Philippines, country which is officially referred to as the Republic of the Philippines is an archipelagic and sovereign country in Southeast region of Asia. The Philippines is located in the Western region of the Pacific Ocean. It comprises approximately 7, 641 Islands that are divided into three major geographical locations from South to North: Mindanao, Visayas, and Luzon. Its capital city is known as Manila and Quezon as the most famous city. The Philippines is bounded by the South China Sea, Philippine Sea, and the Celebes Sea on the West, East, and the Southwest regions respectively. The country shares Maritime borders with Vietnam, Taiwan, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Palau to the West, North, South, and East respectively. The country is headed by Rodrigo Duterte as the president. The human rights issue to be addressed in this report is extrajudicial killings.
In the constitution of the Philippines, the rights of Filipinos are articulated in the Article III which is also known as the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights has 22 major sections which are always applied in the declaration of the Filipino citizen’s privileges and rights which must be protected by the constitution in whichever matter. The life to life falls in section 1 of article III of the Bill of Rights in the Philippines Constitution (Pangilinan, 2011, pp.56-69).
In addition to other local laws, Philippines’ human rights are guided by the United Nation’s ‘International Bill of Human Rights (IBHR)’. The UN Bill of Rights consolidates three major legal documents which include; the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) (Magliocca, 2016, pp.231).
Undoubtedly, Philippines country upholds a lot of sadness of human life and the protection of right to life for the humans. In accordance with Pope, Frances, right to life is the topmost human right. In Philippines form of jurisdiction, life is not merely a moral but a legal principle that is well enshrined in the constitution containing a wide range of provisions of protection of such invaluable human rights. Article III of the Bill of Rights states that no one should be deprived of his or her life without any due law process. Article II of the Bill of Rights, in the Declaration of Principles, protection of human life is regarded as essential being enjoyed by all persons of the democracy blessings. The fundamental law of government puts a lot of value on human life such that it prohibits the imposition of death penalties unless there are compelling reasons such as heinous crimes (Magliocca, 2016, pp.231).
The extrajudicial killings impacted the lives of many people and their families. In the operations of the killing of all suspected drug dealers, pushers and users, children, students, women, men, and their family members were killed. The defenders of human rights were also humiliated and tortured following their critic and condemnation of the president’s anti-drug campaign (Kine, 2017, pp.46-80). The killings also impacted on the journalists who were threatened not to provide contradictory information and statistical data regarding the number of deaths which had been caused by the police and other vigilantes. Since president Duterte took the presidential position of the Philippine country, approximately 118,287 drug personalities are under arrest while 1,308,078 others have surrendered to the authorities (Baviera, 2016, pp.202-208).
On an explicit platform, Duterte campaigned and promised to kill all kind of people who would be making the lives of the Filipinos hard and miserable. In his manifesto, Duterte also promised to kill all kinds of people who would be encouraging and be involved in corruption (Thompson, 2016, pp.3-14). In his vow, the president promised to terminate the lives of all criminal suspects as a solution to criminality, drug and substance use, and corruption the next three to six months after he gets elected as the president of the Republic of Philippines (Pangalangan, 2011, pp.56-69).
During a campaign by the government on the illegal use of drugs, Duterte publicly praised and encouraged extrajudicial killings of all suspects drug users and drug dealers. The human rights groups in Philippine linked the government campaign and the president’s fiery rhetoric to a surge of killings of people by unidentified gunmen and police since he took the office of the presidency in the country (Thompson, 2016, pp.3-14). Based on statistics, approximately 4,800 people were killed in a short period. Police reported that those individuals who were targeted by the police were shot to death following their refusal for arrest but there was no clear and tangible evidence to support this information (Baviera, 2016, pp.202-208).
The killings provide a highlight of the long-standing impunity problem in the country for abuse and harsh state security forces. On top of extrajudicial killings, other issues that confront the Philippines include; violations of reproductive health rights, rights of indigenous people, child labor, and discrimination and stigma related to the crisis of HIV/AIDS (Mapp and Gabel, 2017, pp.1-2).
The Philippines had seen an unprecedented killing level through the enforcement of law since Duterte took the presidential seat. According to the statistical data and records by the police from 01/07/2016 to 03/11/2016, approximately 1,790 suspects of drug users and drug pushers have been killed by the police (Teehankee, 2017, pp. 69-89). The toll of death constitutes almost 20-fold jump in comparison to 68 such killings by the police from 1st January to 15th June of last year but one. The police statistical records attribute to extra 3,0001 killings of people who were drug users and dealers to unknown vigilantes from July to September of last year but one (Thompson, 2016, pp.3-14).
According to the police, these deaths were categorized as “deaths under investigation” but completely there was no evidence of active probation by the police on the occurrence of all the circumstances. According to the ‘Philippine National Police Director-General Ronald Dela Rosa’, it was stated that extrajudicial killings should not be condoned. In the month of September, the same year, the Internal Affairs Services police sources stated that they were overwhelmed by the very high scale of police killings since it could probe only a fraction of the total number of deaths recorded (De Castro, 2017, pp.139-159).
It is so sad to report that Duterte as the president did not respond to all official calls regarding the official probe into the ever-increasing extrajudicial killings. Instead, Duterte stated that the ever-increasing number of deaths following the extrajudicial killings was an indication of success of his own initiated anti-drug campaign (Pangilinan, 2011, pp.811).
The president went ahead and urged all his policemen to seize the momentum. This view was also endorsed by some of the key senior officials of the Duterte’s governance. Solicitor-General Jose Calida, the top official to Duterte took an act of defending the police killings legality and gave an opinion that the so-called “high number of deaths” was not even enough as per the established targets of the anti-drug campaign (Curato, 2017, pp.142-153).
The “war on drugs” under the administration of Duterte resulted in thousands of deaths of most of the Filipinos. According to the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA), the number of deaths increased to 3,906 from 1st July of last year but one to 26th September of the following year based on the police operations that were conducted. The unidentified gunmen had killed more thousands of drug dealers, pushers and users. This led to a total death toll of more than 12, 000 in accordance with the reports by the credible media and World Report 2018 (Clark, and Sikkink, 2013, pp.539).
The Philippine government frustrated all the efforts by the media and the independent observers towards the maintenance of transparent and verifiable tally of the extrajudicial deaths through issue and provision of contradictory statistics and data. In August last year, the Human Rights Official Commission indicated that the actual number of killings was certainly higher in comparison to what had been suggested by the police (Dressel, 2011, pp.529-545).
According to an investigation carried out by the Human Rights Watch, it was discovered that the ‘Philippine National Police’ together with its agents had performed repeated Extrajudicial killings of the drug users and suspects and claimed false self-defense. The police had spent ammunition, packets of the drugs, planted guns on the bodies of the victims as their implication in drug operations and activities (Espiritu, 2017, pp.45-60).
The masked gunmen who also took part in the extrajudicial killings were reported to be working hand-in-hand with the police. All the doubts associated with this were cast on the claims of the government that most of these killings had been initiated by the rival gangs of drugs and the vigilantes. No single individual had been meaningfully prosecuted and investigated for the committed drug killings. Instead, the president pledged to pardon all the police who were involved in the drug killings (Gonzaga, 2011, pp.45-60).
In October last year, the president responded to the public outcry against the extrajudicial killings which were notably committed against the children by removing the police from the anti-drug activities and assigning the duties to the PDEA since it is the main agency that should be involved in the performance of drug wars. Following increased criticism of Duterte’s anti-drug campaign, he responded by harassing, threatening and impugning critics of the human rights defenders and the government (Dressel, 2012, pp.65-84).
Since the beginning of the war against drugs when Duterte got into leadership position, the president together with his officials have humiliated, reviled, and in some instances jailed the advocates of human rights. The chief critic of the president, Senator Leila de Lima has been in detention since February last year. Following the increased killings and the elevated number of deaths every month, various actions of advocacy were taken to improve on the issue of extrajudicial killings of the drug dealers, users, and suspects which was a total violation of human rights to life (Thompson, 2016, pp.3-14).
The United States intervened in the issue and provided military financial support under Obama’s administration by allotting a total of $120 million for the last year but one. The earlier action on military financing by the US was primarily conditioned on improving the situation of human rights in the Philippines (Espiritu, 2017, pp. 45-59). Conditionally, this assistance had been listed as “Asia pivot” of the administration of Obama. President Trump also allotted $180 million for military assistance to the Philippines for last year to improve human rights. The Philippine president showed dissatisfaction with the relations between the US and Philippines but he later conceded it because his Philippines needed the US military assistance due to the dispute between China and South China Sea (Teehankee, and Thompson, 2016, pp.125-134).
Other countries like Australia, Canada, and the European Union provided support to the Philippines including programs of capacity-building with the aim of improving situation of human rights. Spain provided resources and funds to the Philippine Commission of Human Rights (Espiritu, 2017, pp. 45-59). Following human rights issues raised by Philippine’s president “war on drugs”, the US state department suspended the sale of 26,000 rifles of the military assault to the Philippine National Police. The European Union transitioned EPJUST II rule of law involving training of law enforcement agencies and the police into GOJUST program which was tasked with institution of justice sector reforms (Lum, and Dolven, 2014, pp.177).
The high escalation of the unlawful human killings and president’s open defiance and bold disobedience of the international standards of human rights and confrontational stance of critics roiled the existing relationships between the Philippines and its Western country friends. Repeatedly, Duterte had threated to seek reliable and stronger connections with other countries like Russia and China who have not been criticizing the abuses associated with his anti-drug campaign. Unfortunately, he repeated threats were not successful at all (Holden, 2011, pp.331-350).
Cecilia Malmstrom, the European Trade Commissioner gave a warning that the Philippine government must address the concerns of the EU about abuses of human rights or else it would lose tariff-free exports of approximately 6,000 products under human rights benchmarks of EU in connection with the Generalized Scheme of Preferences Plus trans de scheme (GSP+) (Sonmez, Apostolopoulos, Tran, and Rentrope, 2011, pp.17-35).
In May last year, the US senators took an act of introducing a bill, known as the Philippines Human Rights Accountability and Counter Narcotics. The bill was primarily meant to put restrictions on the arms exports to the Philippines, assist the Philippines in handling drug issues and problems, and support the groups of human rights. At the time of writing, the bill was referred to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee of the US (Espiritu, 2017, pp.45-59).
On behalf of 32 states, Iceland organized for a joint statement at the Human Rights Council session of June and the second one on behalf of 39 states during the council’s session of September condemning and cursing the evil act of extrajudicial killings in the Philippines. The statement by Iceland was also meant to call and invite every state for credible and independent investigations of the killings committed in Philippines (Espiritu, 2017, pp.45-59).
Various pledges were made by various countries to support the Philippines. Australia promised an extension of military assistance to the Philippines primarily for counterterrorism. Japan pledged $800 million Overseas Development Assistance package for five years to promote infrastructure and economic development. Tokyo promised to support Philippines financially for the establishment of projects of drug rehabilitation. China also pledged to assist the Philippines with under the One Belt, One Road Beijing program (Holden, 2011, pp.331-350).
The Philippines underwent a Universal Periodic Review in May. The review was primarily focused on the records of human rights of every member of the UN state which is usually conducted on a four-yearly basis (Quimpo, 2015, pp.3335-350). In September, the Philippines responded by rejecting almost every suggestion and recommendation which had been made to stop and eradicate extrajudicial killings. The president rejected this with the aim of ensuring independence in the investigation of the deaths. Human Rights High Commissioner showed grave concerns at the president’s open support for the policy of “shoot-to-kill” and the “apparent absence of credible investigations” (Kine, 2017, pp.46-80).
Conclusion:
Philippines governance is totally poor and dictatorial under president Duterte. Since he took the presidential seat, there has been an ever-increasing number of deaths following extrajudicial killings of all drug users, dealers, pushers and suspects by the police, unidentified gunmen, and vigilantes. President Duterte initiated an anti-drug campaign whose policy was “shoot and kill” with apparently no evidence and credible investigations. Duterte’s action of encouraging extrajudicial killings was a total violation of Human Rights particularly the right to life. Under the constitution of the Philippine government, right to life is articulated in section 1 of article III which is also known as the Bill of Rights. Termination of one’s life is a violation of his or her right to life. Various countries and states such as the UN, UE, Canada, China, Tokyo, Australia, and Japan provided advocacy actions through the provision of military assistance, financial support and establishment of projects and programs to support human rights situation.
References:
Baviera, A., 2016. President Duterte’s foreign policy challenges. Contemporary Southeast Asia: A Journal of International and Strategic Affairs, 38(2), pp.202-208.
Clark, A.M. and Sikkink, K., 2013. Information effects and human rights data: Is the good news about increased human rights information bad news for human rights measures. Hum. Rts. Q., 35(6), p.539.
Curato, N., 2017. Flirting with authoritarian fantasies? Rodrigo Duterte and the new terms of Philippine populism. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 47(1), pp.142-153.
De Castro, R.C., 2017. The Duterte Administration’s foreign policy: Unravelling the Aquino Administration’s balancing agenda on an emergent China. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 35(3), pp.139-159.
Dressel, B., 2011. The Philippines: how much real democracy? International Political Science Review, 32(5), pp.529-545.
Dressel, B., 2012. Targeting the public purse: advocacy coalitions and public finance in the Philippines. Administration & Society, 44(6_suppl), pp.65-84.
Espiritu, B.F., 2017. The Lumad Struggle for Social and Environmental Justice: Alternative media in a socio-environmental movement in the Philippines. Journal of Alternative and Community Media, 35(2), pp.45-59.
Gonzaga, F.P., 2011. Rule of Law in the Philippines: The Reproductive Logic of Elite democracy. Perspectives in the Arts and Humanities Asia, 1(2), pp.45-60
Holden, W.N., 2011. Neoliberalism and state terrorism in the Philippines: the fingerprints of Phoenix. Critical Studies on Terrorism, 4(3), pp.331-350.
Kine, P., 2017. Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte’s’war on drugs’. Harvard International Review, 38(3),pp.46-80
Lum, T. and Dolven, B., 2014. The Republic of the Philippines and US interests–2014. Current Politics and Economics of South, Southeastern, and Central Asia, 23(2), p.177.
Magliocca, G.N., 2016. The Bill of Rights as a Term of Art. Notre Dame L. Rev., 92(5), pp.231.
Mapp, S. and Gabel, S.G., 2017. Government abuses of human rights. Journal of Human Rights and Social Work, 2(1-2), pp.1-2.
Pangalangan, R.C., 2011. Human Rights Discourse in Post-Marcos Philippines. Human Rights in Asia, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar, 23(4), pp.56-69.
Pangilinan, C.D., 2011. The Dispute over Extrajudicial Killings: The Need to Define Extra Judicial Killings as State-Sponsored Acts. Phil. LJ, 86(3), p.811.
Quimpo, N., 2015. Can the Philippines’ wild oligarchy be tamed. Routledge Handbook of Southeast Asian Democratization, Routledge, New York, NY, 34(5), pp.335-350.
Sonmez, S., Apostolopoulos, Y., Tran, D. and Rentrope, S., 2011. Human rights and health disparities for migrant workers in the UAE. Health Hum Rights, 13(2), pp.17-35.
Teehankee, J.C., 2017. Duterte’s resurgent nationalism in the Philippines: A discursive institutionalist analysis. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 35(3), pp.69-89.
Teehankee, J.C. and Thompson, M.R., 2016. Electing a strongman. Journal of Democracy, 27(4), pp.125-134.
Thompson, M.R., 2016. Introduction: The early Duterte presidency in the Philippines. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 35(3), pp.3-14.
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.
Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order form
Once we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignment
As soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download