Friday, August 12, 2005
Binuo ang KONTRA-BUSAL noong 1999 upang tutulan ang paggaga sa malayang pamamahayag ng rehimeng Estrada. ito'y binubuo ng mga indibidwal na artista't manunulat at mga manggagawang pangkultura na naniniwalang ang lahat ay may karapatang magpahayag ng kani-kanilang opinyon at pananaw sa pamamagitan ng anumang pormang sining. In addition, naniniwala rin ang mga miyembro nito na "art is a weapon 4 social change".
Ngayong 2005, sa ilalim ng rehimeng GMA, ang buong mamamaya'y di lamang nakakaranas ng pang-ekonomyang pagsasamantala. Umiigting ang pampulitikang panunupil ng rehimen at ang tumitinding paggaga nito sa malayang pamamahayag, hindi lamang sa sektor ng mga artista't manunulat kundi pati sa mga mamamahayag ay dapat nang agresibong tutulan. Muling bubuuin ang KONTRA-BUSAL. isang alyansa ng mga artista't manunulat, mamamahayag at mga manggagawang pangkultura na naniniwalang ang lahat ay may karapatang magpahayag ng kani-kanilang opinyon at pananaw KAHIT na ito'y "unorthodox or even hateful to the prevailing climate of opinion".--philippine supreme court ruling-- Naniniwala rin ang alyansa na ang karapatang ito'y may kaakibat na responsabilidad. Responsabilidad na dapat pagsilbihan, hindi ang sarili o ang iilan, kundi ang mas nakararami, ang sambayanan.
No Need for Anti-Terror Bill
If only the government of the Philippines would enact laws on
conventions that the country is treaty-bound to comply with, there
would be no need to legislate an anti-terrorism bill (ATB). Passing
the ATB will only replicate existing international humanitarian laws
and laws on crimes against humanity, a UP law professor says.
BY DABET CASTAÑEDA
Bulatlat
Several treaties and conventions already signed by the Philippines in
past years are more than enough to cover so-called terrorist acts thus
making the proposed anti-terrorism bill (ATB) now in Congress
redundant.
A University of the Philippines law professor who testified at the
recent House Committee on Justice hearing on the ATB said Congress
only needs to enact enabling laws to implement the treaties that
government is duty-bound to implement without even passing the
proposed ATB.
Harry Roque, professor of Public International Law at the UP College
of Law, in his attestation to the committee hearing on Aug. 3 proposed
to enact the country's treaty obligations specifically relating to the
Geneva Conventions of 1951, additional protocols as well as the rules
on the means and methods of warfare, and possibly a legislation to
implement crimes against humanity as they exist in customary law.
Crimes against humanity, as defined by the United Nations
International Crimes Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTFY) and
the UN tribunal for Rwanda, are widespread or systematic attacks
against civilian population.
No enabling laws
Roque, who is also a member of the prosecution team in connection with
the impeachment complaint against President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo at
the House, cited specific treaty obligations that the country has
signed for which no enabling laws have been enacted. These include the
various conventions on torture, genocide, against the taking of
hostages, the physical protection of nuclear materials, on the
suppression of unlawful acts against the safety of fixed platforms
located at the continental shelf, on the marking of planting
explosives with the purpose of detection, on the suppression of
terrorist bombings and on the suppression of financing terrorism.
"We are parties to these conventions and we are duty-bound to enact
local enabling legislations to such," he said.
Roque told the committee, chaired by Rep. Simeon Datumanong (second
district, Maguindanao), also said these existing laws and norms in the
international community are adequate enough in dealing with what is
known today as "modern-day terrorism."
A bill specifically dealing with terrorism is not needed for the
simple reason that even the international community has not precisely
defined "terrorism," he said.
Roque's attestation prompted some members of the justice committee to
suggest that they wait for the UN to provide an accurate definition of
terrorism by September.
Rep. Rozzano Rufino Biazon (lone district, Muntinlupa) also suggested
that the committee look into the laws that are needed to be passed and
that can substitute for the ATB.
The committee is expected to fast track its deliberations on the ATB
as the bill has been certified as urgent by the president after the
Feb. 14 bombings in Makati, the country's financial district.
Meanwhile, the justice committee faces tougher days ahead as it starts
the hearings on the Macapagal-Arroyo impeachment on Aug. 10.
Skirting an agreement
Roque also said that the country needs to legislate on the
international humanitarian law to penalize persons who do not comply
with the Comprehensive Agreement on the Respect for Human Rights and
International Humanitarian Law (CARHRIHL), a rights agreement between
the Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and the
National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP). The agreement was
signed in 1998.
Revolutionary movements worldwide consider the CARHRIHL a breakthrough
it being the only human rights agreement signed by parties engaged in
a civil war.
However, Roque said the CARHRIHL is "just an agreement in principle to
observe but if any of them would breach the agreement there are no
provisions on how to deal with the breach."
On the contrary, human rights lawyer Edre Olalia said in a separate
interview, that there is such provision as stated in Part 5 of the
agreement. The provision states that both parties shall receive
complaints of human rights and international humanitarian law,
investigate such cases and recommend specific actions toward these.
Olalia, who is also a legal consultant of the NDFP, said that both the
GRP and NDFP have, in fact, created last year the Joint Monitoring
Committee (JMC) to determine if both parties comply with its
provisions. They have set up a Joint Secretariat (JS) which is tasked
to document violations of both parties.
"In principle, there is a system and a structure to address violations
of the agreement. In practice, however, the JMC is being limited to
accepting complaints," Olalia said. Since its operations started, 386
complaints have been filed against military, police, paramilitary and
other agents of the GRP while eight cases have been lodged at the NDFP
Section.
Olalia also said there is no need to legislate laws to ensure
adherence to the CARHRIHL it being a bicameral agreement entered into
by the two belligerent parties in the context of the peace
negotiations. Bulatlat
conventions that the country is treaty-bound to comply with, there
would be no need to legislate an anti-terrorism bill (ATB). Passing
the ATB will only replicate existing international humanitarian laws
and laws on crimes against humanity, a UP law professor says.
BY DABET CASTAÑEDA
Bulatlat
Several treaties and conventions already signed by the Philippines in
past years are more than enough to cover so-called terrorist acts thus
making the proposed anti-terrorism bill (ATB) now in Congress
redundant.
A University of the Philippines law professor who testified at the
recent House Committee on Justice hearing on the ATB said Congress
only needs to enact enabling laws to implement the treaties that
government is duty-bound to implement without even passing the
proposed ATB.
Harry Roque, professor of Public International Law at the UP College
of Law, in his attestation to the committee hearing on Aug. 3 proposed
to enact the country's treaty obligations specifically relating to the
Geneva Conventions of 1951, additional protocols as well as the rules
on the means and methods of warfare, and possibly a legislation to
implement crimes against humanity as they exist in customary law.
Crimes against humanity, as defined by the United Nations
International Crimes Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTFY) and
the UN tribunal for Rwanda, are widespread or systematic attacks
against civilian population.
No enabling laws
Roque, who is also a member of the prosecution team in connection with
the impeachment complaint against President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo at
the House, cited specific treaty obligations that the country has
signed for which no enabling laws have been enacted. These include the
various conventions on torture, genocide, against the taking of
hostages, the physical protection of nuclear materials, on the
suppression of unlawful acts against the safety of fixed platforms
located at the continental shelf, on the marking of planting
explosives with the purpose of detection, on the suppression of
terrorist bombings and on the suppression of financing terrorism.
"We are parties to these conventions and we are duty-bound to enact
local enabling legislations to such," he said.
Roque told the committee, chaired by Rep. Simeon Datumanong (second
district, Maguindanao), also said these existing laws and norms in the
international community are adequate enough in dealing with what is
known today as "modern-day terrorism."
A bill specifically dealing with terrorism is not needed for the
simple reason that even the international community has not precisely
defined "terrorism," he said.
Roque's attestation prompted some members of the justice committee to
suggest that they wait for the UN to provide an accurate definition of
terrorism by September.
Rep. Rozzano Rufino Biazon (lone district, Muntinlupa) also suggested
that the committee look into the laws that are needed to be passed and
that can substitute for the ATB.
The committee is expected to fast track its deliberations on the ATB
as the bill has been certified as urgent by the president after the
Feb. 14 bombings in Makati, the country's financial district.
Meanwhile, the justice committee faces tougher days ahead as it starts
the hearings on the Macapagal-Arroyo impeachment on Aug. 10.
Skirting an agreement
Roque also said that the country needs to legislate on the
international humanitarian law to penalize persons who do not comply
with the Comprehensive Agreement on the Respect for Human Rights and
International Humanitarian Law (CARHRIHL), a rights agreement between
the Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and the
National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP). The agreement was
signed in 1998.
Revolutionary movements worldwide consider the CARHRIHL a breakthrough
it being the only human rights agreement signed by parties engaged in
a civil war.
However, Roque said the CARHRIHL is "just an agreement in principle to
observe but if any of them would breach the agreement there are no
provisions on how to deal with the breach."
On the contrary, human rights lawyer Edre Olalia said in a separate
interview, that there is such provision as stated in Part 5 of the
agreement. The provision states that both parties shall receive
complaints of human rights and international humanitarian law,
investigate such cases and recommend specific actions toward these.
Olalia, who is also a legal consultant of the NDFP, said that both the
GRP and NDFP have, in fact, created last year the Joint Monitoring
Committee (JMC) to determine if both parties comply with its
provisions. They have set up a Joint Secretariat (JS) which is tasked
to document violations of both parties.
"In principle, there is a system and a structure to address violations
of the agreement. In practice, however, the JMC is being limited to
accepting complaints," Olalia said. Since its operations started, 386
complaints have been filed against military, police, paramilitary and
other agents of the GRP while eight cases have been lodged at the NDFP
Section.
Olalia also said there is no need to legislate laws to ensure
adherence to the CARHRIHL it being a bicameral agreement entered into
by the two belligerent parties in the context of the peace
negotiations. Bulatlat
