bayan Muna in Tarlac

• Case 11: Felipe Lapa,

Bayan Muna Coordinator of District Three of Laguna Province

• Case 12: Espedito Albarillo,

Secretary General of Bayan Muna Southern Tagalog;

Manuela Albarillo,

Active member of Bayan Muna

• Case 13: Romeo Malabanan,

Secretary General of the Laguna Chapter of Bayan Muna.

3) Union Leaders and Activists

The next largest group of victims comprises union leaders and activists that were engaged in prolonged strikes against management. Examples of this can be seen in the following cases.

• Union leaders and workers of Hacienda Luisita

Cases 4 and 5: Jesus Lasa, Juancho Sanchez, and other 5 workers

The victims were shot and killed when military and police fired into the crowd in the picket line (“Hacienda Luisita Massacre”).

Case 8: Ricardo Ramos

The victim was the president of one of the two labor unions that participated in the Hacienda Luisita labor strike.

• Union leader of EMI-YAZAKI

Case 13: Jesus “Buth”Servida

The victim was the external organizer of new labor union. There was also an attempt to assassinate the former president of the union.

• Union leader of Nestle

Case 18: Diosdado Fortuna

• The victim was the Chairman of the Nestle Labor Union. His union was involved in a prolonged labor dispute with Nestle.

4. Persons who were labeled as “NPA” , “NPA front” or “ Enemies of the State”

Astonishingly, majority of victims were tagged as members of the New People’s Army (hereinafter NPA) or “enemies of the state” before or after killings or disappearances.

Such labeled persons include elected members of the city council, village leaders, lawyers, and leaders of human rights organizations. Based on gathered information, the HRN fact-finding mission observes it is hardly believable that such victims are NPA or enemies of the state.

• Accusation of being NPA

Several victims are tagged as “NPA” before or after the killing.

• Case 1: Eden Marcellana

The victim’s husband told “Palparan mentioned in the past that KARAPATAN was a front of the NPA and these activists are considered enemies. Palparan’s group was going around the community and holding meetings were they would say Eden was a member of the NPA”

• Case2 　Benjaline Hernandez

After the killing, the military declared that the killing was a legitimate encounter

with NPA.

• Case 3 　Juvy Magsino

Prior to her death, Magisno reported to her mother that a Sergeant of the 204^th Brigade of the AFP accused her of being a member of the NPA.

• Cases 4 and 5: Hacienda Luisita Massacre　

After the killing, the military published a report named “Trinity of War” which alleged that the NPA was instigating the Hacienda Luisita strike, and the massacre was committed by the NPA instead of the AFP.

• Case 7: 　Abelardo Ladera

• Prior to his death, the military distributed a Comic styled propaganda material naming the victim as a member of NPA.

• Case 12: Mr. and Mrs. Albarillo

According to the Melo Commission report, police report of the case refers to Mrs. Albarillo as a “lie-low member of the CPP/NPA” and Mr. Albarillo was “supposedly linked to the assassination of Mayor Oscar Aldaba of San Teodoro.”⁴²

Before the killing, Mrs. Albarillo asked for mercy by saying “we are not NPA”; however, their please were in vain.

• Case 16: Grecil Buya,

After the killing, the AFP accused the victim as an “NPA child soldier” as an excuse for the killing.

• Case 18 TAGAYTAY 5

Five men were suspected to be members of the NPA and abducted.

They were tortured physically and mentally to obtain information on their alleged NPA activities. Although the PNP denied that the five men were in their custody, five days after the abduction, the victims suddenly appeared before a district court on a charge of rebellion.

• Listing in “Knowing the Enemies”

The HRN fact-finding team obtained a power point presentation titled “Knowing the Enemies”. The commander of the AFP, General Hermogenes Esperon, in his testimony before the Melo Commission, admitted the existence of the power point presentation “Knowing the Enemy” and stated that it was made by the army.⁴³

In this power point presentation, several legal groups were designated as “enemy organizations”. The fact-finding team found that most victims it investigated were members of organizations mentioned in “Knowing the Enemies.”

The Bayan Muna party and KARAPATAN are listed in “Knowing the Enemies” as enemy organizations. The victims who were members of those organizations have already been described above. Other organizations and victims include the following:

• “Labor Unrest at Hacienda Luisita Incorporated” including CATLU and ULWU.

Ricardo Ramos (President of CATLU)

Jesus Lasa (Active member of ULWU)

In particular, Ricardo Ramos was listed by name in this presentation.

• “Philippines Independent Church” (PIC)

Bishop Ramento(Former Supreme Bishop of PIC)

• “United Church of Christ in the Philippines” (UCCP)

Isaias Sta Rosa (Member)

Juancho Sanchez (Youth Fellowship)

• “College Editor’s Guild of the Philippines” (CEGP)

Benjaline Hernandez (Vice President)

• “Kilusang Mayo Uno” (central organization of labor federations)

Felipe Lapa (Member)

Diosdado Fortuna (Regional Chairperson)

• Order of Battle

There are four cases in which the families and colleagues of victims heard that the victims’ names were listed in the “Order of Battle”. ⁴⁴ The “Order of Battle” is a list of individuals and organizations which was allegedly made by the AFP. According to the UN special rapporteur Alston’s intermediate report, the term “Order of Battle” is defined in the military as “an organizational tool used by military intelligence to list and analyze enemy military units”.⁴⁵

Case 7: Mr. Ricardo Ramos

Case 8: Mr. Abelardo Ladera

Case11: Mr. and Mrs Albarillo

Case14: Mr. Diosdado Fortuna

Notably, Ladera was elected as a city councilor of Tarlac by the second largest vote, while Mr. Ramos and Mr. Albarillo were the chairpersons of their respective Barangays, the smallest local government units in the Philippines. Mr. Ramos was also elected as one of “the most outstanding village leaders in the Philippines”.

There is no justification for the government to list civilian in the “Order of Battle”. Such practice certainly endangers civilian’s life. In particular, there is no legitimacy for the government to list the people working legally and peacefully such as above four victims in the list.

At the same time, the military’s designations of the majority of the victims or their organizations as “enemies of the state” can hardly be dismissed as just meaningless coincidences. The military’s condemnations against the victims prior to the killing suggest a direct connection between the killings and the military.⁴⁶

(3) Incidents Prior to the Killing

In the following cases, incidents prior to the killing also indicate connections between the killing and military or police.

• Case 3 – Juvy Magsino

  • Prior to Magsino’s death, she told her mother that she was receiving death threats from unknown sources and that the commanding officer of the 204^th Brigade, General Palparan once told her “I am watching you.”

• Case 4 –Ricardo Ramos

  • Prior to his death, he found his name in the “Order of Battle” at the regional public meeting organized by military.

  • He got death threat text messages in his cell phone.

  • The day before he was killed, he received a box which contained a flower typically used in funerals, a card signed “RIP (Rest in peace)”, and a cartoon of a coffin. The sender was unknown. This box exploded.

  • On the day of the victim’s Killing, military officers requested to speak to the victim on two separate occasions. Each time, the officers were told the victim was unavailable. Later in the evening of the same day, the victim was shot and killed.

• Case 7 – Abelardo Ladera

  • Prior to his death, the military distributed comic-style propaganda naming the victim as a member of the NPA.

• Case 9 – Alberto Ramento

  • Prior to his death, the victim frequently received death threats in his cell-phone frequently. The threats became more frequent after the issue of “Knowing the Enemy” in which victim’s church, the PIC was designated as an “Enemy of the State”.

• Case 11 – Expedito/ Manuela Albarillo

  • Two weeks prior to the Abarillo’s death, the military frequently visited their home to encourage them to stop campaigning for Bayan Muna.

• Case 13 – Jesus “Buth” Servida

  • According to a former colleague, Mr. Servida was under surveillance prior to his death.

  • Prior to his death, a gunman later identified as a policeman in Security Unit attempted to assassinate the former president of the victim’s labor union near the Yazaki-EMI plant.

• Case 14 – Diosdado Fortuna

  • Prior to his death, Mr. Fortuna reported constant incidents of surveillance and several encounters with police.

  • Prior to his death, another labor organizer in the region was abducted. According to the victim of abduction, the abductors mistook him for Mr. Fortuna.

(4) Method of Killing (Manner of killing, Weapons Used, Location)

In many of the cases, the assailants carried out the killings in a “professional” manner. In the cases investigated by the HRN fact-finding team, victims were often killed by a firearm usually issued to military personnel. An additional indicator that the perpetrators were professionals is the fact that the killings were conducted in broad daylight in front of family members, neighbors and other witnesses.

Weapons Used

Some of the victims were killed with a weapon which is usually used by military, the .45-caliber pistol.

• Case 5 – Isaias Sta.Rosa:

  • The victim’s family stated they were threatened by men in military uniforms carrying .45-caliber pistols.

  • Police investigation recovered a shell from a .45-caliber pistol near the victim’s body.

• Case 20 – Felipe Lapa:

  • The victim was killed by a shot to the head with a .45-caliber gun. The perpetrators were identified as CAFGU members.

• Case 7 – Jesus “Buth” Servida:

  • The victim was killed point blank with .45-caliber gun shots to his face and mouth.

  • The perpetrator has not been identified.

• Case 18 – Diosdado Fortuna:

  • The victim was shot by two armed, unidentified men.

  • Bullets from a .45-caliber pistol entered the victim’s chest and fatally injured his heart, liver and spleen causing his instant death.

Location (Where the killings took place):

The majority of the killings occurred in front of the victim’s home or place of work and in front of several witnesses. In some cases, perpetrators dared to assassinate victims in broad daylight. These acts indicate the assailants had little fear of police or government reaction.

• In many cases, the assailants approached the victims at their homes, ‘escorted’ them several meters away and then shot them.

  • Case 5 : Isaias Sta. Rosa

  • Case 20: Felipe Lapa

  • Case 21: Mr. and Mrs.Abarillo

• In other cases, the victims were killed in public settings such as place of work or in residential areas:

  • Case 2: Juvy Magsino

The victims were shot and killed near the military camp.

• Case 8: Ricardo Ramos

The victim was killed while he celebrated the victory of the strike with many villagers.

• Case 11: Abelardo Ladera

The victim was killed while stopping at a local store on his way home. He was killed in front of his driver at about 1pm.

• Case 19: Romeo Malabanan

The victim was shot in front of his home, along a public street in the morning.

• Case 7: Jesus “Buth” Servida

The Victim was shot in front of his place of work (Japanese-owned Yazaki-EMI) in the morning.

• Case : Diosdado Fortuna

The victim was shot in front of the gate of the Japanese-owned plastic company SAGARA around 5:20 pm.

(5) Killings associated with General Palparan

The Melo commission report described that the involvement of Mr. Palparan, a former General of the AFP as follows:

“General Palparan, clearly the man in the center of the maelstrom, admits to having uttered statements openly encouraging persons to perform extrajudicial killings against those suspected of being communists, albeit unarmed civilians. Worse, he was reported to have ‘expressed delight’ at the disappearance of at least two persons, mere students, but who were suspected of being communists or activists.”⁴⁷

The HRN fact-finding team also finds several killings that we have investigated are attributed to the element of the AFP directed by Mr. Parparan, and most likely attributed to Mr. Parparan.

1) May 2001-April 2003

During this period, Mr. Palparan was the Brigade Commander of the 204^th Infantry Brigade, 2^nd Infantry Division in Mindoro Province. The following incidents are allegedly related to him or his Brigade.

• Case 1 Eden Marcellana

・According to the victim’s husband, she was considered a top enemy of Gen. Palaparan. The victim was preparing a report charging Gen. Palaparan with human rights violations. The report was scheduled to be published as then Colonel Palaparan was preparing for a promotion in the military hierarchy to the rank of General.

・Gen. Palaparan’s direct subordinates held meetings with the local community telling people the victim was a member of the NPA.

・The evidence shows that an element of the 204^th Infantry Brigade under Palparan was the perpetrator of the killing.

• Case 11 Felipe Lapa

A family member of the victim saw the perpetrators who were identified as members of the 204^th Infantry Brigade under Palparan.

• Case 12 Expedito Albarillo

Mr. and Mrs. Albarillo were killed by an element of the 16^th Battalion which is related to the 204^th Infantry Brigade.

2) September 2005-September 2006

During the time, Mr. Palparan was the Commanding General of the 7^th Infantry Division in Central Luzon. The following incidents are allegedly related to him or his Brigade.

• Case 6: Ricardo Ramos

The witness pointed out the elements of the 48^th Infantry Battalion, 7^th Infantry Division under Palparan as the killers.

• Case 16: Sherlyn Cadapan

The witness testified that Sherlyn Cadapan and 2 others were abducted by elements of the 56^th Infantry Battalion, the7^th Infantry Division under Palparan.

According to the Melo report, with respect to those disappearances, General Palparan said that “those disappearances are good for us but as to who abducted them we don’t know.”

• Case 10: Bishop Alberto Ramento

Bishop Ramento was stabbed to death in his church in Tarlac, on October 3, 2006 immediate after the retirement of General Palparan.

• Case 17 Ronald Intal

Ronald Intal was forcibly taken by armed men on 3 April, 2006. He was well known by the 7^th Infantry Division for his support of the Hacienda Luisita strike.

3) Instigation and Encouragement

The HRN fact-finding mission could not obtain any evidence to prove that Mr. Palparan directed or ordered his subordinates within the AFP to perpetrate the killings. Nevertheless, it is clear that he, at least, instigated and encouraged his subordinates to do so.

The report detailed his pronouncements related to extrajudicial killings. The description in the report suggested that General Palparan verbally encouraged and instigated the extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances. For example:

“Even though they are in Government as Party List Representatives, no matter what appearance they take, they are still Enemies of the State” (May 16, 2006, Philippine Daily Inquirer).

“The killings are being attributed to me but I did not kill them, I just inspire the trigger men.” “I encourage people victimized by communist rebels to get even.”⁴⁸

Mr. Parpalan is therefore responsible for some of the killings, by at least instigating and encouraging the actual perpetrators within the military.

(5) Conclusion

The HRN fact-finding team concludes that there are reasonable grounds to believe that in the many cases, either the AFP or PNP are responsible for the killings.

First, in eight extrajudicial killing cases, the team can identify the witnesses who clearly point out elements of the AFP as the perpetrators. In two cases (including one of the above eight cases), the AFP admitted at least once that they killed the victims “in the course of legitimate encounters with NPA.” Also in two of the three forced disappearance cases, witness and released victims clearly testified about the military’s involvement.

Second, in another six extrajudicial killings and one abduction case, the fact-finding mission has not identified any witness to point out military personnel as perpetrators, nor has the team identified any acknowledgement by the military. However, the team can recognize that there are systematic patterns to the killings which suggest a connection between the killings and elements of governmental agencies.

All extrajudicial cases have several patterns in common with other cases, such as:

(a ) the victims are limited to certain groups, (b) victims were condemned by the government or AFP as enemies or NPA front, (c) victims were publicly exposing the human rights violations allegedly committed by the AFP, (d) victims were harassed, threatened with death, encouraged by the military to stop their leftist activity, or under persistent surveillance. Also, the weapons used, locations of crime scenes, and patterns of the crimes have certain similarities. In enforced disappearance cases, the characteristic of the cases have many factors in common with the extrajudicial killing cases.

The cases related to the former General Palparan are the clearest examples of military responsibility. Even if he did not directly order the killings, he publicly encouraged the killings. Successive killings have taken place in the areas which his military Brigade or Battalion controlled and there are cases in which witnesses clearly identified elements of his military as the perpetrators.

Considering the Arroyo Administration’s All Out War policy as well as the AFP’s neutralizing policy toward the leftist, which will be discussed later along with the above findings, the team considers that the governmental agencies, most extensively the AFP, are responsible for most of the above killings.

2. The number and characteristics of the victims.

One of the controversial problems concerns the number of the victims of extrajudicial killings in the Philippines. KARAPATAN, a local human rights organization, reported that more than 800 extrajudicial killings have been committed⁴⁹ since Arroyo came into power in 2001. Another local human rights organization PAHRA has a different number. According to Amnesty International, there were 66 cases of extrajudicial killings in 2005, but the number of cases reached 51 in the first six months of 2006⁵⁰. Moreover, the cases investigated by the Task Force USIG were even more limited in number.

In terms of the number of killings, we recognize that more evaluation and clarification is necessary to determine the exact number. However, the difference in the numbers provided by different organizations cannot be a justification to underestimate or discredit their allegations of victimization. All claims of killings and abductions should be listened to sincerely, and investigated thoroughly by the government. Although KARAPATAN and PHARA reported different numbers of extrajudicial killings, the difference in number can be attributed to the fact that they are working in different regions and their investigations have not overlapped⁵¹.

What is important to note is that a number of extrajudicial killings were indeed committed by state agencies. It is of grave concern that despite the facts stated above, perpetrators within the government have not been brought to justice and human rights violators are enjoying impunity. Most of the victims’ relatives we met with claimed that there had been no justice, accountability, or even serious investigations of the killings of their loved ones.

Also, we have grave concerns about the characteristics of the targeted victims in these killings. In the cases we investigated, the victims include highly respected lawyers, human rights activists, union leaders, a church bishop, a city councilor, a Barangay Captain⁵² and left-wing activists. Most of the victims were advocates for the rights of ordinary citizens. Such killings perpetuate fear among the people and have a chilling effect on the society as a whole. It undermines freedom of expression, and ultimately, democracy in society⁵³.

Ⅴ　Interviews

1. Extrajudicial Killings against Human Rights Workers

Case 1 : Eden Marcellana and Eddie Gumanoy⁵⁴

Background Information:

【Victims 】 Eden Marcellana (29 years old, female)

General Secretary of the organization KARAPATAN Southern Tagalog

Eddie Gumanoy (37 years old, male)

Chair of the peasant organization KASAMA-TK

【Incident】 The victims were killed on April 21, 2003 in Bansud, Oriental Mindoro,

Southern Tagalog. The incident happened in the course of fact-finding investigations conducted by the victims regarding human rights violations in Mindoro.

【Perpetrators】Master Sergeant Donald Caigas of the 204^th Infantry Brigade in Mindoro and

the other AFP members were identified as perpetrators by witnesses.

Prior to the Killings

Prior to her killing, Marcellana’s activities as General Secretary involved: conducting Fact-finding Missions (FFM), developing documentation, interacting with media organizations and holding dialogues with government agencies and military officers. Marcellana worked in this capacity for approximately five years.

Marcellana’s husband told HRN that the military also suspected his wife of being affiliated with the New People’s Army.

Marcellana’s husband believed she was considered a top enemy of Palparan because of her human rights work.

“Almost all the cases of human rights violations were related to Palparan. Eden was the one who handled these cases, and as a spokesperson, she was vocally condemning the human rights violations. That’s why she was suspected as a high-ranking official of the National Democratic Front. She was considered a big fish.”

“Palparan mentioned in the past that KARAPATAN was a front of the NPA and these activists were considered enemies. Palparan’s group was going around the community and holding meetings where they would say Eden was a member of the NPA.”

Circumstances of the Killings

From April 19 to 21, 2003, Marcellana and Gumanoy led a fact-finding mission consisting of 11 people to Gloria, Oriental Mindoro to investigate cases of abduction and torture of Barangay Councilors and police as well as the destruction of villagers’ homes which were allegedly committed by the 204^th Infantry Brigade. While investigating the abduction and torture cases, Marcella’s group learned of another torture case against the Barangay Captain of Tambong. Since the group thought the latter case was urgent, they then decided to conduct a fact-finding mission into this violation as well.

The mission decided to end their work on April 21, 2003 and left for Calapan City. At around 7 pm, the passenger van in which the mission members were riding was stopped and commandeered by armed men. The assailants specifically asked for Eden and forced her to reveal her identity. The van later stopped somewhere in Poblacion 3, Victoria town and the assailants took Eden, Eddie, Virgilio Catoy Ⅱ, Marlvin Jocson, Francisco Saez, all members of the FFM, as well as Zosimo Cripon, an ordinary passenger who rode the van with members of the fact-finding mission, to a jeepney. They were hogtied and driven for another hour or so until the jeepney stopped. At this point, Eden and Eddie were ordered to step out of the jeepney. Eden and Eddie were found dead with bullet wounds the following day. The remaining passengers are still alive and reported the incident.

The witnesses, four survivors of abduction positively identified one of the perpetrators of the abduction as Master Sergeant Donald Caigas of the 204^th Infantry Brigade in Mindoro.

The husband of Eden believes that Palparan is the mastermind behind the killings. “Before she was killed, Eden was preparing a case against Palparan because he was due for a promotion. The Commission on Appointments of the Senate was going to hear the case against Palparan, and Eden was in possession of evidence against Palaparan.”

Investigation and Prosecution

This case became high-profile. The President had to form a Task Force in the Department of Justice, thus starting an investigation. Donald Caigas ignored several summons sent to him to appear before the Department of Justice Task Force. In June 5, 2003, DOJ Undersecretary Jose Calida announced that Master Sergeant Donald Caigas was arrested on charges of Killings of Marcellana and Gumanoy.

Based on the testimonies of nine surviving witnesses to the abductions and killings, in May 2003, the Department of Justice( hereinafter, DOJ) Task Force conducted inquiry of the said incident.

At this time, the case brought by governmental agencies has been dismissed twice. The families and supporters of Eden and Eddie are waiting for a ruling in a third trial.

Comment from the Family Member

When asked what he would like to say to the Philippine government and authorities, Mr. Marcellana responded:

“To have the perpetrators punished, including Palparan; for President Arroyo to order a stop to all killings, and justice for victims.”⁵⁵

Case 2: Benjaline Hernandez⁵⁶

Background Information:

【Victims】 Benjaline Hernandez (22 years old, female)

Deputy Secretary General of the human rights organization KARAPATAN (Alliance for the Advancement of People's Rights) in Southern Mindanao Region based in Davao.

Third year university student at Ateneo de Davao University and the Vice President for Mindanao of the College Editors Guild of the Philippines (CEGP)

Crisanto Amora(23) 　Vivian Andrade(18)　Labaon Sinunday(30)

Members of the Arakan Progressive Peasant Organization (APPO)

【Incident】 The victims were killed on April 5, 2002 in Barangay Caridad, Arakan Valley, North Cotabato.

The incident happened in the course of the victims’ human rights research.

【Perpetrators】Master Sergeant Antonio Torella of the AFP and CAFGU members were identified as perpetrators by witnesses

Circumstances of the Killings

On 5 April 2002, Hernandez was in Arakan Valley conducting a follow-up documentation on the fact-finding mission on the Tababa Massacre, an unsolved massacre where three peasants were killed in Arakan Valley in 2001. Hernandez was accompanied by members of the Arakan Progressive Peasant Organization (APPO), namely, Crisanto Amora, Vivian Andrade and Labaon Sinunday.

According to a witness, when Hernandez and her companions stopped for lunch in an abandoned hut, armed men strafed the house with no warning. Some of the men were wearing bonnets, which covered their faces. After hearing the gunfire, the group ran out of the hut. Sinunday was shot and killed first.

Hernandez, Amora and Andrade begged for their lives while explaining to the armed men that they were civilians, and unarmed. However, they were all shot at close range.

A witness, a 16 years old boy, who accompanied the victims was able to survive the incident by jumping out of the hut and hiding in the grass. According to the witness they were shot and killed at the same time by a group of armed men. He suffered psychological trauma having witnessed the killings at such close range.⁵⁷ The boy identified the perpetrators as Sgt. Antonio Torella of the 7^th Battalion (Airborne), the AFP and members of the paramilitary group called CAFGU (Citizens Armed Forces Geographical Unit). According to the boy, there were six CAFGU involved, including Leo Ingatan, Edwin Arandilla, Edgar Alojado, and Bernabe Abanilla, who we