Chapter 2: ICCPR Chapter

1

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)

Introduction

Human rights, taken collectively, refer to the supreme, inherent, and inalienable rights to life, dignity, and self-development. It is the essence of these rights that makes man human.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) is an important treaty in the field of universal human rights. The covenant covers the civil and political rights of individuals which States are obliged to guarantee, particularly the right to life. No derogation is permitted on this right, even in times of war or public emergency. In International Law, the right to life begins at birth while in Philippine Law, it begins at conception.

The civil and political rights enshrined in the abovementioned Covenant include ensuring of people’s integrity and safety; protection from discrimination on grounds of physical or mental disability, gender, religion, race, national origin, age, sexual orientation, or gender identity; and individual rights, such as privacy, the freedoms of thought and conscience, speech and expression, religion, the press, and movement. Political rights include natural justice (procedural fairness) in law, such as the rights of the accused, including the right to a fair trial; due process; the right to seek redress or a legal remedy; and right to participate in civil society and politics, such as freedom of association, the right to assemble, the right to petition, the right of self-defense, and the right to vote.

The Philippines signed the Covenant on December 19, 1966, ratified it on February 28, 1986, and submitted the Instrument of Ratification on October 23, 1986. The treaty entered into force on January 23, 1987, three months after its submission. The Philippines submitted its Initial Report to the Committee on March 22, 1989 (CCPR/C/50/Add.1/Rev.1), which was considered by the Committee on April 7, 1989. The combined second and third report was submitted to the Committee on September 18, 2002. Following the Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee-ICCPR, the PHRP II considers the following thematic objectives as priorities:

Thematic Objective 1: To mainstream international human rights standards to domestic norms through the enactment of laws, as well as to work for the hamonization of enacted legislations and other administrative and judicial measures/actions including, but not limited to, local legislations

The Philippine government is strongly committed to uphold the universality of human rights standards. In this context, there is an urgent need to mainstream international human rights standards to domestic norms, specifically in national and local legislations, judicial measures, administrative

policies, programs and mechanisms. These must reflect the generally accepted principles of human rights consistent with the ICCPR provisions following the 2003 Concluding Observations of the UN Human Rights Committee.

2

Also, as a reaffirmation of the government to promote universal respect for and observance and protection of all human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, there is a need to support the ratification of other international human rights instruments.

Thematic Objective 2: To enhance the institutional remedies and multi-stakeholders commitments to put an end to alleged impunity

While there are existing remedies and mechanisms in place to address

human rights violations, such as extrajudicial/extra-legal killings (ELK) and enforced disappearances (ED), there appears to be a need to enhance the institutional remedies and multi-stakeholders commitments to address and to finally put an end to all the perceived impunity. Corollary to this, all sectors must be truly empowered through the continuing process of assessment, monitoring, planning, and capacity- building toward the resolution of various human rights issues and challenges.

In seeking to achieve real empowerment of various vulnerable,

marginalized and disadvantaged sectors, the PHRP II will provide all possible opportunities to educate and capacitate citizens in the exercise of their rights. This will be pursued through the efforts of the government and its meaningful partnership with NGOs and CSOs toward the achievement of national development goals.

Thematic Objective 3: To set up a multi-stakeholder, coordinated

performance accountability and monitoring system on the compliance of the government with implementation of the ICCPR

The successful implementation of plans and programs consistent with the

provisions under the ICCPR requires the institutionalization of a well-coordinated multi-stakeholder performance accountability and monitoring system on Government’s compliance.

Thematic Objective 4: To establish mechanisms and strengthen existing

measures on International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and Rule of Law (ROL).

As a member of the International Criminal Court (ICC), the Philippines is under obligation to establish mechanisms and to institutionalize measures for the effective implementation of the International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and observance of the Rule of Law (ROL).

3

SECTION 1 Strategic Treaty Indicators

Thematic Objective 1: To mainstream international human rights standards to domestic norms through the enactment of laws, and to work for the harmonization of enacted legislations and other administrative and judicial measures/actions including, but not limited to local legislations

The indicators under this thematic objective are enacted new legislations

and harmonized existing national and local legislations consistent with the ICCPR. This is in response to item no. 1 of the 2003 Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee, to quote:

“ The Committee notes the absence of information regarding the status in domestic law of the Covenant and on whether any Covenant provisions have been invoked in court proceedings to date. The State party should ensure that its legislation gives full effect to the rights recognized in the Covenant and that domestic law is harmonized with the obligations subscribed to under the Covenant.”

With the separation of powers among the branches of government,

namely, the Legislative, the Executive and the Judiciary, the indicators are based primarily on the existing bills or legislations pending with Congress on related civil and political rights. For local legislation, these will be based on ordinances that would be responsive to local conditions in the provinces, cities and municipalities and barangays.

It is noteworthy to mention that while the Philippines is noted for well-

crafted laws, our laws are always criticized internationally for their non-conformity with the provisions of international human rights standards. A case in point is RA 9372 (Human Security Act of 2007). Needless to say, the government is also being criticized for poor implementation of laws which often lead to denial of justice to victims and their families.

Accountable agencies for these indicators are: Congress, local government

units, Department of the Interior and Local Government, and Philippine National Police.

Thematic Objective 2: To enhance the institutional remedies and

multi-stakeholders commitments to put an end to alleged impunity

The indicators for this thematic objective are:

a. Decrease in the percentage of unresolved cases involving media killings, politically-motivated killings, trafficking, and terrorism; b. Coordinated inter-agency and multi-stakeholder mechanisms on the investigation and prosecution of political killings, enforced disappearance, trafficking, terrorism, and torture; c. Legislation and functional mechanisms to hold liable non-

4

State actors, such as rebel groups armed for human rights violations.

This objective is to enhance the existing mechanisms which were created to address extra-legal killings, arbitrary detention, harassment, intimidation, and abuse allegedly perpetrated by State actors against human rights defenders, journalists and leaders of indigenous peoples including detainees, many of whom are women and children.

Item no. 8 of the 2003 Concluding Observations of the Human Rights

Committee that needs to be addressed is herein quoted in part:

“The Committee is concerned about the lack of appropriate measures to investigate crimes allegedly committed by State security forces and agents, in particular those committed against human rights defenders, journalists and leaders of indigenous peoples, and the lack of measures taken to prosecute and punish the perpetrators. Furthermore, the Committee is concerned at reports of intimidation and threats of retaliation impeding the right to an effective remedy for persons whose rights and freedoms have been violated. Sub-paragraph (a) of the same item provides that the State party should adopt legislative and other measures to prevent such violations, in keeping with articles 2, 6 and 9 of the Covenant, and ensure effective enforcement of the legislation.”

Item no. 11 of the same Concluding Observation expresses concern

regarding reported cases of extrajudicial killings, arbitrary detention, harassment, intimidation and abuse, including that of detainees, many of whom are women and children, that have neither been investigated nor prosecuted. Such a situation is conducive to the perpetration of further violations of human rights and to a culture of impunity. Further, the same item provides that “the State party should adopt and enforce legislative and other measures to prevent such violations, in keeping with articles 6 and 9 of the Covenant and to improve the implementation of relevant laws. The State party should conduct prompt and impartial investigations, and prosecute and punish the perpetrators.”

Accountable agencies are: Department of Justice, National Bureau of

Investigation, Armed Forces of the Philippines, Philippine National Police, Presidential Human Rights Committee, Philippine Center for Transnational Crime and local government units.

Thematic Objective 3: To set up a multi-stakeholder coordinated performance accountability and monitoring system on the Philippine compliance to the ICCPR.

The indicator for this thematic objective is the establishment of an intra

and inter pillar performance accountability and monitoring system. Following the international standard of fairness, the five pillars of the criminal justice system must be able to institute a performance accountability measure and monitoring system. Thus, to ensure that the government’s plans and programs are carried out efficiently and affectively, a monitoring mechanism must be established to hold the duty-bearers accountable as provided for in their mandates.

5

The accountable agencies for this indicator are the following: Supreme Court, Department of Justice, local government units, Department of the Interior and Local Government, Bureau of Jail Management and Penology, Department of Social Welfare and Development, Commission on Audit, Anti-Money Laundering Council, and Office of the Ombudsman.

Thematic Objective 4: To establish mechanisms and strengthen

existing measures on international humanitarian law (IHL) and rule of law (ROL).

The indicators for this thematic objective are:

(1) Country-level ROL index; (2) Number and proportion of trained military and police on IHL and

ROL; (3) Number and proportion of marginalized, vulnerable, and

disadvantaged groups accessing the justice system and other alternative dispute resolution (ADR) systems;

(4) Local government commitments on the functionality of local mechanisms addressing human rights.

The Philippines as a new member of the International Criminal Court (ICC)

through its recent accession to the Rome Statute is under obligation to establish mechanisms and strengthen existing measures on IHL and ROL.

The accountable agencies for these indicators are: Philippine National

Police, Armed Forces of the Philippines, Department of Foreign Affairs, Supreme Court, Congress, Department of the Interior and Local Government, and Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines.

6

SECTION 2 Thematic Baseline and Situationer

Thematic Objective 1

The foundations of the legal framework on human rights protection are the Constitution, legislation, court decisions or jurisprudence, and customs and traditional practices.

The Constitution as the supreme and basic law provides for the general

framework and principles by which the State is ruled. It is the standard on which the national legal instruments and government actions and decisions are based and evaluated.

Important elements of the Constitution include the Bill of Rights, and the

articles on human rights and social justice, accountability of public officers, citizenship, suffrage, national economy, and patrimony. The Constitution provides for the establishment and separation of powers of the three major branches of government – Executive, Judiciary, and Legislature. It specifies the mandates and powers of the major institutions responsible for human rights promotion and protection. Furthermore, the Constitution provides that: “The Congress shall give highest priority to the enactment of measures that protect and enhance the right of all the people to human dignity, reduce social, economic and political inequalities, and remove cultural inequities by equitably diffusing wealth and political power for the common good. (Article XIII, Section 1)”

Consequently, the following statutes were enacted to bolster anti-

discriminatory measures:

a) Republic Act (RA) 8425, otherwise known as the Social Reform and Poverty Alleviation Act;

b) RA 9257, or the Expanded Senior Citizen’s Act of 2003;

c) RA 7877, or the Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995 declaring

sexual harassment unlawful in the employment, education, or training environment and for other purposes,;

d) RA 6725, on strengthening the prohibition on discrimination

against women with respect to terms and conditions of employment, amending Article 135 of the Labor Code;

e) RA 6955, on declaring unlawful the practice of matching for

marriage to foreign nationals on a mail-order basis and for other similar practices, including the advertisement, publication, printing or distribution of brochures, fliers and other propaganda materials;

f) RA 7192, on promoting the integration of women as full and

equal partners of men in development and nation-building;

g) RA 7322, on increasing maternity benefits in favor of women

7

workers in the private sector, amending Section 14-A of RA 1161;

h) RA 8353, on expanding the definition of the crime of rape, reclassifying the same as a crime against persons amending Act No. 3815 and RA 9208;

i) RA 7277, on providing for the rehabilitation, self-development

and self- reliance of disabled persons and their integration into the mainstream of society, also known as the Magna Carta for Disabled Persons;

j) RA 7279, or the Urban Development Housing Act of 199 providing

for a comprehensive and continuing urban development and housing program, establishing the mechanism for its implementation;

k) RA 8042, on instituting the policies of overseas employment and establishing a higher standard of protection and promotion of the welfare of the migrant workers, their families and overseas Filipinos in distress;

l) RA 9344, on establishing a comprehensive juvenile justice and

welfare system, creating the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council under the Department of Justice;

m) RA 9231, on the elimination of the worst forms of child labor and

affording stronger protection for the working child;

n) RA 9255, on allowing illegitimate children to use the surname of their father;

o) RA 9262, on the anti-violence against women and their children;

p) RA 7610, on providing for stronger deterrence and special protection

against child abuse, exploitation and discrimination;

q) RA 7309, on creating a board of claims under the Department of Justice for victims of unjust imprisonment or detention and victims of violent crimes;

r) RA 7438, on defining certain rights of persons, arrested,

detained or under custodial investigation as well as the duties of the arresting, detaining and investigating officers and providing penalties for violations.


An institution created for the protection of human rights across the agenda is the Public Attorney’s Office (PAO) under the DOJ which provides free legal assistance, including prosecution and defense. Prosecution is the responsibility of national government agencies, the National Prosecution Service, an organic unit of the DOJ; and the Office of the Ombudsman.

In 2006, an independent commission chaired by former COMELEC

Chairperson Jose Melo was established to investigate the unexplained killings of activists and media practitioners. The recommendations of the Melo Commission

8

were adopted and implemented by the Executive Branch as well as the Legislature and the Judiciary, corresponding with the following actions:

a) Formation of the Task Force Usig (Task Force Prosecution) on May

13, 2006, under the PNP to immediately investigate said killings.

b) Creation of the Task Force of Prosecutors on Human Rights and Extrajudicial Killings on March 27, 2007 under DOJ Order No. 257 to handle the inquest, preliminary investigation and prosecution of cases of alleged political killings; and

c) Issuance of Administrative Order (AO) No. 181 on July 3, 2007,

directing the coordination between the National Prosecution Service and other concerned agencies of the government for the successful investigation and prosecution of political and media killings.


In October 2007, the PNP and the AFP received an order to take active steps to prevent human rights violations by men-in-uniform. These steps include the issuance of office instructions and the conduct of trainings aimed at reinforcing a culture of non-tolerance of human rights abuses among all PNP and AFP personnel.

In November 2007, A.O. 211 was issued creating the multi-agency Task

Force against Political Violence or Task Force 211, to increase coordination between the DOJ, Department of National Defense (DND), PHRC, investigative and national security agencies, and civil society for speedier solutions to such violence.

To strengthen the witness protection program, Congress initiated certain

legislative proposals for this purpose. Other legislative proposals certified as urgent include the imposition of harsher penalties on persons who commit political killings, and the harshest penalties on persons-in-uniform who commit such killings.

The Judiciary complemented the unwavering commitment of the

Executive Branch of government to address human rights concerns. The Supreme Court has instructed all courts to prioritize such cases now pending in Philippine courts. It also convened the National Consultative Summit on EJK and Enforced Disappearances, and the recommendations generated during the Summit resulted in proposed legislation in Congress and the promulgation of the Rule on the Writ of Amparo, and the Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data.

One of the major gaps in dealing with human rights issues is the

limited knowledge of duty-bearers as well as claimholders on the ICCPR. Some of those charged with enforcing and implementing the law are themselves new to this concept.

Another area of concern is the lack of experience in mainstreaming human

rights-based approach to their functions and responsibilities. Thus, the need to

9

capacitate the duty-bearers to apply human rights standards and indicators within their agenda, drawn from the provisions of the ICCPR.


In time of war, international humanitarian law (IHL) protects those who

are not or no longer taking an active part in hostilities, and limits the choice of methods and means of warfare. It applies in both situations of international and non-international armed conflict.

The main instruments of IHL are the Geneva Conventions of 12 August

1949 on the protection of war victims, which the Philippines ratified on 06 December 1952. To complement these Conventions, two Additional Protocols were adopted in 1977.

The Philippines signed both the First and the Second Protocols to the

Geneva Conventions on 12 December 1977. Only the Second Protocol has been ratified by the Philippines on 11 December 1986.

Nevertheless, many of these rules are part of customary international

humanitarian law. Moreover, most of them already form part of the general principles accepted by the AFP.

The enactment of the following laws, to wit: RA No. 9851 (An Act Defining and Penalizing Crimes Against International Humanitarian Law, Genocide and Other Crime Against Humanity), and RA No. 9745 (An Act Penalizing Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment and Prescribing Penalties Therefore) uphold the strong commitment of the Philippines to uphold the ROL and IHL.

Finally, on August 23, 2011, the Senate ratified the Rome Statute making it

as one of the newest members to the International Criminal Court. Sen. Miriam Defensor- Santiago, a member of the Philippine Senate, gained a seat in the ICC.

Table 2.1 Situation Matrix

HUMAN RIGHTS

ISSUES DUTY BEARERS CLAIMHOLDERS

Documented cases of extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances since Martial Law up to the present

PNP, DOJ, CHRP

peasants organized labor media members of militant

groups

Corruption Pillars of the criminal justice system

Judiciary Ombudsman

Corruption victims Every citizen

Ineffective barangay justice system despite PD 1508 (1976)

DILG LGUs Lupon members

Barangay residents with cases filed before the Lupon

Lack of IP IPs DILG

10

HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES

DUTY BEARERS CLAIMHOLDERS

representation in the local Sanggunihan

Challenges experienced by witnesses in cases

DOJ NBI

Victims and/or their family

Influence-peddling by politicians in court cases

SC Lower Courts

(i.e. RTC, MTC, MTCC, MCTC, etc.)

DOJ-NPS

Litigants General public

Deprivation/delay in the delivery of basic services due to bureaucratic/political corruption

Ombudsman PCGG

Public, most especially, the marginalized, disadvantaged and vulnerable sectors

11

SECTION 3 Thematic Performance Targets

Thematic Objective 1: To mainstream international human rights standards to domestic norms through the enactment of laws, and to work for the hamonization of enacted legislations and other administrative and judicial measures/actions, including but not limited to local legislations

Medium-term target:

Enactment of national legislation related to civil and political rights, as

well as ordinances at the local level.

Annual targets:

2012 – Advocacy and lobbying up to First and Second Readings; 2013 – Advocacy and lobbying up to deliberation; 2014 – Advocacy and lobbying up to passage and adoption of

Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR); and 2015-2016 – Implementation.


Medium-term target:

Functional investigative mechanism resulting in 80-90% prosecuted cases

on ELK, ED, trafficking, and terrorism.

Annual targets:

2012-2013 - institute effective investigative mechanisms in place;

2012-2016 - 25 percent decrease in ELK, ED, trafficking and terrorism cases;

2012-2016 - 25 percent prosecuted cases on ELK, ED, trafficking and terrorism cases.

Thematic Objective 3: To set up a multi-stakeholder coordinated performance accountability and monitoring system on the compliance of the government with implementation of the ICCPR

Medium-term target:

Performance of Access to Justice program especially as it would

benefit the poor and the marginalized sectors

Annual target:

Enhanced performance promoting mechanism for Access to Justice (continuing)

12

Thematic Objective 4: To establish mechanisms and strengthen existing measures on International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and Rule of Law (ROL).

Medium-term target:

Enhancement of the terms of engagement and monitoring system on IHL and ROL compliance and capacitation of at least 70-80% of the military and law enforcers on IHL and ROL

Annual targets:

2012-2015 - At least 30% of the military and law enforcement agency personnel trained on IHL and ROL annually;

2012 -2016 - Updating and monitoring of the terms of engagement incorporating the provisions of the Rome Statute.

Table 2.2: Performance Targets

Thematic Objective 1: To mainstream international human rights standards to domestic norms through the enactment of laws and to work for the hamonization of enacted legislations and other administrative and judicial measures/actions including but not limited to local legislations

Strategic Indicators Medium Target Annual Targets New legislations are harmonized with existing national and local legislations consistent with the ICCPR

Enactment of national legislation related to civil and political rights, as well as ordinances at the local level

2012- advocacy and lobbying up to the 1st and 2nd readings 2013- advocacy and lobbying up to deliberation 2014- advocacy and lobbying up to passage and adoption of Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) 2015- Implementation


Strategic Indicators Medium Targets Annual Targets (a) Decrease in the

percentage of unresolved cases involving killings of media and political activists;

(b) Coordinated inter-agency and multi-stakeholder mechanisms on the investigation and prosecution of political killings, enforced disappearance, trafficking, terrorism and torture

(c) Legislation and functional

Functional investigative mechanism resulting in 80-90% prosecuted cases on ELK, ED, trafficking and terrorism

2012-2013- Institute effective investigative mechanisms in place 2012-2016- 25% decrease in ELK, ED, trafficking and terrorism cases 2012-2016- 25% prosecuted cases on ELK, ED, trafficking and terrorism cases

13

mechanism to hold liable non-State actors, such as rebel groups for human rights violations

Thematic Objective 3: To set up a multi-stakeholder, coordinated performance accountability and monitoring system on the compliance of the government with implementation of the ICCPR

Strategic Indicators Medium Target Annual Targets Intra- and inter-pillar performance accountability and monitoring system

Performance of Access to Justice especially as it benefits the poor and the marginalized sectors

Enhanced performance promoting mechanism for Access to Justice

Thematic Objective 4: To establish mechanisms and strengthen existing measures on International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and Rule of Law (ROL).

Strategic Indicators Medium Target Annual Targets (a) Country-level

index of ROL (b) Number and

proportion of trained military and police on IHL and ROL

(c) Number and proportion of marginalized vulnerable and disadvantaged groups accessing the justice system and other alternative dispute resolution systems

(d) Local government commitments on the functionality of local mechanisms addressing human rights

Enhancement of the terms of engagement and monitoring system on IHL and ROL compliance and at least 70-80% of the military and law enforcers are capacitated on IHL and ROL

2012-2015 – At least 30% of the military and law enforcement agency personnel trained on IHL and ROL annually 2012-2016- Updating and monitoring of the terms of engagement incorporating the provisions of the Rome Statute

14

SECTION 4 Program of Action

Through the PHRP II, the Philippine government shall give priority to the enactment of legislations consistent with human rights standards and conventions and to the advancement of human rights protection at all levels. The steps to be taken shall involve the conduct of sectoral, national, and local consultations with duty-bearers and claimholders to define the rights protected under the ICCPR; the conduct of studies on proposed legislations to countercheck for duplication of laws and to identify gaps; and the conduct of treaty monitoring and report preparation as part of State obligation.

Another priority is to popularize the ICCPR among duty-bearers, as well as

the claimholders. As an initial step, studies, regular dialogues, and workshops on civil and political rights shall be conducted nationwide. Also to be undertaken are trainors’ training on ICCPR and HRBA for duty-bearers and claimholders, information dissemination programs and projects, workshops, symposia, conferences, public hearings, and other activities.

Table 2.3 presents the breakdown of programs and projects categorized

by thematic objective, with specifications on coverage, responsible stakeholders and outputs matched accordingly with the medium and annual targets. (Please refer to Table 2.3 below).

15

Table 2.3: Programs/ Activities/ Projects

Thematic Objective No.1 – To mainstream international human rights standards to domestic norms through the enactment of laws and to work for the hamonization of enacted legislations and other administrative and judicial measures/actions including but not limited to local legislations

Performance Targets Programs/ Activities/ Projects

Coverage Responsible Stakeholders Target Date/s

Expected Outputs Medium Targets

Annual Targets Duty-Bearers Claimholders

Enactment of national legislation related to civil and political rights, as well as ordinances at the local level

2012 – Advocacy & Lobbying up to 1st & 2nd reading 2013 – Advocacy & Lobbying up to Deliberation 2014 – Advocacy & Lobbying up to passage & adoption of IRR 2015-2016 –Implementation

Joint conduct of empirical studies to support proposed legislation

Update of

databank containing all human rights law

Advocacy for the

passage of a law defining and criminalizing EJK/ELK

Advocacy for

passage of local ordinances on efforts to stop ELK

National/ Local National/ Local National/ Local Local

Congress (House of Representatives and the Senate) LEDAC Congress Congress DILG

Women Children Youth Prisoners &

detainees Indigenous

Peoples Migrant

Workers Persons with

Disabilities Elderly Public &

private Labor Informal

Labor Displaced

persons Victims of

Disappearance & their Families

Rural Workers Miners

1st Quarter of 2012 1st Quarter of 2012 Semestral of 2012 Quarterly of 2012-2016

Policy study Updated databank of national legislation Organized lobby groups Local ordinances passed and implemented

16





Conduct review of proposed bills as to ICCPR compliance Organization of relevant Lobby groups of affected/concerned sectors

National

DOJ, DFA, PHRC & CHRP

Submission of position papers/ comments to Congress/ Senate

Training-Workshop on the Legislative Process, Lobbying and the Human Rights Based Approach to

National/ Local

CHRP PHRC

General Public 3rd quarter of every year 2012-2016

25% of legislative officers trained each year Local: one Trainors-Training on the first

17





Legislation and Policy Development

year of 2012 National: 4 pilot areas in the NCR, Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao for each year 2013-2016

Advocacy for the Signing and/or Ratification of New Treaties and/or Human Rights Instruments

National DFA DOJ PHRC CHRP

General Public Quarterly of 2012

Champions of congress identified

Thematic Objective No.2 – To enhance the institutional remedies and multistakeholders commitments to put an end to alleged impunity





Functional investigative mechanism resulting 80-90% prosecuted cases on ELK, ED, trafficking and terrorism

2012- 2013 – Institute effective investigative mechanisms in place

Continuing conduct of public awareness activities on ELK

National/Lo cal

PNP,DOJ, CHRP,DILG, DND NBI, local officials and other concerned Inter-Agency Body/ies

Women Children Youth Prisoners &

detainees Indigenous

Peoples Migrant

Workers Persons with

Quarterly 2012

Number of fora, symposia training conducted; Increase in the number of whistleblowers and increase in the number of cases filed in courts by 10%

18

Thematic Objective No.3 – To set up a multi stakeholder coordinated performance accountability and monitoring system on the compliance of the government with the implementation of the ICCPR





Performance of access to justice especially of the marginalized, vulnerable and disadvantaged sectors

Enhanced performance promoting mechanism for Access to Justice

Conduct of public awareness activities Integration of access to justice into the

National/ local National

DOJ, DSWD, DILG, SC, LGUs, PhilJa, Alternative Law Groups DOJ

General Public, poor, vulnerable and disadvantaged sectors General Public

Quarterly 2012 Quarterly 2012

Training for police prosecutors, PAO, judges, court personnel, social worker and brgy. officials Prosecutor’s Manual of Policy and Rules

2012-2016 – 25% decrease in ELK, ED, trafficking and terrorism cases 2012-2016 – 25 % prosecuted cases on ELK, ED, trafficking and terrorism cases

Capacity building for law enforcers Establishment & enforcement of performance Accountability System (sanctions & rewards scheme)

National/ Local National

DOJ DILG Task Forces of different National Government Agencies (NGAs)

Disabilities Elderly Public &

private Labor Informal

Labor Displaced

persons Victims of

Disappearance & their Families

Rural Workers

Quarterly 2012 Quarterly 2012

High performance level of inter-agency bodies Performance Accountability System Inter-agency Collaboration Agreement Agency-Bound Performance Report

19





prosecutors’ manual of policies and rules Strengthening of existing monitoring mechanism at the local level

Local

DOJ, LGUs, Alternative Law Groups

Marginalized, vulnerable and disadvantaged sectors

Quarterly 2012-2016

updated Performance score board for Access to Justice

Thematic Objective No.4 – To establish mechanisms and strengthen existing measures on the International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and Rule of Law (ROL)





Enhancement of the terms of engagement and monitoring system on IHL compliance and measures on IHL and ROL and at least 70-80%of the military and law enforcers are capacitated on IHL and ROL

2012-2015 – At least 30% of the military and law enforcement agency personnel trained on IHL and ROL annually 2012-2016 – Updating and monitoring of the terms of engagement incorporating the provisions of the Rome Statute

Continuing HR advocacy at the LGUs

Local LGUs, AFP, DND, DILG, CSO & NGO

Constituents at the grassroots

Semestral 2012-2016

Institutionalized HR promotion and protection in the LGUs Mainstreamed HRBA in the policy development, program plans, activities and services in local governance

Institutionalization National State actors General Public 2012 -2016 Guidelines on the

20





of guidelines on the implementation of HRET

and Regional

and non- state actors

implementation of HRET for law enforcers

Mainstream IHL and ROL in the existing HRETP of the government agencies and academies

National AFP, DND and DILG

General Public Semestral 2012

Revised HRETP programs

Pilot testing, adoption and enforcement of revised graduated curricula on HR-IHL education for the AFP, law enforcement, security and intelligence units

National AFP, PNP, DND, DILG, BJMP, NBI, PDEA and LGUs

General Public Quarterly 2012 20% of all law enforcement officers and agents of covered agencies

21

Section 5 Linkages with Other Development Initiatives

and Plans

Under Chapter 7 on Good Governance and the Rule of Law chapter of the 2011-2016 Philippine Development Plan (PDP), specific strategies, reforms and proposed instruments to address issues and challenges confronting the criminal justice system, with emphasis on handling ELKs and EDs, have been identified. Specific complementary measures identified in the PDP include the re-filing of bills on ELK and ED such as HB No. 566 (Stiffer penalties for ELK); HB Nos. 1748, 2591, 3002 (designating crimes against IHL; HB No. 2263 (Involuntary Disappearance Act), and SB Nos.1427 and 983 (bill on command responsibility)

1. Strengthen the Oversight Bodies

a) Expand Office of the Ombudsman powers. The powers of

the OMB shall be expanded to include examination of bank accounts, and the establishment of witness protection and benefits program under the office. The compensation and benefits for OMB employees themselves should likewise be enhanced, specifically, their exemption from the salary standardization law, ranking , retirement benefits (survivorship), and special allowances for lawyers; and

b) Pursue the passage of a charter for Commission on Human

Rights of the Philippines (CHRP). Enable CHRP to perform its oversight monitoring function as an independent national human rights institution in relation to Philippine government’s compliance with the international human rights treaties to which it is a State party.

2. Effective and Speedy Resolution of Cases in Courts and Quasi

Judicial Bodies

a) Improve investigative abilities of law enforcement units, especially the NBI. A greater availability of science-based evidence for law enforcers in order to enhance the quality of final judicial outcomes. This will be attained through the establishment of world-class forensic laboratories in major regional centers and cities;

b) Rules for preliminary investigation shall be re-studied and

codified to expedite resolution of cases;

c) Formulate policy and guidelines in the determination of probable cause. The policy and guidelines on the elements and parameters of probable cause should be issued based on laws and jurisprudence to avoid the frivolous filing of cases and to reduce the currently high rate of dismissed cases. In this way, courts can focus on resolving high-impact cases while avoiding delays;

22

d) Strictly implement the reglementary period provided for by the rules on resolution of cases. Timelines in the disposition of cases should be re-studied, strictly monitored and complied with. Delayed resolution of cases not only wastes limited government resources but also harms the interest of all parties involved in the dispute;

e) Establish a case-monitoring system covering the entire

justice system. A justice system infrastructure should be established to be able to comprehensively monitor the progress of cases from one agency to another. The system will interconnect existing case-monitoring systems for efficient and effective case management - such as the Warrant of Arrest Information System (WAIS) of the PNP; the CDIS of the NBI; the electronic Prosecution Case Management of the DOJ; The Judiciary Case Management System (JCMS) of the Supreme Court; and the Inmate Information System of the Bureau of Corrections, the Board of Pardons and Parole, and the Parole and Probation Administration. An effective monitoring system enforces accountability among service providers and thus encourage them to resolve their cases within the timelines provided by existing rules;

23

SECTION 6 Human Rights Capacity Building Plan

The PHRP II process consists of the following stages: preparation, development, implementation, and monitoring and review. The duty-bearers and the claimholders have their respective responsibilities in all stages.

Both the duty-bearers and the claimholders are required to have:

(a) adequate understanding of the Convention (ICCPR); (b) familiarization with previous ICCPR country reports as well as with other related development plans of the government; (c) knowledge on human rights-based approach (HRBA); and (d) skills on networking with other relevant agencies and organizations. Of similar importance would be the duty bearer’s knowledge in: (a) rights-based policy formulation; (b) rights-based programs/ projects development; (c) human rights indicators setting and monitoring; (d) networking; (e) rights-based monitoring and evaluation system, techniques and tools; (f) rights-based programs/projects review; and (g) human rights reporting skills.

However, capability gaps and weaknesses have been identified,

namely: (a) limited knowledge on the Convention (ICCPR); (b) uneven distribution of work among the staff and problem on work attitude; (c) lack of time; (d) unfamiliarity with applicable human rights standards and indicators; (e) lack of experience on rights-based approach application; (f) lack of experience and capacity in ICCPR compliance monitoring and projects/ programs monitoring; and (g) inadequate skills in rights-based monitoring and evaluation.

To overcome these gaps and weaknesses, programs on capacity

building have been lined-up for both the duty-bearers and the claimholders. These, among others, would include: (a) a series of orientations and study circles; (b) familiarization on UN Self Assessment Study and other initiatives, including the Millennium Challenge; (c) strict implementation of their respective designation orders and commands; (d) trainings and seminars on the Convention (ICCPR) and the human rights-based approach (HRBA); (e) conduct of coaching sessions on the application of human rights and rights-based approach; and (f) establishment of a monitoring and evaluation system for the Convention (ICCPR) and the PHRP II projects/programs.

25

Table 2.4: Human Rights Capacity Building Plan

Thematic Participants Objective/s

Education and Training Activity/ies

Coverage Target Thematic Participants Responsible Parties

Expected Outputs Duty-bearers Claimholders

1. To mainstream international human rights standards to domestic norms through the enactment of laws as well as for the harmonization of enacted legislations and other administrative and judicial measures/ actions including but not limited to local legislations 2. To enhance the institutional remedies and multistakeholders commitments to put an end to alleged impunity

Series of orientation & study circles ICCPR, IHL, ROL and HRBA Trainors’ Training on ICCPR and HRBA

National/local National Local

Congress CHRP DOJ DFA PHRC PNP,DOJ,CHRP, DILG, DND NBI, local officials and other concerned Inter-Agency Body/ies

Vulnerable groups Vulnerable groups

PHRC DOJ Congress DOJ PHRC DILG CHR

25% of legislative officers and other government officials are trained 25% of all officers in covered agencies trained

3. To set up a Trainors’ National DOJ, DSWD, NGOs DSWD At least 3

26

Thematic Participants Objective/s

Education and Training Activity/ies

Coverage Target Thematic Participants Responsible Parties

Expected Outputs Duty-bearers Claimholders

multi stakeholder coordinated performance accountability and monitoring system on the compliance of the government with the implementation of the ICCPR

Training on access to justice

Local

DILG, SC, LGUs, PhilJa, Alternative Law Groups

CSOs DOJ PhilJa PHRC

trained trainors per agency and at least 2 per region

4. To establish mechanisms and strengthen existing measures on the International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and Rule of Law (ROL)

Trainors’ Training on IHL and ROL

National Local

DND AFP DILG

NGOs CSOs

AFP DILG PHRC

At least 3 trained trainors per agency and at least 2 per region

27

SECTION 7 Coordination and Management Plan

To ensure effective and efficient implementation of the plan, particularly this Chapter, the different coordinative mechanisms are listed below:

the Judicial Executive Legislative Advisory and Consultative

Council (JELACC) for human rights public policies that would require the cooperation of the representatives of the three branches of government on measures or matters affecting the primacy of the rule of law and strengthening due process and the institutions of justice, and better implementation of the laws;

the Legislative and Executive Development Advisory Council

(LEDAC) for human rights public policies and programs requiring consistency in coordinating development Planning and congressional budgeting as well as effective integration of programs and projects requiring close coordination with relevant other sectors;

the creation of different Interagency Committees to be led by

the accountable agencies in each thematic objective but if two or more accountable agencies have been identified, any of such agencies or both may take the lead. The composition of each committee shall be identified by the responsible/ coordinating agency; and

the creation of a Task Force or a Project Implementing Team, if

there is a need to undertake a particular plan, program, or action within a specified period. This Task Force or Team shall likewise be headed by the identified accountable agency, or agencies, as may be identified. If the head agency has not been named, then one agency among the identified responsible/cooperating agencies shall lead the Task Force or Team.

These Committees, Task Force, and/or Project Implementing Team

shall be under the close supervision of the lead agency, i.e., the DOJ for the ICCPR thematic cluster. In effect, regular reporting on the progress of each Plan, program, and action must be submitted to this Department.

Respective sources of mandates, such as but not limited to, Executive

Orders, Administrative Orders, Memoranda of Agreement, and Memoranda of Understanding shall be issued for the operation of the Committees, Task Force, or Project Implementing Team.

28

Table 2.5: Coordination and Management Arrangements

Thematic Objective

Committees/Task Force/Project Implementing Team

Head Members 1.Mainstream international human rights standards to domestic norms through the enactment of laws as well as to work for the harmonization of enacted legislations and other administrative and judicial measures/actions including but not limited to local legislations

DOJ/DFA/ Joint House and Senate Working group/LGUs

DFA-UNIO PHRC DILG DOJ LGUs

2.To enhance the institutional remedies and multi-stakeholders commitments to put an end to alleged impunity

DOJ/AFP/DILG/PNP/ LGUs

Task Force Usig/Task Force Political Violence/DOJNPS/ PCTC/ Chief Local Executives/ PAHRA/FIND

3. To set up a multi-stakeholder, coordinated performance accountability and monitoring system on the compliance of the government with implementation of the ICCPR

DOJ/Ombudsman/Supreme Court

Supreme Court/DOJ-NPS/ Law Enforcement Agencies/LGUs/COA/ AMLC

4. To establish mechanisms and strengthen existing measures on International Humanitarian Law and observance of the Rule of Law

DOJ/Supreme Court

DFA/PHRC/Ombudsman

29

SECTION 8 Resource Generation and Mobilization Plan

The identified programs, activities and projects (PAPs) in the ICCPR Chapter shall be incorporated in the usual government agency plans and programs of the concerned agencies, as well as in the next Philippine Development Plan (PDP). This is to ensure the allocation of necessary funds by the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) and the Congress. Other funds and resources shall be generated from donor agencies such as international, regional, and national institutions.

30

Table 2. 6: Resource Mobilization Plan

PHRP PROCESS PROGRAMS/PROJECTS ACTIVITIES

NEEDING FUNDING SUPPORT

AREA COVERAGE

PROJECTED TOTAL FUNDING REQUIREMENTS

FOR 5 YEARS

POTENTIAL SOURCES

MOBILIZATION ACTIVITES

Preparatory Preliminary consultations & cluster meetings

National P10,000 per meeting twice a month

PHRC

Development Conduct of sectoral, national & local consultations involving duty bearers and claimholders Conduct of Trainors’ Training on ICCPR & HRBA for duty bearers & claimholders - HRBA selection - Access to Justice

National P5,000,000 (P120,000) (P500,000 for each trainers training) = P2,000,000

UNDP Asia Foundation

Donor’s Forum

Implementation Conduct of studies to support proposed legislations Conduct of treaty monitoring, report preparation & dissemination Conduct of information dissemination programs/projects Conduct of workshops, symposia, conferences, public hearings, etc. Conduct of sectoral & local trainings (pilot sectoral) Drafting of legislation

National & local

P2,000,000 per treaty per year P1,000,000 P3,000,000 P5,000,000 P8,000,000

Asia Foundation UNDP EU New Zealand British Council Swedish Embassy GAA LGU Funds

Multi donor’s Forum Bilateral negotiations

31

PHRP PROCESS PROGRAMS/PROJECTS ACTIVITIES

NEEDING FUNDING SUPPORT

AREA COVERAGE

PROJECTED TOTAL FUNDING REQUIREMENTS

FOR 5 YEARS

POTENTIAL SOURCES

MOBILIZATION ACTIVITES

Conduct of policy advocacy

Monitoring Conduct of monitoring & evaluation

National & local

P2,000,000/ treaty Asia Foundation UNDP EU New Zealand British Council Swedish Embassy


Review Conduct of mid & post review National & local

P2,000,000/ treaty Asia Foundation UNDP EU New Zealand British Council Swedish Embassy


32

SECTION 9 Monitoring and Evaluation Plan

Part of the monitoring and evaluation stage is systematic collection of necessary data and information to track the progress of accomplishment of targets along the strategic indicators. This includes gathering of data for strategic indicators which lack baseline information.

The identified accountable agency, or agencies, shall collect, compile and disseminate information pertaining to the progress and development of each program, activities and projects (PAPs). Any constraint or limitation or hindrance in the completion of the PAPs shall likewise be identified for proper monitoring.

Quarterly reporting shall be submitted by the accountable agencies to the DOJ, as the head of the ICCPR Thematic Cluster, which in turn shall collate all the reports and submit these to the PHRC.

33

Table 2.7: Monitoring and Evaluation Calendar

Monitoring and

Evaluation Activity

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Baseline Study (1st Quarter) submission of

updated baseline

information

Periodic Monitoring

Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly

Annual Plan Review

(1st Quarter) Presentation of

Annual Accomplishment

Report of the ICCPR Chapter of the PHRP II













Studies (2nd Quarter) Conduct of necessary

studies included as PAPs in particular thematic

objectives

(2nd Quarter) Conduct of necessary


objectives



objectives



objectives



objectives Documentation (2nd Quarter)

Consolidation of monitoring

reports submitted by

(2nd Quarter) Consolidation of

monitoring reports

submitted by


monitoring reports

submitted by


monitoring reports

submitted by


monitoring reports

submitted by

34

accountable agencies





Use of information

(2nd Quarter) Integration of

updated baseline

information into the ICCPR Chapter


updated baseline



updated baseline



updated baseline



updated baseline


M and E Capacity Building

(1st Quarter) Conduct of M

and E Capacity Building

Workshops for all identified accountable

agencies




agencies




agencies




agencies




agencies Evaluation Midterm

Evaluation Post Evaluation

Chapter 2: ICCPR Chapter

Government & Nonprofit

Transcript of Chapter 2: ICCPR Chapter