Week 3.
International Human Rights Law Duterte has vowed to continue his anti-drug campaign until his term ends in 2022. In July 2018,
World Report 2019: Philippines
The human rights crisis in the Philippines unleashed since President Rodrigo Duterte took office
in June 2016 deepened in 2018 as Duterte continued his murderous “war on drugs” in the face
of mounting international criticism.
In March, Duterte announced that the Philippines would withdraw from the International
Criminal Court (ICC) “effective immediately” in response to the ICC’s move in February to
launch a preliminary examination of “drug war” killings to determine whether to open a full-
blown investigation.
Duterte sought to silence his critics via various means. His most prominent critic, Senator Leila
de Lima, remained in detention on politically motivated drug charges. In May, the Philippine
Supreme Court took unprecedented action to remove Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno,
apparent reprisal for her criticism of Duterte’s “drug war” and other abusive policies. In
September, Duterte revoked the amnesty given to Senator Antonio Trillanes IV, another
Duterte critic, by the previous administration for leading mutinies in 2003 and 2007 when he
was a naval officer; in October, a Manila court denied a Department of Justice petition to issue
a warrant for his arrest.
In November, in a rare triumph of accountability in the Philippines, a Manila court found three
police officers guilty for the murder of 17-year-old Kian delos Santos in August 2017. The killing,
which was caught on surveillance camera, sparked outrage against the “drug war.” In
September, a court in Bulacan province convicted ex-army Maj. Gen. Jovito Palparan and two
other military men for the kidnapping and illegal detention of Karen Empeño and Sherlyn
Cadapan, two student activists who were allegedly abducted, raped, and tortured by military
agents in 2006. The two women remain missing.
Extrajudicial Killings
The Duterte administration’s “war on drugs” continued in 2018 and expanded into areas
outside the capital, Metro Manila, including to the provinces of Bulacan, Laguna, Cavite, and
the cities of Cebu and General Santos.
According to the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA), 4,948 suspected drug users and
dealers died during police operations from July 1, 2016 to September 30, 2018. But this does
not include the thousands of others killed by unidentified gunmen. According to the Philippine
National Police (PNP), 22,983 such deaths since the “war on drugs” began are classified as
“homicides under investigation.”
The exact number of fatalities is difficult to ascertain because the government has failed to
disclose official documents about the “drug war.” It has issued contradictory statistics and, in
the case of these “homicides under investigation,” stopped releasing the figures altogether.
Masked gunmen taking part in killings appeared to be working closely with police, casting
doubt on government claims that most killings have been committed by vigilantes or rival drug
gangs.
he again pledged to continue the “war on drugs,” saying “it will be as relentless and chilling as
on the day it began.” Duterte has also vowed to protect police officers and agents carrying out
the “drug war” from prosecution. Except for a few high-profile cases, the killings have not been
investigated.
Human Rights Defenders
Since February 2017, Senator Leila de Lima has been jailed on politically motivated drug
charges filed against her in apparent retaliation for leading a Senate inquiry into the “drug war”
killings. Her plight has prompted international expressions of support.
In September, Duterte ordered the arrest of a colleague of de Lima’s, Senator Antonio Trillanes
IV, by revoking his amnesty, forcing him to remain at the Senate premises for weeks. In
October, a Manila court dismissed the government’s petition to issue the arrest warrant
against Trillanes. Trillanes has been Duterte’s most vocal critic since de Lima, accusing the
president and his family of corruption.
In February, the Department of Justice issued a petition that labeled more than 600 people—
among them Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, the United Nations special rapporteur on the rights of
indigenous peoples, and dozens of leftist activists—as members of the Communist Party of the
Philippines (CPP) and its armed wing, the New People’s Army (NPA). That action put those
individuals at risk of extrajudicial execution. Tauli-Corpuz called the allegation “baseless,
malicious and irresponsible.” In August, a Manila court removed her name from the petition.
Philippine presidential spokesman Harry Roque alleged in March that “some human rights
groups have become unwitting tools of drug lords to hinder the strides made by the
administration.” That echoed comments made days prior by Foreign Affairs Secretary Alan
Peter Cayetano equating efforts of some unnamed human rights organizations to stop
Duterte’s murderous “war on drugs” with “being used by drug lords.”
Children’s Rights
The Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) announced in June that it was seeking to
impose annual unannounced drug screening tests on teachers and schoolchildren starting in
the fourth grade. PDEA sought to justify the move as an attempt to identify 10-year-old
potential drug users so they “can get intervention while they are still young.”
Imposing drug testing on schoolchildren when Philippine police are summarily killing alleged
drug users endangers children should they fail such a drug test. Mandatory testing may also
violate children’s right to bodily integrity, constitute arbitrary interference with their privacy
and dignity, and may deter children from attending school for reasons unrelated to any
potential drug use.
Police have killed dozens of children since the start of the “war on drugs” in June 2016, deaths
which Duterte has dismissed as “collateral damage.” In February, police arrested three police
officers implicated in the execution-style summary killing of 17-year-old Kian Lloyd delos
Santos in August 2017.
Attacks on Journalists
The Duterte administration ratcheted up its attack on media freedom in January 2018 by
threatening the closure of Rappler.com, an online news outlet critical of the “war on drugs.”
In November, the Department of Justice indicted Rappler and its editor and founder, Maria
Ressa, for tax evasion. This followed months of attacks and harassment of Rappler by the
Duterte government and its supporters.
New draft regulations by the Philippine House of Representatives in May would allow Congress
to ban reporters who “besmirch” the reputation of lawmakers from covering the national
legislature. Journalists and some members of Congress have denounced the proposed rule as
dangerously ambiguous and stifling. The killings of journalists continued in 2018, with six
murdered by unidentified gunmen in different parts of the country.
HIV Epidemic
The Philippines faces the fastest-growing epidemic of HIV in Asia. According to the Joint United
Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), the number of new HIV cases jumped from 4,400
in 2010 to 12,000 in 2017, the last year for which data were available. Most new infections—
up to 83 percent—are among men and transgender women who have sex with men. There are
now an estimated 68,000 Filipinos living with HIV.
This increase has been attributed to government policy failures to respond to the epidemic.
Human Rights Watch research shows that many sexually active young Filipinos have little or
no knowledge about the role of condoms in preventing sexually transmitted diseases because
the government fails to promote condoms vigorously, among other factors.
Human Rights Watch documented that workers and employees in the Philippines living with
HIV may suffer workplace discrimination including refusal to hire, unlawful firing, and forced
resignation of people with HIV. Some employers may also disregard or actively facilitate
workplace harassment of employees who are HIV positive. In February, Duterte suggested to
a group of returning overseas migrant workers that they avoid using condoms because they
“aren’t pleasurable.”
In October, the Senate and House of Representatives approved a bill that would amend the
country’s 20-year-old AIDS law. The new law outlines a rights-based response to the epidemic
and prohibits discrimination against people with HIV in the workplace and other settings. It
also makes it unlawful to disclose the HIV status of an individual without their consent.
However, the law does not include specific provisions directing the government to promote
condom use.
Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity
The Philippine Supreme Court heard a long-awaited argument in June that could open the door
to same-sex marriage in the overwhelmingly Catholic country. In May, the city of Mandaluyong
approved an ordinance to protect the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT)
people—the latest in a slew of similar local laws passed across the country.
The House of Representatives unanimously passed a federal nondiscrimination bill protecting
LGBT people in September 2017, but opponents have stalled a companion bill in the Senate.
Representatives also introduced a bill that would create civil partnerships and give same-sex
couples rights in adoption, insurance, inheritance, property, and medical decision-making.
Key International Actors
In January 2018, the European Commission expressed strong concerns about the Philippines’
compliance with the human rights obligations related to the trade preferences scheme from
which it benefits.
In February, the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) announced that she would
open a preliminary examination into the “drug war” killings in the Philippines. The Duterte
administration responded by withdrawing from the Rome Statute, which takes effect in one
year. In April, the European Parliament adopted a resolution calling on the Philippines to put
an end to the drug war and ensure accountability, and on the EU to use all available mean—
including suspending trade benefits if necessary—to persuade the Philippines to reverse its
abusive trend.
Asian governments have expressed implicit or explicit support for the anti-drug campaign. The
Indonesian government in February awarded then-Philippine National Police Director-General
Ronald dela Rosa its highest honor, the Medal of Honor, for his “rock star-like inspiration to
the Indonesian national police and the Indonesian people on how to fight the war on drugs.”
In May, the South Korean Embassy in Manila and the Korean Police National Agency
donated more than 130 vehicles to the Philippines National Police despite its role in the “drug
war” killings.
The US Congress regularly appropriates assistance to the Philippine government, including
substantial financing for arms sales as well as funds for law enforcement and military training.
Law enforcement funding is restricted to drug user treatment projects and marine and
international interdiction programs. The US military also routinely provides the Philippines
military with second-hand military vehicles, ships, and non-lethal equipment.
Iceland led a joint statement on behalf of 38 states at the June session of the United Nations
Human Rights Council (HRC), building on two previous joint statements, condemning the
extrajudicial killings and calling for “a more formal Council initiative” if needed to hold the
Philippines to its obligations as a member of the Council. It also called for the Philippines to
“cooperate with the international community” to ensure investigations into these deaths. On
October 12, the Philippines was elected to serve a second three-year term on the UN HRC,
starting January 2019.
PHILIPPINES 2018 HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT (See separate file for full text)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Philippines is a multi-party, constitutional republic with a bicameral legislature. President
Rodrigo Roa Duterte, elected in May 2016, began his constitutionally limited six-year term in
June 2016. The 2016 presidential election was generally seen as free and fair. Barangay (village)
and youth council elections originally scheduled for 2016 were twice postponed but ultimately
held in May. These, too, were generally free and fair, although there were reports of violence
and vote buying.
Civilian control over the Philippine National Police (PNP) continued to improve but was not
fully effective. Extrajudicial killings have been the chief human rights concern in the country
for many years and, after a sharp rise with the onset of the antidrug campaign in 2016, they
continued in the reporting year, albeit at a lower level. From January to September 29, media
chronicled 673 deaths in police operations suspected to be connected with the government’s
antidrug campaign. The PNP Internal Affairs Service (IAS) is required to investigate all deaths
or injuries committed in the conduct of a police operation. IAS claimed it began investigations
of all reported extrajudicial killings. There were no reports that civilian control over other
security forces was inadequate.
Human rights issues included unlawful or arbitrary killings by security forces, vigilantes, and
others allegedly connected to the government, and by insurgents; forced disappearance;
torture; arbitrary detention; harsh and life-threatening prison conditions; political prisoners;
arbitrary or unlawful interference with privacy; criminal libel; killings of and threats against
journalists; official corruption and abuse of power; and the use of forced and child labor.
The government investigated a limited number of reported human rights abuses, including
abuses by its own forces, paramilitaries, and insurgent and terrorist groups. Concerns about
police impunity increased significantly following the sharp increase in killings by police in 2016.
President Duterte publicly rejected criticism of alleged police killings, but said authorities
would investigate any actions taken outside the rule of law. Significant concerns persisted
about impunity of civilian national and local government officials and powerful business and
commercial figures. Slow judicial processes remained an obstacle to bringing government
officials allegedly involved in human rights abuses to justice.
Muslim separatists, communist insurgents, and terrorist groups continued to attack
government security forces and civilians, causing displacement of civilians and resulting in the
deaths of security force members and civilians. Terrorist organizations engaged in kidnappings
for ransom, bombings of civilian targets, beheadings, and the use of child soldiers in combat
or auxiliary roles. The government called off negotiations with the National Democratic Front
of the Philippines, the political arm of the communist New People’s Army, in June, but
continued to explore ways to resume talks.
Jose Manuel Diokno, “Civil and Administrative Remedies as Instruments of Accountability for
Human Rights Violations” June 2009, Introduction in p. 1-3
ROC RULE 102 (Habeas Corpus)
Section 1. To what habeas corpus extends. — Except as otherwise expressly provided by law,
the writ of habeas corpus shall extend to all cases of illegal confinement or detention by which
any person is deprived of his liberty, or by which the rightful custody of any person is withheld
from the person entitled thereto.
Section 2. Who may grant the writ. — The writ of habeas corpus may be granted by the
Supreme Court, or any member thereof in the instances authorized by law, and if so granted it
shall be enforceable anywhere in the Philippines, and may be made returnable before the
court or any member thereof, or before a Court of First Instance, or any judge thereof for the
hearing and decision on the merits. It may also be granted by a Court of First Instance, or a
judge thereof, on any day and at any time, and returnable before himself, enforceable only
within his judicial district.
Section 3. Requisites of application therefor. — Application for the writ shall be by petition
signed and verified either by the party for whose relief it is intended, or by some person on his
behalf, and shall set forth:
(a) That the person in whose behalf the application is made is imprisoned or restrained on his
liberty;
(b) The officer or name of the person by whom he is so imprisoned or restrained; or, if both
are unknown or uncertain, such officer or person may be described by an assumed appellation,
and the person who is served with the writ shall be deemed the person intended;
(c) The place where he is so imprisoned or restrained, if known;
(d) A copy of the commitment or cause of detention of such person, if it can be procured
without impairing the efficiency of the remedy; or, if the imprisonment or restraint is without
any legal authority, such fact shall appear.
Section 4. When writ not allowed or discharge authorized. — If it appears that the person
alleged to be restrained of his liberty is in the custody of an officer under process issued by a
court or judge or by virtue of a judgment or order of a court of record, and that the court or
judge had jurisdiction to issue the process, render the judgment, or make the order, the writ
shall not be allowed; or if the jurisdiction appears after the writ is allowed, the person shall not
be discharged by reason of any informality or defect in the process, judgment, or order. Not
shall anything in this rule be held to authorize the discharge of a person charged with or
convicted of an offense in the Philippines, or of a person suffering imprisonment under lawful
judgment.
Section 5. When the writ must be granted and issued. — A court or judge authorized to grant
the writ must, when a petition therefor is presented and it appears that the writ ought to issue,
grant the same forthwith, and immediately thereupon the clerk of the court shall issue the writ
under the seal of the court; or in case of emergency, the judge may issue the writ under his
own hand, and may depute any officer or person to serve it.
Section 6. To whom writ directed, and what to require. — In case of imprisonment or restraint
by an officer, the writ shall be directed to him, and shall command him to have the body of the
person restrained of his liberty before the court or judge designated in the writ at the time and
place therein specified. In case of imprisonment or restraint by a person not an officer, the writ
shall be directed to an officer, and shall command him to take and have the body of the person
restrained of his liberty before the court or judge designated in the writ at the time and place
therein specified, and to summon the person by whom he is restrained then and there to
appear before said court or judge to show the cause of the imprisonment or restraint.
Section 7. How prisoner designated and writ served. — The person to be produced should be
designated in the writ by his name, if known, but if his name is not known he may be otherwise
described or identified. The writ may be served in any province by the sheriff or other proper
officer, or by a person deputed by the court or judge. Service of the writ shall be made by
leaving the original with the person to whom it is directed and preserving a copy on which to
make return or service. If that person cannot be found, or has not the prisoner in his custody,
then the service shall be made on any other person having or exercising such custody.
Section 8. How writ executed and returned. — The officer to whom the writ is directed shall
convey the person so imprisoned or restrained, and named in the writ, before the judge
allowing the writ, or in case of his absence or disability, before some other judge of the same
court, on the day specified in the writ, unless, from sickness or infirmity of the person directed
to be produced, such person cannot, without danger, be bought before the court or judge; and
the officer shall make due return of the writ, together with the day and the cause of the caption
and restraint of such person according to the command thereof.
Section 9. Defect of form. — No writ of habeas corpus can be disobeyed for defect of form, if
it sufficiently appears therefrom in whose custody or under whose restraint the party
imprisoned or restrained is held and the court or judge before whom he is to be bought.
Section 10. Contents of return. — When the person to be produced is imprisoned or restrained
by an officer, the person who makes the return shall state therein, and in other cases the
person in whose custody the prisoner is found shall state, in writing to the court or judge
before whom the writ is returnable, plainly and unequivocably:
(a) Whether he has or has not the party in his custody or power, or under restraint;
(b) If he has the party in his custody or power, or under restraint, the authority and the true
and whole cause thereof, set forth at large, with a copy of the writ, order execution, or other
process, if any, upon which the party is held;
(c) If the party is in his custody or power or is restrained by him, and is not produced,
particularly the nature and gravity of the sickness or infirmity of such party by reason of which
he cannot, without danger, be bought before the court or judge;
(d) If he has had the party in his custody or power, or under restraint, and has transferred such
custody or restraint to another, particularly to whom, at what time, for what cause, and by
what authority such transfer was made.
Section 11. Return to be signed and sworn to. — The return or statement shall be signed by
the person who makes it; and shall also be sworn by him if the prisoner is not produced, and
in all other cases unless the return is made and signed by a sworn public officer in his official
capacity.
Section 12. Hearing on return. Adjournments. — When the writ is returned before one judge,
at a time when the court is in session, he may forthwith adjourn the case into the court, there
to be heard and determined. The court or judge before whom the writ is returned or adjourned
must immediately proceed to hear and examine the return, and such other matters as are
properly submitted for consideration, unless for good cause shown the hearing is adjourned,
in which event the court or judge shall make such order for the safekeeping of the person
imprisoned or restrained as the nature of the case requires. If the person imprisoned or
restrained is not produced because of his alleged sickness or infirmity, the court or judge must
be satisfied that it is so grave that such person cannot be produced without danger, before
proceeding to hear and dispose of the matter. On the hearing the court or judge shall disregard
matters of form and technicalities in respect to any warrant or order of commitment of a court
or officer authorized to commit by law.
Section 13. When the return evidence, and when only a plea. — If it appears that the prisoner
is in custody under a warrant of commitment in pursuance of law, the return shall be
considered prima facie evidence of the cause of restraint, but if he is restrained of his liberty
by any alleged private authority, the return shall be considered only as a plea of the facts
therein set forth, and the party claiming the custody must prove such facts.
Section 14. When person lawfully imprisoned recommitted, and when let to bail. — If it appears
that the prisoner was lawfully committed, and is plainly and specifically charged in the warrant
of commitment with an offense punishable by death, he shall not be released, discharged, or
bailed. If he is lawfully imprisoned or restrained on a charge of having committed an offense
not so punishable, he may be recommitted to imprisonment or admitted to bail in the
discretion of the court or judge. If he be admitted to bail, he shall forthwith file a bond in such
sum as the court or judge deems reasonable, considering the circumstances of the prisoner
and the nature of the offense charged, conditioned for his appearance before the court where
the offense is properly cognizable to abide its order of judgment; and the court or judge shall
certify the proceedings, together with the bond, forthwith to the proper court. If such bond is
not so filed, the prisoner shall be recommitted to confinement.
Section 15. When prisoner discharged if no appeal. — When the court or judge has examined
into the cause of caption and restraint of the prisoner, and is satisfied that he is unlawfully
imprisoned or restrained, he shall forthwith order his discharge from confinement, but such
discharge shall not be effective until a copy of the order has been served on the officer or
person detaining the prisoner. If the officer or person detaining the prisoner does not desire
to appeal, the prisoner shall be forthwith released.
Section 16. Penalty for refusing to issue writ, or for disobeying the same. — A clerk of a court
who refuses to issue the writ after allowance thereof and demand therefor, or a person to
whom a writ is directed, who neglects or refuses to obey or make return of the same according
to the command thereof, or makes false return thereof, or who, upon demand made by or on
behalf of the prisoner, refuses to deliver to the person demanding, within six (6) hours after
the demand therefor, a true copy of the warrant or order of commitment, shall forfeit to the
party aggrieved the sum of one thousand pesos, to be recorded in a proper action, and may
also be punished by the court or judge as for contempt.
Section 17. Person discharged not to be again imprisoned. — A person who is set at liberty
upon a writ of habeas corpus shall not be again imprisoned for the same offense unless by the
lawful order or process of a court having jurisdiction of the cause or offense; and a person who
knowingly, contrary to the provisions of this rule, recommits or imprisons, or causes to be
committed or imprisoned, for the same offense, or pretended offense, any person so set at
liberty, or knowingly aids or assists therein, shall forfeit to the party aggrieved the sum of one
thousand pesos, to be recovered in a proper action, notwithstanding any colorable pretense
or variation in the warrant of commitment, and may also be punished by the court or judge
granting the writ as for contempt.
Section 18. When prisoner may be removed from one custody to another. — A person
committed to prison, or in custody of an officer, for any criminal matter, shall not be removed
therefrom into the custody of another unless by legal process, or the prisoner be delivered to
an inferior officer to carry to jail, or, by order of the proper court or judge, be removed from
one place to another within the Philippines for trial, or in case of fire epidemic, insurrection,
or other necessity or public calamity; and a person who, after such commitment, makes signs,
or counter-signs any order for such removal contrary to this section, shall forfeit to the party
aggrieved the sum of one thousand pesos, to be recovered in a proper action.
Section 19. Record of writ, fees and costs. — The proceedings upon a writ of habeas
corpus shall be recorded by the clerk of the court, and upon the final disposition of such
proceedings the court or judge shall make such order as to costs as the case requires. The fees
of officers and witnesses shall be included in the costs taxed, but no officer or person shall
have the right to demand payment in advance of any fees to which he is entitled by virtue of
the proceedings. When a person confined under color of proceedings in a criminal case is
discharged, the costs shall be taxed against the Republic of the Philippines, and paid out of its
Treasury; when a person in custody by virtue or under color of proceedings in a civil case is
discharged, the costs shall be taxed against him, or against the person who signed the
application for the writ, or both, as the court shall direct.
A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC
(25 September 2007)
THE RULE ON THE WRIT OF AMPARO
SECTION 1. Petition. – The petition for a writ of amparo is a remedy available to any person
whose right to life, liberty and security is violated or threatened with violation by an unlawful
act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private individual or entity.
The writ shall cover extralegal killings and enforced disappearances or threats thereof.
SEC. 2. Who May File. – The petition may be filed by the aggrieved party or by any qualified
person or entity in the following order:
a. Any member of the immediate family, namely: the spouse, children and parents of
the aggrieved party;
b. Any ascendant, descendant or collateral relative of the aggrieved party within the
fourth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity, in default of those mentioned in the
preceding paragraph; or
c. Any concerned citizen, organization, association or institution, if there is no known
member of the immediate family or relative of the aggrieved party.
The filing of a petition by the aggrieved party suspends the right of all other authorized parties
to file similar petitions. Likewise, the filing of the petition by an authorized party on behalf of
the aggrieved party suspends the right of all others, observing the order established herein.
SEC. 3. Where to File. – The petition may be filed on any day and at any time with the Regional
Trial Court of the place where the threat, act or omission was committed or any of its elements
occurred, or with the Sandiganbayan, the Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court, or any justice
of such courts. The writ shall be enforceable anywhere in the Philippines.
When issued by a Regional Trial Court or any judge thereof, the writ shall be returnable before
such court or judge.
When issued by the Sandiganbayan or the Court of Appeals or any of their justices, it may be
returnable before such court or any justice thereof, or to any Regional Trial Court of the place
where the threat, act or omission was committed or any of its elements occurred.
When issued by the Supreme Court or any of its justices, it may be returnable before such
Court or any justice thereof, or before the Sandiganbayan or the Court of Appeals or any of
their justices, or to any Regional Trial Court of the place where the threat, act or omission was
committed or any of its elements occurred.
SEC. 4. No Docket Fees. – The petitioner shall be exempted from the payment of the docket
and other lawful fees when filing the petition. The court, justice or judge shall docket the
petition and act upon it immediately.
SEC. 5. Contents of Petition. – The petition shall be signed and verified and shall allege the
following:
a. The personal circumstances of the petitioner;
b. The name and personal circumstances of the respondent responsible for the threat,
act or omission, or, if the name is unknown or uncertain, the respondent may be
described by an assumed appellation;
c. The right to life, liberty and security of the aggrieved party violated or threatened
with violation by an unlawful act or omission of the respondent, and how such threat
or violation is committed with the attendant circumstances detailed in supporting
affidavits;
d. The investigation conducted, if any, specifying the names, personal circumstances,
and addresses of the investigating authority or individuals, as well as the manner and
conduct of the investigation, together with any report;
e. The actions and recourses taken by the petitioner to determine the fate or
whereabouts of the aggrieved party and the identity of the person responsible for
the threat, act or omission; and
f. The relief prayed for.
The petition may include a general prayer for other just and equitable reliefs.
SEC. 6. Issuance of the Writ. – Upon the filing of the petition, the court, justice or judge shall
immediately order the issuance of the writ if on its face it ought to issue. The clerk of court
shall issue the writ under the seal of the court; or in case of urgent necessity, the justice or the
judge may issue the writ under his or her own hand, and may deputize any officer or person to
serve it.
The writ shall also set the date and time for summary hearing of the petition which shall not
be later than seven (7) days from the date of its issuance.
SEC. 7. Penalty for Refusing to Issue or Serve the Writ. – A clerk of court who refuses to issue
the writ after its allowance, or a deputized person who refuses to serve the same, shall be
punished by the court, justice or judge for contempt without prejudice to other disciplinary
actions.
SEC. 8. How the Writ is Served. – The writ shall be served upon the respondent by a judicial
officer or by a person deputized by the court, justice or judge who shall retain a copy on which
to make a return of service. In case the writ cannot be served personally on the respondent,
the rules on substituted service shall apply.
SEC. 9. Return; Contents. – Within seventy-two (72) hours after service of the writ, the
respondent shall file a verified written return together with supporting affidavits which shall,
among other things, contain the following:
a. The lawful defenses to show that the respondent did not violate or threaten with
violation the right to life, liberty and security of the aggrieved party, through any act
or omission;
b. The steps or actions taken by the respondent to determine the fate or whereabouts
of the aggrieved party and the person or persons responsible for the threat, act or
omission;
c. All relevant information in the possession of the respondent pertaining to the threat,
act or omission against the aggrieved party; and
d. If the respondent is a public official or employee, the return shall further state the
actions that have been or will still be taken:
i. to verify the identity of the aggrieved party;
ii. to recover and preserve evidence related to the death or disappearance of the
person identified in the petition which may aid in the prosecution of the person or
persons responsible;
iii. to identify witnesses and obtain statements from them concerning the death or
disappearance;
iv. to determine the cause, manner, location and time of death or disappearance as well
as any pattern or practice that may have brought about the death or disappearance;
v. to identify and apprehend the person or persons involved in the death or
disappearance; and
vi. to bring the suspected offenders before a competent court.
The return shall also state other matters relevant to the investigation, its resolution and the
prosecution of the case.
A general denial of the allegations in the petition shall not be allowed.
SEC. 10. Defenses not Pleaded Deemed Waived. — All defenses shall be raised in the return,
otherwise, they shall be deemed waived.
SEC. 11. Prohibited Pleadings and Motions. – The following pleadings and motions are
prohibited:
a. Motion to dismiss;
b. Motion for extension of time to file return, opposition, affidavit, position paper and
other pleadings;
c. Dilatory motion for postponement;
d. Motion for a bill of particulars;
e. Counterclaim or cross-claim;
f. Third-party complaint;
g. Reply;
h. Motion to declare respondent in default;
i. Intervention;
j. Memorandum;
k. Motion for reconsideration of interlocutory orders or interim relief orders; and
l. Petition for certiorari, mandamus or prohibition against any interlocutory order.
SEC. 12. Effect of Failure to File Return. — In case the respondent fails to file a return, the
court, justice or judge shall proceed to hear the petition ex parte.
SEC. 13. Summary Hearing. — The hearing on the petition shall be summary. However, the
court, justice or judge may call for a preliminary conference to simplify the issues and
determine the possibility of obtaining stipulations and admissions from the parties.
The hearing shall be from day to day until completed and given the same priority as petitions
for habeas corpus.
SEC. 14. Interim Reliefs. — Upon filing of the petition or at anytime before final judgment, the
court, justice or judge may grant any of the following reliefs:
(a) Temporary Protection Order. – The court, justice or judge, upon motion or motu proprio,
may order that the petitioner or the aggrieved party and any member of the immediate family
be protected in a government agency or by an accredited person or private institution capable
of keeping and securing their safety. If the petitioner is an organization, association or
institution referred to in Section 3(c) of this Rule, the protection may be extended to the
officers involved.
The Supreme Court shall accredit the persons and private institutions that shall extend
temporary protection to the petitioner or the aggrieved party and any member of the
immediate family, in accordance with guidelines which it shall issue.
The accredited persons and private institutions shall comply with the rules and conditions that
may be imposed by the court, justice or judge.
(b) Inspection Order. — The court, justice or judge, upon verified motion and after due hearing,
may order any person in possession or control of a designated land or other property, to permit
entry for the purpose of inspecting, measuring, surveying, or photographing the property or
any relevant object or operation thereon.
The motion shall state in detail the place or places to be inspected. It shall be supported by
affidavits or testimonies of witnesses having personal knowledge of the enforced
disappearance or whereabouts of the aggrieved party.
If the motion is opposed on the ground of national security or of the privileged nature of the
information, the court, justice or judge may conduct a hearing in chambers to determine the
merit of the opposition.
The movant must show that the inspection order is necessary to establish the right of the
aggrieved party alleged to be threatened or violated.
The inspection order shall specify the person or persons authorized to make the inspection and
the date, time, place and manner of making the inspection and may prescribe other conditions
to protect the constitutional rights of all parties. The order shall expire five (5) days after the
date of its issuance, unless extended for justifiable reasons.
(c) Production Order. – The court, justice or judge, upon verified motion and after due hearing,
may order any person in possession, custody or control of any designated documents, papers,
books, accounts, letters, photographs, objects or tangible things, or objects in digitized or
electronic form, which constitute or contain evidence relevant to the petition or the return, to
produce and permit their inspection, copying or photographing by or on behalf of the movant.
The motion may be opposed on the ground of national security or of the privileged nature of
the information, in which case the court, justice or judge may conduct a hearing in chambers
to determine the merit of the opposition.
The court, justice or judge shall prescribe other conditions to protect the constitutional rights
of all the parties.
(d) Witness Protection Order. – The court, justice or judge, upon motion or motu proprio, may
refer the witnesses to the Department of Justice for admission to the Witness Protection,
Security and Benefit Program, pursuant to Republic Act No. 6981.
The court, justice or judge may also refer the witnesses to other government agencies, or to
accredited persons or private institutions capable of keeping and securing their safety.
SEC. 15. Availability of Interim Reliefs to Respondent. – Upon verified motion of the
respondent and after due hearing, the court, justice or judge may issue an inspection order or
production order under paragraphs (b) and (c) of the preceding section.
A motion for inspection order under this section shall be supported by affidavits or testimonies
of witnesses having personal knowledge of the defenses of the respondent.
SEC. 16. Contempt. – The court, justice or judge may order the respondent who refuses to
make a return, or who makes a false return, or any person who otherwise disobeys or resists
a lawful process or order of the court to be punished for contempt. The contemnor may be
imprisoned or imposed a fine.
SEC. 17. Burden of Proof and Standard of Diligence Required. – The parties shall establish their
claims by substantial evidence.
The respondent who is a private individual or entity must prove that ordinary diligence as
required by applicable laws, rules and regulations was observed in the performance of duty.
The respondent who is a public official or employee must prove that extraordinary diligence
as required by applicable laws, rules and regulations was observed in the performance of duty.
The respondent public official or employee cannot invoke the presumption that official duty
has been regularly performed to evade responsibility or liability.
SEC. 18. Judgment. — The court shall render judgment within ten (10) days from the time the
petition is submitted for decision. If the allegations in the petition are proven by substantial
evidence, the court shall grant the privilege of the writ and such reliefs as may be proper and
appropriate; otherwise, the privilege shall be denied.
SEC. 19. Appeal. – Any party may appeal from the final judgment or order to the Supreme
Court under Rule 45. The appeal may raise questions of fact or law or both.
The period of appeal shall be five (5) working days from the date of notice of the adverse
judgment.
The appeal shall be given the same priority as in habeas corpus cases.
SEC. 20. Archiving and Revival of Cases. – The court shall not dismiss the petition, but shall
archive it, if upon its determination it cannot proceed for a valid cause such as the failure of
petitioner or witnesses to appear due to threats on their lives.
A periodic review of the archived cases shall be made by the amparo court that shall, motu
proprio or upon motion by any party, order their revival when ready for further proceedings.
The petition shall be dismissed with prejudice upon failure to prosecute the case after the lapse
of two (2) years from notice to the petitioner of the order archiving the case.
The clerks of court shall submit to the Office of the Court Administrator a consolidated list of
archived cases under this Rule not later than the first week of January of every year.
SEC. 21. Institution of Separate Actions. — This Rule shall not preclude the filing of separate
criminal, civil or administrative actions.
SEC. 22. Effect of Filing of a Criminal Action. – When a criminal action has been commenced,
no separate petition for the writ shall be filed. The reliefs under the writ shall be available by
motion in the criminal case.
The procedure under this Rule shall govern the disposition of the reliefs available under the
writ of amparo.
SEC. 23. Consolidation. – When a criminal action is filed subsequent to the filing of a petition
for the writ, the latter shall be consolidated with the criminal action.
When a criminal action and a separate civil action are filed subsequent to a petition for a writ
of amparo, the latter shall be consolidated with the criminal action.
After consolidation, the procedure under this Rule shall continue to apply to the disposition of
the reliefs in the petition.
SEC. 24. Substantive Rights. — This Rule shall not diminish, increase or modify substantive
rights recognized and protected by the Constitution.
SEC. 25. Suppletory Application of the Rules of Court. – The Rules of Court shall apply
suppletorily insofar as it is not inconsistent with this Rule.
SEC. 26. Applicability to Pending Cases. – This Rule shall govern cases involving extralegal
killings and enforced disappearances or threats thereof pending in the trial and appellate
courts.
SEC. 27. Effectivity. – This Rule shall take effect on October 24, 2007, following its publication
in three (3) newspapers of general circulation.
A. M. No. 08-1-16-SC January 22, 2008
THE RULE ON THE WRIT OF HABEAS DATA
RESOLUTION
Acting on the recommendation of the Chairperson of the Committee on Revision of the Rules
of Court submitting for this Courts consideration and approval the proposed Rule on the Writ
of Habeas Data, the Court Resolved to APPROVE the same.
This Resolution shall take effect on February 2, 2008, following its publication in three (3)
newspapers of general circulation. January 22, 2008.
THE RULE ON THE WRIT OF HABEAS DATA
Section 1. Habeas Data. - The writ of habeas data is a remedy available to any person whose
right to privacy in life, liberty or security is violated or threatened by an unlawful act or
omission of a public official or employee, or of a private individual or entity engaged in the
gathering, collecting or storing of data or information regarding the person, family, home and
correspondence of the aggrieved party.
Sec. 2. Who May File. - Any aggrieved party may file a petition for the writ of habeas data.
However, in cases of extralegal killings and enforced disappearances, the petition may be filed
by:
Any member of the immediate family of the aggrieved party, namely: the spouse, children and
parents; or
(a)
(b) Any ascendant, descendant or collateral relative of the aggrieved party within the fourth
civil degree of consanguinity or affinity, in default of those mentioned in the preceding
paragraph; or
Sec. 3. Where to File. - The petition may be filed with the Regional Trial Court where the
petitioner or respondent resides, or that which has jurisdiction over the place where the data
or information is gathered, collected or stored, at the option of the petitioner.
The petition may also be filed with the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals or the
Sandiganbayan when the action concerns public data files of government offices.
Sec. 4. Where Returnable; Enforceable. - When the writ is issued by a Regional Trial Court or
any judge thereof, it shall be returnable before such court or judge.
When issued by the Court of Appeals or the Sandiganbayan or any of its justices, it may be
returnable before such court or any justice thereof, or to any Regional Trial Court of the place
where the petitioner or respondent resides, or that which has jurisdiction over the place where
the data or information is gathered, collected or stored.
When issued by the Supreme Court or any of its justices, it may be returnable before such
Court or any justice thereof, or before the Court of Appeals or the Sandiganbayan or any of its
justices, or to any Regional Trial Court of the place where the petitioner or respondent resides,
or that which has jurisdiction over the place where the data or information is gathered,
collected or stored.
The writ of habeas data shall be enforceable anywhere in the Philippines.
Sec. 5. Docket Fees. - No docket and other lawful fees shall be required from an indigent
petitioner. The petition of the indigent shall be docked and acted upon immediately, without
prejudice to subsequent submission of proof of indigency not later than fifteen (15) days from
the filing of the petition.
Sec. 6. Petition. - A verified written petition for a writ of habeas data should contain:
(a)The personalcircumstances of the petitioner and the respondent;
(b) The manner the right to privacy is violated or threatened and how it affects the right to life,
liberty or security of the aggrieved party;
(c) The actions and recourses taken by the petitioner to secure the data or information;
(d) The location of the files, registers or databases, the government office, and the person in
charge, in possession or in control of the data or information, if known;
(e) The reliefs prayed for, which may include the updating, rectification, suppression or
destruction of the database or information or files kept by the respondent.
In case of threats, the relief may include a prayer for an order enjoining the act complained of;
and
(f) Such other relevant reliefs as are just and equitable.
Sec. 7. Issuance of the Writ. - Upon the filing of the petition, the court, justice or judge shall
immediately order the issuance of the writ if on its face it ought to issue. The clerk of court
shall issue the writ under the seal of the court and cause it to be served within three (3) days
from the issuance; or, in case of urgent necessity, the justice or judge may issue the writ under
his or her own hand, and may deputize any officer or person serve it.
The writ shall also set the date and time for summary hearing of the petition which shall not
be later than ten (10) work days from the date of its issuance.
Sec. 8. Penalty for Refusing to Issue or Serve the Writ. - A clerk of court who refuses to issue
the writ after its allowance, or a deputized person who refuses to serve the same, shall be
punished by the court, justice or judge for contempt without prejudice to other disciplinary
actions.
Sec. 9. How the Writ is Served. - The writ shall be served upon the respondent by a judicial
officer or by a person deputized by the court, justice or judge who shall retain a copy on which
to make a return of service. In case the writ cannot be served personally on the respondent,
the rules on substituted service shall apply.
Sec. 10. Return; Contents. - The respondent shall file a verified written return together with
supporting affidavits within five (5) working days from service of the writ, which period may
be reasonably extended by the Court for justifiable reasons. The return shall, among other
things, contain the following:
(a) The lawful defenses such as national security, state secrets, privileged communications,
confidentiality of the source of information of media and others;
(b) In case of respondent in charge, in possession or in control of the data or information
subject of the petition;
(i) a disclosure of the data or information about the petitioner, the nature of such
data or information, and the purpose for its collection;
(ii) the steps or actions taken by the respondent to ensure the security and
confidentiality of the data or information; and
(iii) the currency and accuracy of the data or information held; and,
(c) Other allegations relevant to the resolution of the proceeding.
A general denial of the allegations in the petition shall not be allowed.
Sec. 11. Contempt. - The court, justice or judge may punish with imprisonment or fine a
respondent who commits contempt by making a false return, or refusing to make a return; or
any person who otherwise disobeys or resist a lawful process or order of the court.
Sec. 12. When Defenses May be Heard in Chambers. - A hearing in chambers may be conducted
where the respondent invokes the defense that the release of the data or information in
question shall compromise national security or state secrets, or when the data or information
cannot be divulged to the public due to its nature or privileged character.
Sec. 13. Prohibited Pleadings and Motions. - The following pleadings and motions are
prohibited:
(a)Motion to dismiss;
(b) Motion for extension of time to file return, opposition, affidavit, position paper and other
pleadings;
(c) Dilatory motion for postponement;
(d) Motion for a bill of particulars;
(e) Counterclaim or cross-claim;
(f) Third-party complaint;
(g) Reply;
(h) Motion to declare respondent in default;
(i) Intervention;
(j) Memorandum;
(k) Motion for reconsideration of interlocutory orders or interim relief orders; and
(l) Petition for certiorari, mandamus or prohibition against any interlocutory order.
Sec. 14. Return; Filing. - In case the respondent fails to file a return, the court, justice or judge
shall proceed to hear the petition ex parte, granting the petitioner such relief as the petition
may warrant unless the court in its discretion requires the petitioner to submit evidence.
Sec. 15. Summary Hearing. - The hearing on the petition shall be summary. However, the court,
justice or judge may call for a preliminary conference to simplify the issues and determine the
possibility of obtaining stipulations and admissions from the parties.
Sec. 16. Judgment. - The court shall render judgment within ten (10) days from the time the
petition is submitted for decision. If the allegations in the petition are proven by substantial
evidence, the court shall enjoin the act complained of, or order the deletion, destruction, or
rectification of the erroneous data or information and grant other relevant reliefs as may be
just and equitable; otherwise, the privilege of the writ shall be denied.
Upon its finality, the judgment shall be enforced by the sheriff or any lawful officers as may be
designated by the court, justice or judge within five (5) working days.
Sec. 17. Return of Service. - The officer who executed the final judgment shall, within three (3)
days from its enforcement, make a verified return to the court. The return shall contain a full
statement of the proceedings under the writ and a complete inventory of the database or
information, or documents and articles inspected, updated, rectified, or deleted, with copies
served on the petitioner and the respondent.
The officer shall state in the return how the judgment was enforced and complied with by the
respondent, as well as all objections of the parties regarding the manner and regularity of the
service of the writ.

Sec. 18. Hearing on Officer-s Return. - The court shall set the return for hearing with due notice
to the parties and act accordingly.

Sec. 19. Appeal. - Any party may appeal from the final judgment or order to the Supreme Court
under Rule 45. The appeal may raise questions of fact or law or both.

The period of appeal shall be five (5) working days from the date of notice of the judgment or
final order.

The appeal shall be given the same priority as in habeas corpus and amparo cases.

Sec. 20. Institution of Separate Actions. - The filing of a petition for the writ of habeas data
shall not preclude the filing of separate criminal, civil or administrative actions.

Sec. 21. Consolidation. - When a criminal action is filed subsequent to the filing of a petition
for the writ, the latter shall be consolidated with the criminal action.

When a criminal action and a separate civil action are filed subsequent to a petition for a writ
of habeas data, the petition shall be consolidated with the criminal action.

After consolidation, the procedure under this Rule shall continue to govern the disposition of
the reliefs in the petition. Sec. 22. Effect of Filing of a Criminal Action. - When a criminal action
has been commenced, no separate petition for the writ shall be filed. The relief under the writ
shall be available to an aggrieved party by motion in the criminal case.

The procedure under this Rule shall govern the disposition of the reliefs available under the
writ of habeas data.

Sec. 23. Substantive Rights. - This Rule shall not diminish, increase or modify substantive rights.

Sec. 24. Suppletory Application of the Rules of Court. - The Rules of Court shall apply
suppletorily insofar as it is not inconsistent with this Rule.

Sec. 25. Effectivity. - This Rule shall take effect on February 2, 2008, following its publication in
three (3) newspapers of general circulation.