March 12, 2021

For: Sir ECL

From: JMF
Re: Supreme Court Cases with reference to Human Rights Defenders

Human Rights Defenders is defined by the United Nations Human

Rights Office of the High Commissioner as:

“Human rights defender” is a term used to describe people

who, individually or with others, act to promote or protect
human rights in a peaceful manner. Human rights
defenders are identified above all by what they do and it is
through a description of their actions (section A below) and
of some of the contexts in which they work (section B
below) that the term can best be explained. [1] The
examples given of the activities of human rights defenders
are not an exhaustive list.

B. Who can be a human rights defender?

There is no specific definition of who is or can be a human

rights defender. The Declaration on human rights
defenders (see annex I) refers to “individuals, groups and
associations … contributing to … the effective elimination
of all violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms
of peoples and individuals” (fourth preambular paragraph).
In accordance with this broad categorization, human rights
defenders can be any person or group of persons working
to promote human rights, ranging from intergovernmental
organizations based in the world’s largest cities to
individuals working within their local communities.
Defenders can be of any gender, of varying ages, from any
part of the world and from all sorts of professional or other
backgrounds. In particular, it is important to note that
human rights defenders are not only found within NGOs
and intergovernmental organizations but might also, in
some instances, be government officials, civil servants or
members of the private sector.
1. Defending human rights through professional
activities – paid or voluntary
The most obvious human rights defenders are those whose
daily work specifically involves the promotion and
protection of human rights, for example human rights
monitors working with national human rights organizations,
human rights ombudsmen or human rights lawyers.
However, what is most important in characterizing a
person as a human rights defender is not the person’s title
or the name of the organization he or she works for, but
rather the human rights character of the work undertaken.
It is not essential for a person to be known as a “human
rights activist” or to work for an organization that includes
“human rights” in its name, or to work for an organization
at all in order to be a human rights defender. Many of the
staff of the United Nations serve as human rights
defenders even if their day-to-day work is described in
different terms, for example as “development”. Similarly,
the national and international staff of NGOs around the
world working to address humanitarian concerns can
typically be described as human rights defenders. People
educating communities on HIV/AIDS, activists for the rights
of indigenous peoples, environmental activists and
volunteers working in development are also playing a
crucial role as human rights defenders.
Many people work in a professional capacity as human
rights defenders and are paid a salary for their work.
However, there are many others who work in a
professional capacity as human rights defenders but who
are volunteers and receive no remuneration. Typically,
human rights organizations have very limited funding and
the work provided by these volunteers is invaluable.
Many professional activities do not involve human rights
work all of the time but can have occasional links with
human rights. For example, lawyers working on
commercial law issues may not often address human rights
concerns and cannot automatically be described as human
rights defenders. They can nevertheless act as defenders
on some occasions by working on cases through which
they contribute to the promotion or protection of human
rights. Similarly, leaders of trades unions undertake
numerous tasks, many of which bear no relation to human
rights, but when they are working specifically to promote
or protect the human rights of workers they can be
described as human rights defenders. In the same way,
journalists have a broad mandate to gather information
and disseminate it to a public audience through print, radio
or television media. In their general role, journalists are
not human rights defenders. However, many journalists do
act as defenders, for example when they report on human
rights abuses and bear witness to acts that they have seen.
Teachers who instruct their pupils in basic principles of
human rights fulfill a similar role. Doctors and other
medical professionals who treat and rehabilitate victims of
human rights violations can also be viewed as human
rights defenders in the context of such work; and doctors
have special obligations by virtue of the Hippocratic oath.
Those who contribute to assuring justice – judges, the
police, lawyers and other key actors – often have a
particular role to play and may come under considerable
pressure to make decisions that are favourable to the State
or other powerful interests, such as the leaders of
organized crime. Where these actors in the judicial process
make a special effort to ensure access to fair and impartial
justice, and thereby to guarantee the related human rights
of victims, they can be said to be acting as human rights
defenders.
A similar “special effort” qualification can be applied to
other professions or forms of employment that bear no
obvious relation to human rights. The individuals who hold
these jobs may sometimes choose to conduct their work in
a way that offers specific support to human rights. For
example, some architects choose to design their
construction projects in a way that takes into consideration
relevant human rights, such as the right to adequate
(temporary) housing for the people who will work on the
project, or the rights of children to be consulted on the
design, if the building is of particular relevance to them.
2. Defending human rights in a non-professional
context
Many people act as human rights defenders outside any
professional or employment context. For example, a
student who organizes other students to campaign for an
end to torture in prisons could be described as a human
rights defender. An inhabitant of a rural community who
coordinates a demonstration by members of the
community against environmental degradation of their
farmland by factory waste could also be described as a
human rights defender. A politician who takes a stand
against endemic corruption within a Government is a
 human rights defender for his or her action to promote and
protect good governance and certain rights that are
threatened by such corruption. Witnesses in court cases to
prosecute the perpetrators of human rights abuses, and
witnesses who provide information to international human
rights bodies or domestic courts and tribunals to help them
address violations, are also considered to be human rights
defenders in the context of those actions.
People all over the world strive for the realization of human
rights according to their circumstances and in their own
way. The names of some human rights defenders are
internationally recognized, but the majority of defenders
remain unknown. Whether an individual works as a local
government official, a policeman upholding the law or an
entertainer using his or her position to highlight injustices,
all can play a role in the advancement of human rights.
The key is to look at how such people act to support
human rights and, in some instances, to see whether a
“special effort” is made.
Clearly, it is impossible to catalogue the huge variety of
contexts in which human rights defenders are active.
However, common to most defenders are a commitment to
helping others, a commitment to international human
rights standards, a belief in equality and in non-
discrimination, determination and, in many instances,
tremendous courage.

While there are a long series of cases involving human rights, cases
involving and covering human rights defenders are not very many.
These are the following.

Holistic Approach to Reparations

Although the PCIJ in the Chorzow Factory case 201 declared
that the ultimate goal of reparation is restitutio in
integrum, 202 or the return of the victims to a situation prior to
the unlawful conduct, it is acknowledged
that human rights violations are impossible to rectify. As aptly
stated by Special Rapporteur Van Boven in his final report:
It is obvious that gross violations of human rights and
fundamental freedoms, particularly when they have
been committed on a massive scale, are by their
nature irreparable. In such instances any remedy
 or redress stands in no proportional relationship
to the grave injury inflicted upon the victims. It
is nevertheless an imperative norm of justice that the
responsibility of the perpetrators be clearly established
and that the rights of the victims be sustained to the
fullest possible extent. 203 (Emphasis supplied)
This view was seconded by Judge A.A. Cancado Trindade of
the IACtHR in his Separate Opinion in Bulacio v.
Argentina. 204 He opined "the harm cannot be erased. Instead,
reparations for human rights violations only provide the victims
the means to attenuate their suffering, making it less unbearable,
perhaps bearable." 205
These statements reflect the underlying idea that the
reparations in the UN Reparations Principles are envisioned to
extend beyond the pecuniary or material dimension. Rather,
holistic reparation is the key. This conclusion is supported by
Principles 19 to 23 of the UN Reparations Principles pertaining to
the five forms of full and effective reparation:
19. Restitution should, whenever possible, restore the
victim to the original situation before the gross
violations of international human rights law or serious
violations of international humanitarian law occurred.
Restitution includes, as appropriate: restoration of
liberty, enjoyment of human rights, identity, family life
and citizenship, return to one's place of residence,
restoration of employment and return of property.
20. Compensation should be provided for any
economically assessable damage, as appropriate and
proportional to the gravity of the violation and the
circumstances of each case, resulting from gross
violations of international human rights law and
serious violations of international humanitarian law,
such as:

(a) Physical or mental harm;

(b) Lost opportunities, including employment,

education and social benefits;

(c) Material damages and loss of earnings,

including loss of earning potential;

(d) Moral damage;
 (e) Costs required for legal or expert assistance,
medicine and medical services, and
psychological and social services.

21. Rehabilitation should include medical and

psychological care as well as legal and social services.
22. Satisfaction should include, where applicable, any
or all of the following:

(a) Effective measures aimed at the cessation of

continuing violations;

(b) Verification of the facts and full and public

disclosure of the truth to the extent that
such disclosure does not cause further harm
or threaten the safety and interests of the
victim, the victim's relatives, witnesses, or
persons who have intervened to assist the
victim or prevent the occurrence of further
violations;

(c) The search for the whereabouts of the

disappeared, for the identities of the children
abducted, and for the bodies of those killed,
and assistance in the recovery, identification
and reburial of the bodies in accordance with
the expressed or presumed wish of the
victims, or the cultural practices of the
families and communities;

(d) An official declaration or a judicial decision

restoring the dignity, the reputation and
the rights of the victim and of persons
closely connected with the victim;

(e) Public apology, including acknowledgement of

the facts and acceptance of responsibility;

(f) Judicial and administrative sanctions against

persons liable for the violations;

(g) Commemorations and tributes to the victims;

(h) Inclusion of an accurate account of the

violations that occurred in
international human rights law and
 international humanitarian law training and
in educational material at all levels.

23. Guarantees of non-repetition should include, where

applicable, any or all of the following measures, which
will also contribute to prevention:

(a) Ensuring effective civilian control of military

and security forces;

(b) Ensuring that all civilian and military

proceedings abide by international standards
of due process, fairness and impartiality;

(c) Strengthening the independence of the

judiciary;

(d) Protecting persons in the legal, medical and

health-care professions, the media and other
related professions,
and human rights defenders;

(e) Providing, on a priority and continued

basis, human rights and international
humanitarian law education to all sectors of
society and training for law enforcement
officials as well as military and security
forces;

(f) Promoting the observance of codes of conduct

and ethical norms, in particular international
standards, by public servants, including law
enforcement, correctional, media, medical,
psychological, social service and military
personnel, as well as by economic
enterprises;

(g) Promoting mechanisms for preventing and

monitoring social conflicts and their
resolution;

(h) Reviewing and reforming laws contributing to

or allowing gross violations of
international human rights law and serious
violations of international humanitarian law.
 Clearly, aside from addressing the injuries suffered by
victims through financial compensation, reparation also addresses
a broader set of issues, through the prevention of
future human rights violations. It addresses "democracy, good
governance, and building an inclusive political community.
Reparations includes recognition, acknowledgment of violations
and state responsibility. It can contribute to structural
transformation" 206 while also seeking to promote peace and
reconciliation. 207 This holistic approach to reparation is followed
in other human rights institutions like the UNCAT, the UNHRC, the
ICC, the IACtHR and the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).
General Comment No. 3 of the UNCAT emphasizes that
"monetary compensation alone may not be sufficient redress for a
victim of torture and ill-treatment. The Committee affirms that the
provision of only monetary compensation is inadequate for a State
party to comply with its obligations under article 14." 208 General
Comment No. 31 of the UNHRC likewise notes that "where
appropriate, reparation can involve restitution, rehabilitation and
measures of satisfaction, such as public apologies, public
memorials, guarantees of non-repetition and changes in relevant
laws and practices, as well as bringing to justice the perpetrators
of human rights violations." 209
The holistic approach was likewise applied by the ICC to the
Lubanga Case, 210 in which it held that victims of war crimes,
crimes against humanity, and genocide have a fundamental right
to receive reparations. The trial chamber observed that
reparations "go beyond the notion of punitive justice, towards a
solution which is more inclusive, encourages participation and
recognizes the need to provide effective remedies for
victims." 211 It then explained that reparations must be applied
in a broad and flexible manner, so as to allow it to approve the
widest possible remedies for violations of the rights of the
victims. 212
In Blazek v. Czech Republic, the UNHRC declared that a
remedy is only effective if it results in adequate measures of
reparation granted to victims. It further provided that the
approach must be holistic so as to put the needs and interests of
the victim at the center of the process with the aim of restoring
the latter's dignity. 213
For its part, the IACtHR made it clear that as a principle of
international law, every violation of an international obligation that
results in harm creates a duty to make adequate reparation. In
this respect, the Court ruled that reparation
 consists in full restitution (restitutio in integrum),
which includes the re-establishment of the previous
situation. If this is not feasible, as in most cases
of human rights violations, the Court will determine
measures to guarantee the rights that have been
violated and to redress the consequences of the
violations. Therefore, the Court has found it necessary
to award different measures of reparation in order to
redress the damage fully, so that, in addition to
pecuniary compensation, measures of restitution,
rehabilitation and satisfaction, and guarantees of non-
repetition, have special relevance to the harm
caused. 214
It is noteworthy that the IACtHR has constantly
addressed human rights violations of a widespread nature, which
can be attributed to the authoritarian regimes and violent conflicts
in Latin America during the 1970s and early
1980s. 215 Consequently, IACtHR rulings are particularly relevant
to our discussion of the authoritarian Marcos regime.
Lastly, while the ECHR has awarded "just satisfaction"
partaking of a pecuniary nature in most of its cases, 216 the
intention to provide a holistic approach in providing effective
satisfaction can be discerned in its Vagrancy Cases against the
Belgian Government:
[I]f the victim, after exhausting in vain the domestic
remedies before complaining at Strasbourg of a
violation of his rights, were obliged to do so a second
time before being able to obtain from the Court just
satisfaction, the total length of the procedure instituted
by the Convention would scarcely be in keeping with
the idea of the effective protection of human rights.
Such a requirement would lead to a situation
incompatible with the aim and object of the
Convention. 217
xxx xxx xxx
Nevertheless, the provisions of Article 50 which
recognise the Court's competence to grant to the
injured party a just satisfaction also cover the case
where the impossibility of restitutio in integrum  follows
from the very nature of the injury; indeed common
sense suggests that this must be so a fortiori.
||| (Ocampo v. Enriquez, G.R. Nos. 225973, 225984, 226097,
226116, 226117, 226120 & 226294, [November 8, 2016], 798 PHIL
227-715)

Petitioners are known to be critical of government. They

engaged in various humanitarian activities in support of their
advocacies. 16 They were surprised when they were tagged as
individuals criminally responsible for the atrocities against the
Manobos, especially since they were not even based in Davao City
nor in Mindanao. 17 Criminal complaints 18 were filed against
petitioners Representative Isagani T. Zarate
(Zarate), 19 Representative Emerenciana De Jesus, 20 Rafael V.
Mariano (Mariano), 21 Teodoro Casiño (Casiño), 22 Cristina
Palabay, 23 Sister Mary Francis Añover, 24 Reverend Irma M.
Balaba (Balaba), 25 and Jacquiline Ruiz. 26
The phenomenon of implicating progressive civil group
leaders to heinous crimes is called "red baiting." As stated by
Alston, it is the "'vilification', 'labelling', or guilt by
association" 27 of various democratic organizations. These groups
are stereotyped or caricatured by the military as communist
groups, making them easy targets of government military or
paramilitary units. Alston described this in detail in the Report of
the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial Summary or Arbitrary
Executions, Philip Alston, on His Mission to Philippines (12-21
February 2007):
1. Since 2001 the number of politically motivated
killings in the Philippines has been high and the death
toll has mounted steadily. These killings have
eliminated civil society leaders,
including human rights defenders, trade unionists, and
land reform advocates, as well as many others on the
left of the political spectrum. Of particular concern is
the fact that those killed appear to have been carefully
selected and intentionally targeted. The aim has been
to intimidate a much larger number of civil society
actors, many of whom have, as a result, been placed
on notice that the same fate awaits them if they
continue their activism. One of the consequences is
that the democratic rights that the people of the
 Philippines fought so hard to assert are under serious
threat.
xxx xxx xxx
13. Senior Government officials in and out of the
military believe that many civil society organizations
are fronts for the [Communist Party of the Philippines
(CPP)] and that the CPP controls these groups to
instrumentalize popular grievances in the service of
revolutionary struggle, forge anti-Government
alliances, and recruit new party members. While
greatly overstated, these views are not entirely
baseless. It is the self-professed policy of the CPP to
engage in united front politics for the purpose of
promoting its views among those who are dissatisfied
with the status quo but would be disinclined to join
the CPP. Similarly, the CPP has publicly stated that its
members engaged in such organizing and mobilization
are subject to the principle of democratic centralism
and, thus, ultimately to the direction of the Central
Committee of the CPP. There is no reason to doubt
that the CPP expects those of its members who occupy
leadership positions within civil society organizations to
promote its strategic priorities. This does not,
however, warrant the approach of many officials who
characterized alleged front groups as if they were
simply branches of the CPP. More objective
interlocutors recognized that the term "front"
encompasses many gradations of control, some very
tenuous, and that in virtually any front organization
most members will not belong to the CPP and will
likely be unaware of the organization's relationship to
the CPP. Relatively little is known about the extent of
the CPP's influence within civil society organizations,
and it would be naїve to assume that the CPP is as
powerful as it would like to present itself as being.
xxx xxx xxx
16. Newspapers routinely carry reports of senior
military officials urging that alleged CPP front groups
and parties be neutralized. Often, prominent political
parties and established civil society groups are named
specifically. The public is told that supporting their
work or candidates is tantamount to supporting "the
enemy". This practice was openly and adamantly
defended by nearly every member of the military with
 whom I spoke. When I suggested to senior military
officials that denunciation of civil society groups should
only be done according to law and by the Government,
the response was that civilian authorities are in no
position to make such statements because they might
be assassinated as a result. On another occasion, I
asked a senior civilian official whether the Government
might issue a directive prohibiting such statements by
military officers. He expressed vague sympathy for the
idea, but his subordinate — a retired military
commander — promptly interjected that such a
directive would be "impossible" because "this is a
political war". When political "warfare" is conducted by
soldiers rather than civilians, democracy has been
superseded by the military.
17. The public vilification of "enemies" is accompanied
by operational measures. The most dramatic
illustration is the "order of battle" approach adopted
systematically by the AFP and, in practice, often by the
PNP. In military terms an order of battle is an
organizational tool used by military intelligence to list
and analyze enemy military units. The AFP adopts an
order of battle in relation to the various regions and
sub-regions in which it operates. A copy of a leaked
document of this type, from 2006, was provided to
me, and I am aware of no reason to doubt its
authenticity. The document, co-signed by senior
military and police officials, calls upon "all members of
the intelligence community in the [relevant] region . . .
to adopt and be guided by this update to enhance a
more comprehensive and concerted effort against the
CPP/NPA/NDF". Some 110 pages in length, the
document lists hundreds of prominent civil society
groups and individuals who have been classified, on
the basis of intelligence, as members of organizations
which the military deems "illegitimate". While some
officials formalistically deny that being on the order of
battle constitutes being classified as an enemy of the
state, the widespread understanding even among the
political elite is that it constitutes precisely that.
 
xxx xxx xxx
46. Senior Government officials are attempting to use
prosecutions to dismantle the numerous civil society
organizations and party list groups that they believe to
be fronts for the CPP. While this project is sometimes
discussed as if it were a dark conspiracy, it was
explained to me openly and directly by numerous
officials as the very function of [Inter-Agency Legal
Action Group (IALAG)], which was established in 2006.
IALAG is an executive rather than advisory body and,
while it includes representatives of various criminal
justice, intelligence, and military organs, institutional
power and legal authority over its operations is
concentrated in the Office of the National Security
Adviser. At the national level, IALAG meets at least
once every other week, discusses the evidence in
particular cases and debates whether it is sufficient to
file a criminal complaint. There are also regional and
provincial IALAG bodies with a similar structure and
role. It has been due to the efforts of IALAG that
charges have been brought against a number of leftist
lawmakers and persons who had been given immunity
guarantees to facilitate peace negotiations with the
NDF.
47. The reason that such an ad hoc mechanism was
established for bringing charges against members of
these civil society organizations and party list groups is
that they have seldom committed any obvious criminal
offence. Congress has never reversed its decision to
legalize membership in the CPP or to facilitate the
entry of leftist groups into the democratic political
system. But the executive branch, through IALAG, has
worked resolutely to circumvent the spirit of these
legislative decisions and use prosecutions to impede
the work of these groups and put in question their
right to operate freely. SDAaTC
48. What justification is given for waging this legal
offensive? One explanation that I received was that
when membership in the CPP was legalized, the
expectation was that its members would lay down
their arms and participate in the parliamentary
struggle. On this interpretation, the CPP has instead
sought to pursue simultaneously the armed and
parliamentary struggles. Many senior government
officials stated unequivocally that they consider the
party list groups in Congress as part of the insurgency.
It is evidently the case that there are persons in
Congress as well as in the hills who adhere to a
 "national democratic" ideology, but when I would ask
interlocutors in what respect party list members of
Congress belonging to the most criticized parties —
Bayan Muna, Anakpawis, and Gabriela — had gone
beyond expressing sympathy for the armed struggle to
actually supporting it, I was repeatedly provided the
same unsubstantiated allegation, that these
congresspersons provide their "pork barrel" to the
NPA. Cases filed against several congresspersons on
these grounds have failed. This has not discouraged
senior government officials. One insisted that although
the publicly available evidence might be inadequate,
the charges were amply supported by intelligence
information that could not be disclosed. Another
informed me simply that warrants had been issued
based on probable cause and that he would not stop
treating the congresspersons as criminals simply
because no conviction had yet been achieved.
49. The central purpose of IALAG is to prosecute and
punish members of the CPP and its purported front
groups whenever there is any legal basis for doing so.
I received no evidence that it was designed or
generally functions to plan extrajudicial
executions. However, IALAG's proactive legal strategy
requires drawing up lists of individuals who are
considered enemies of the state but many of whom
will not be reachable by legal process . The temptation
to execute such individuals is clear, representatives of
the AFP and PNP with the capacity to do so participate
in IALAG bodies at all levels, and there is
circumstantial evidence that this has sometimes
occurred. The most deleterious role played by IALAG
bodies may, however, be to encourage prosecutors to
act as team players with the AFP and PNP in
counterinsurgency operations and to de-prioritize
cases involving the deaths of leftist
activists. 28 (Emphasis supplied, citations omitted)
Alston's report shows that the military has routinely
prosecuted leaders of progressive groups for a specific purpose.
Once the government prosecutes baselessly, these progressive
leaders will have to bargain for immunity and, in exchange, the
government will use them to facilitate negotiations with the
Communist Party of the Philippines. Alston's observations match
the experience of petitioners currently being prosecuted for
allegedly detaining the Manobos.
 The display of petitioners' photographs in the "rouge gallery"
to the Manobos does not appear to be an isolated incident of red
baiting against petitioners. Petitioner Representative Zarate found
evidence that his name had been included in an Order of Battle,
as described by Alston, of the 10th Infantry Division of the
Philippine Army. 29 Petitioners Mariano and Casiño were also
wrongfully accused in a kidnapping and murder case in Nueva
Ecija, similar to the criminal complaint filed by the Manobos
against them. However, it turned out that in the earlier case, the
victim had died in a road accident. 30
Petitioner Reverend Balaba also narrated in detail four (4)
different occasions in August 2015 when unidentified men looked
for her in their church and in her residence. 31 She also noticed
that for several hours, a government-issued vehicle (red plate with
plate number SLB 383) was parked six (6) meters away from their
church. 32 Petitioners believe this type of systematized
surveillance resulted in information in the possession of the
Criminal Investigation and Detection Group that was eventually
used in the criminal complaint alleging that petitioners illegally
detained the Manobos. 33
The previous encounter of petitioner Representative Zarate
with the military, the harassment in the criminal cases previously
filed against petitioners Mariano and Casiño, the apparent
surveillance being conducted against petitioner Reverend Balaba,
and petitioners' inclusion in the military's "rogue gallery" may
possibly escalate into a situation where the life, liberty, or security
of these petitioners will be violated. This possibility of harm is
what the writ of Amparo seeks to avert. One of the functions of
the writ is to "[break] the expectation of impunity in the
commission of [extralegal killings and enforced
disappearances]." 34 The writ of Amparo must be allowed in
order that its preventive function be realized.
II
In the alternative, given the nature of the allegations made
in the Petition, respondents should be ordered to comment on the
Petition for the writ of Amparo and writ of Habeas Data in order to
show cause why these protective writs should not be issued.
Under the rules on the writs of Amparo and Habeas Data,
"the court, justice or judge shall immediately order the issuance of
the writ if on its face it ought to issue ." 35 The immediate
issuance of the writ is conditioned on a  prima facie showing that
the petitioner's life, liberty, or security is violated or threatened to
be violated. The rules, however, do not suggest that the petition
should immediately be dismissed absent a prima facie  showing of
 a violation or threat of violation of petitioner's life, liberty, or
security. The rules provide enough procedural leeway 36 to allow
the courts to ask for additional pleadings in order to evaluate the
merits of the petition.

||| (Zarate v. Aquino III, G.R. No. 220028 (Notice), [November 10,

2015] Leonen, J., dissenting)

The petition for the writ of amparo partakes of a summary

proceeding that requires only substantial evidence to make the
appropriate interim and permanent reliefs available to the
petitioner. The Rules of Court and Jurisprudence have long
defined substantial evidence as such relevant evidence as a
reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a
conclusion. 16 It is to be always borne in mind that such
proceeding is not an action to determine criminal guilt requiring
proof beyond reasonable doubt, or to allocate liability for damages
based on preponderance of evidence, or to adjudge administrative
responsibility requiring substantial evidence. 17
The facts and circumstances enumerated by the
respondent's petition consisted of the following:
a) She was a human rights lawyer who had taken criminal
cases in which the accused were political detainees,
including human rights defenders or suspected
members of the CPP-NPA, and the complainants were
military or police officials or personnel;
b) Her paralegal William Bugatti informed her that he had
personally observed various individuals conducting
surveillance operations of their movements ( i.e., the
respondent and Bugatti) specially during the trial of a
case in Ifugao involving a political detainee who was a
leader of a people's or sectoral organization; AaCTcI
c) On the day Bugatti informed her about his observation,
and she instructed him to discover the names, ranks,
and addresses of the handlers of the Prosecution
witness in the Ifugao case, he was fatally gunned
down;
d) On the same day Bugatti was gunned down, a client of
hers who was working as a civilian asset for the PNP
Intelligence Section reported to her that the Regional
 Intelligence Unit of the PNP, through the PNP Isabela
Provincial Office, issued a directive to conduct a
background investigation to confirm if she was a "Red
Lawyer;"
e) Said civilian asset also informed her that she was being
secretly followed by ISAFP agents, and that individuals
who appeared to be military or police personnel had
been asking people around her office regarding her
routine and whereabouts;
f) Her secretary informed her that a member of the CIS-
CIDG and some purported military personnel had gone
to her law office on several occasions inquiring on her
whereabouts;
g) On the same day said CIS-CIDG member went to her law
office, she received a text message from the Chief
Investigator of the CIDG requesting, for the third time,
a copy of the records of a case she was handling;
h) Gamongan, her driver who testified in support of the
petition, notified her that a vendor outside her law
office had told him that several motorcycle-riding
personnel of the military had approached said vendor
on separate instances asking about her whereabouts
and the persons she was with, her routine and
schedule, as well as the persons who were left at the
law office whenever she went out;
i) Gamongan also testified about an incident that occurred
while he was waiting outside her house in which a
motorcycle-riding man, who looked like he was military
or police based on his haircut and demeanor, had
driven by her house twice intently observing him and
the house "as if he wanted to do something bad;"
j) A known civilian asset of the Military Intelligence Group
(MIG) tried to convince her to have a meeting with
MIG Isabela so that he could explain why she was
being watched; and
k) Upon her refusal of the invitation to meet, the civilian
asset returned the next day telling her that she was
being watched by the MIG because of a land dispute
case she was then handling liar a client. 18
Upon due consideration of the foregoing, the CA opined that
it would be all the more difficult to obtain direct evidence to prove
the respondent's entitlement to the privilege of the writ
of amparo because no extrajudicial killing or enforced
disappearance had yet occurred. Indeed, her petition referred to
acts that merely threatened to violate her rights to life, liberty and
security, or that could be appreciated only as preliminary steps to
her probable extrajudicial killing or enforced disappearance. Even
so, it would be uncharacteristic for the courts, especially this
Court, to simply told their arms and ignore the palpable threats to
her life, liberty and security and just wait for the irreversible to
happen to her. The direct evidence might not come at all, given
the abuse of the State's power to destroy evidence being inherent
in enforced disappearances or extrajudicial killings.
There was no question about the relevance of the hearsay
testimony with which the respondent sought to establish some of
the facts and circumstances she alleged. Flexibility needed to be
adopted in the appreciation and consideration of such facts and
circumstances despite hearsay being inadmissible under other
judicial situations. Such flexibility accorded with the following
instruction in Razon, Jr. v. Tagitis, 19 to wit:
x x x In an Amparo petition, however, this
requirement must be read in light of the nature and
purpose of the proceeding, which addresses a situation
of uncertainty; the petitioner may not be able to
describe with certainty how the victim exactly
disappeared, or who actually acted to kidnap, abduct
or arrest him or her, or where the victim is detained,
because these information may purposely be hidden or
covered up by those who caused the disappearance.
In this type of situation, to require the level of
specificity, detail and precision that the petitioners
apparently want to read into the Amparo Rule is to
make this Rule a token gesture of judicial concern for
violations of the constitutional rights to life, liberty and
security.
To read the Rules of Court requirement on
pleadings while addressing the
unique Amparo situation, the test in reading the
petition should be to determine whether it contains the
details available to the petitioner under the
circumstances, while presenting a cause of action
showing a violation of the victim's rights to life, liberty
and security through State or private party action. The
petition should likewise be read in its totality, rather
than in terms of its isolated component parts, to
determine if the required elements — namely, of the
disappearance, the State or private action, and the
 actual or threatened violations of the rights to life,
liberty or security — are present. 20 EcTCAD
Verily, proceedings related to the petition for the issuance of
the writ of amparo should allow not only direct evidence, but also
circumstantial evidence. The Rules of Court has made no
distinction between direct evidence of a fact and evidence of
circumstances from which the existence of a fact may be
inferred. 21 One kind of evidence is not superior to the other, for
the trier of facts must weigh the evidence upon admission. Only in
the event of a conviction in a criminal case does the Rules of
Court require that the circumstantial evidence should consist of a
combination of several circumstances that "produce a conviction
beyond reasonable doubt." 22 Yet, under Razon, Jr. v. Tagitis,
even hearsay testimony may be considered by the amparo court
provided such testimony can lead to conclusions consistent with
the admissible evidence adduced. 23 What the respondent
obviously established is that the threats to her right to life, liberty
and security were neither imaginary nor contrived, but real and
probable. The gunning down of her paralegal Bugatti after he had
relayed to her his observation that they had been under
surveillance was the immediate proof of the threat. The purpose
and noble objectives of the special rules on the writ
of amparo may be rendered inutile if the rigid standards of
evidence applicable in ordinary judicial proceedings were not
tempered with such flexibility.

||| (Bautista v. Dannug-Salucon, G.R. No. 221862, [January 23,

2018])

The question in standing is whether a party has alleged such a

personal stake in the outcome of the controversy as to assure that
concrete adverseness which sharpens the presentation of issues upon
which the court so largely depends for illumination of difficult
constitutional questions. 10
We find that among the petitioners, only Senator Pimentel has
the legal standing to file the instant suit. The other petitioners
maintain their standing as advocates and defenders of human rights,
and as citizens of the country. They have not shown, however, that
they have sustained or will sustain a direct injury from the non-
transmittal of the signed text of the Rome Statute to the Senate.
Their contention that they will be deprived of their remedies for the
protection and enforcement of their rights does not persuade. The
Rome Statute is intended to complement national criminal laws and
courts. Sufficient remedies are available under our national laws to
protect our citizens against human rights violations and petitioners
can always seek redress for any abuse in our domestic
courts. SEHTAC
As regards Senator Pimentel, it has been held that "to the
extent the powers of Congress are impaired, so is the power of each
member thereof, since his office confers a right to participate in the
exercise of the powers of that institution." 11 Thus, legislators have
the standing to maintain inviolate the prerogatives, powers and
privileges vested by the Constitution in their office and are allowed to
sue to question the validity of any official action which they claim
infringes their prerogatives as legislators. The petition at bar invokes
the power of the Senate to grant or withhold its concurrence to a
treaty entered into by the executive branch, in this case, the Rome
Statute. The petition seeks to order the executive branch to transmit
the copy of the treaty to the Senate to allow it to exercise such
authority. Senator Pimentel, as member of the institution, certainly
has the legal standing to assert such authority of the Senate.

||| (Pimentel, Jr. v. Office of the Executive Secretary, G.R. No.

158088, [July 6, 2005], 501 PHIL 303-318)

Converging our attention to the records of the Constitutional

Commission, we can see the following discussions during its 26
August 1986 deliberations:

MR. GARCIA . . . , the primacy of its (CHR) task must be

made clear in view of the importance of human rights and
also because civil and political rights have been
determined by many international covenants and human
rights legislations in the Philippines, as well as the
Constitution, specifically the Bill of Rights and subsequent
legislation. Otherwise, if we cover such a wide territory in
area, we might diffuse its impact and the precise nature
of its task, hence, its effectivity would also be curtailed .

So, it is important to delienate the parameters of its tasks

so that the commission can be most effective.
MR. BENGZON. That is precisely my difficulty because
civil and political rights are very broad. The Article on the
Bill of Rights covers civil and political rights. Every single
right of an individual involves his civil right or his political
right. So, where do we draw the line?

MR. GARCIA. Actually, these civil and political rights have

been made clear in the language of human rights
advocates, as well as in the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights which addresses a number of articles on
the right to life, the right against torture, the right to fair
and public hearing, and so on. These are very specific
rights that are considered enshrined in many international
documents and legal instruments as constituting civil and
political rights, and these are precisely what we want to
defend here.

MR. BENGZON. So, would the commissioner say civil and

political rights as defined in the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights?

MR. GARCIA. Yes, and as I have mentioned, the

International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights
distinguished this right against torture.

MR. BENGZON. So as to distinguish this from the other

rights that we have?

MR. GARCIA. Yes, because the other rights will

encompass social and economic rights, and there are
other violations of rights of citizens which can be
addressed to the proper courts and authorities.

xxx xxx xxx

MR. BENGZON. So, we will authorize the commission to

define its functions, and, therefore, in doing that the
commission will be authorized to take under its wings
cases which perhaps heretofore or at this moment are
under the jurisdiction of the ordinary investigative and
prosecutorial agencies of the government. Am I correct?

MR. GARCIA. No. We have already mentioned earlier that

we would like to define the specific parameters which
cover civil and political rights as covered by the
international standards governing the behavior of
governments regarding the particular political and civil
rights of citizens, especially of political detainees or
prisoners. This particular aspect we have experienced
during martial law which we would now like to safeguard.

MR. BENGZON. Then, I go back to that question that I

had. Therefore, what we are really trying to say is,
perhaps, at the proper time we could specify all those
rights stated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
and defined as human rights. Those are the rights that
we envision here?

MR. GARCIA. Yes. In fact, they are also enshrined in the

Bill of Rights of our Constitution. They are integral parts
of that.

MR. BENGZON. Therefore, is the Gentleman saying that

all the rights under the Bill of Rights covered by human
rights?

MR. GARCIA. No, only those that pertain to civil and

political rights.

xxx xxx xxx

MR. RAMA. In connection with the discussion on the

scope of human rights, I would like to state that in the
past regime, everytime we invoke the violation of human
rights, the Marcos regime came out with the defense
that, as a matter of fact, they had defended the rights of
people to decent living, food, decent housing and a life
consistent with human dignity.

So, I think we should really limit the definition of human

rights to political rights. Is that the sense of the
committee, so as not to confuse the issue ?

MR. SARMIENTO. Yes, Madam President.

MR. GARCIA. I would like to continue and respond also to

repeated points raised by the previous speaker.

There are actually six areas where this Commission on

Human Rights could act effectively : 1) protection of
rights of political detainees; 2) treatment of prisoners and
the prevention of tortures; 3) fair and public trials; 4)
cases of disappearances; 5) salvagings and hamletting;
and 6) other crimes committed against the religious .
xxx xxx xxx

The PRESIDENT. Commissioner Guingona is recognized.

MR. GUINGONA. Thank You Madam President.

I would like to start by saying that I agree with

Commissioner Garcia that we should, in order to make
the proposed Commission more effective, delimit as much
as possible, without prejudice to future expansion . The
coverage of the concept and jurisdictional area of the
term  "human rights". I was actually disturbed this
morning when the reference was made without
qualification to the rights embodied in the universal
Declaration of Human Rights, although later on, this was
qualified to refer to civil and political rights contained
therein.

If I remember correctly, Madam President, Commissioner

Garcia, after mentioning the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights of 1948, mentioned or linked the concept
of human right with other human rights specified in other
convention which I do not remember. Am I correct?

MR. GARCIA. Is Commissioner Guingona referring to the

Declaration of Torture of 1985?

MR. GUINGONA. I do not know, but the commissioner

mentioned another.

MR. GARCIA. Madam President, the other one is the

International Convention on Civil and Political Rights of
which we are signatory.

MR. GUINGONA. I see. The only problem is that, although

I have a copy of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights here, I do not have a copy of the other covenant
mentioned. It is quite possible that there are rights
specified in that other convention which may not be
specified here. I was wondering whether it would be wise
to link our concept of human rights to general terms like
"convention," rather than specify the rights contained in
the convention.

As far as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is

concerned, the Committee, before the period of
amendments, could specify to us which of these articles
in the Declaration will fall within the concept of civil and
political rights, not for the purpose of including these in
the proposed constitutional article, but to give the sense
of the Commission as to what human rights would be
included, without prejudice to expansion later on, if the
need arises. For example, there was no definite reply to
the question of Commissioner Regalado as to whether the
right to marry would be considered a civil or a social
right. It is not a civil right?

MR. GARCIA. Madam President, I have to repeat the

various specific civil and political rights that we felt must
be envisioned initially by this provision — freedom from
political detention and arrest prevention of torture, right
to fair and public trials, as well as crimes involving
disappearance, salvagings, hamlettings and collective
violations. So, it is limited to politically related crimes
precisely to protect the civil and political rights of a
specific group of individuals, and therefore, we are not
opening it up to all of the definite areas .

MR. GUINGONA. Correct. Therefore, just for the record,

the Gentlemen is no longer linking his concept or the
concept of the Committee on Human Rights with the so-
called civil or political rights as contained in the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights.

MR. GARCIA. When I mentioned earlier the Universal

Declaration of Human Rights, I was referring to an
international instrument.

MR. GUINGONA. I know.

MR. GARCIA. But it does not mean that we will refer to

each and every specific article therein, but only to those
that pertain to the civil and politically related, as we
understand it in this Commission on Human Rights.

MR. GUINGONA. Madam President, I am not even clear

as to the distinction between civil and social rights.

MR. GARCIA. There are two international covenants: the

International Covenant and Civil and Political Rights and
the International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights. The second covenant contains all the
different rights-the rights of labor to organize, the right to
education, housing, shelter, et cetera.
 MR. GUINGONA. So we are just limiting at the moment
the sense of the committee to those that the Gentlemen
has specified.

MR. GARCIA. Yes, to civil and political rights.

MR. GUINGONA. Thank you.

xxx xxx xxx

SR. TAN. Madam President, from the standpoint of the

victims of human rights, I cannot stress more on how
much we need a Commission on Human Rights. . . .

. . . human rights victims are usually penniless. They

cannot pay and very few lawyers will accept clients who
do not pay. And so, they are the ones more abused and
oppressed. Another reason is, the cases involved are very
delicate — torture, salvaging, picking up without any
warrant of arrest, massacre — and the persons who are
allegedly guilty are people in power like politicians, men
in the military and big shots. Therefore, this Human
Rights Commission must be independent.

I would like very much to emphasize how much we need

this commission, especially for the little Filipino, the little
individual who needs this kind of help and cannot get
it. And I think we should concentrate only on civil and
political violations because if we open this to land,
housing and health, we will have no place to go again
and we will not receive any response . . . .30 (emphasis
supplied)

The final outcome, now written as Section 18, Article XIII, of the
1987 Constitution, is a provision empowering the Commission on
Human Rights to "investigate, on its own or on complaint by any
party, all forms of human rights violations involving civil and political
rights" (Sec. 1).

The term "civil rights,"31 has been defined as referring —

(t)o those (rights) that belong to every citizen of the state

or country, or, in wider sense, to all its inhabitants, and
are not connected with the organization or administration
of the government. They include the rights of property,
marriage, equal protection of the laws, freedom of
contract, etc. Or, as otherwise defined civil rights are
 rights appertaining to a person by virtue of his citizenship
in a state or community. Such term may also refer, in its
general sense, to rights capable of being enforced or
redressed in a civil action.

Also quite often mentioned are the guarantees against involuntary

servitude, religious persecution, unreasonable searches and seizures,
and imprisonment for debt.32

Political rights,33 on the other hand, are said to refer to the right to
participate, directly or indirectly, in the establishment or
administration of government, the right of suffrage, the right to hold
public office, the right of petition and, in general, the rights
appurtenant to citizenship vis-a-vis the management of
government. 34

Recalling the deliberations of the Constitutional Commission,

aforequoted, it is readily apparent that the delegates envisioned a
Commission on Human Rights that would focus its attention to the
more severe cases of human rights violations. Delegate Garcia, for
instance, mentioned such areas as the "(1) protection of rights of
political detainees, (2) treatment of prisoners and the prevention of
tortures, (3) fair and public trials, (4) cases of disappearances, (5)
salvagings and hamletting, and (6) other crimes committed against
the religious." While the enumeration has not likely been meant to
have any preclusive effect, more than just expressing a statement of
priority, it is, nonetheless, significant for the tone it has set. In any
event, the delegates did not apparently take comfort in peremptorily
making a conclusive delineation of the CHR's scope of investigatorial
jurisdiction. They have thus seen it fit to resolve, instead, that
"Congress may provide for other cases of violations of human rights
that should fall within the authority of the Commission, taking into
account its recommendation."35

In the particular case at hand, there is no cavil that what are sought
to be demolished are the stalls, sari-sari stores and carinderia, as well
as temporary shanties, erected by private respondents on a land
which is planned to be developed into a "People's Park". More than
that, the land adjoins the North EDSA of Quezon City which, this
Court can take judicial notice of, is a busy national highway. The
consequent danger to life and limb is not thus to be likewise simply
ignored. It is indeed paradoxical that a right which is claimed to have
been violated is one that cannot, in the first place, even be invoked,
if it is, in fact, extant. Be that as it may, looking at the standards
hereinabove discoursed vis-a-vis the circumstances obtaining in this
instance, we are not prepared to conclude that the order for the
demolition of the stalls, sari-sari stores and carinderia of the private
respondents can fall within the compartment of "human rights
violations involving civil and political rights" intended by the
Constitution.

Simon, Jr. v CHR, G.R. No. 100150, January 5, 1994

In this jurisdiction, the application of doctrines originating from the

U.S. has been generally maintained, albeit with some modifications.
While this Court has withheld the application of facial challenges to
strictly penal statues,108 it has expanded its scope to cover statutes
not only regulating free speech, but also those involving religious
freedom, and other fundamental rights.109 The underlying reason for
this modification is simple. For unlike its counterpart in the U.S., this
Court, under its expanded jurisdiction, is mandated by the
Fundamental Law not only to settle actual controversies involving
rights which are legally demandable and enforceable, but also to
determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch
or instrumentality of the Government.110 Verily, the framers of Our
Constitution envisioned a proactive Judiciary, ever vigilant with its
duty to maintain the supremacy of the Constitution.

Consequently, considering that the foregoing petitions have seriously

alleged that the constitutional human rights to life, speech and
religion and other fundamental rights mentioned above have been
violated by the assailed legislation, the Court has authority to take
cognizance of these kindred petitions and to determine if the RH Law
can indeed pass constitutional scrutiny. To dismiss these petitions on
the simple expedient that there exist no actual case or controversy,
would diminish this Court as a reactive branch of government, acting
only when the Fundamental Law has been transgressed, to the
detriment of the Filipino people.

xxx

In this case, a textual analysis of the various provisions of the law

shows that both "reproductive health" and "responsible parenthood"
are interrelated and germane to the overriding objective to control
the population growth. As expressed in the first paragraph of Section
2 of the RH Law:

SEC. 2. Declaration of Policy. - The State recognizes and guarantees

the human rights of all persons including their right to equality and
nondiscrimination of these rights, the right to sustainable human
development, the right to health which includes reproductive health,
the right to education and information, and the right to choose and
make decisions for themselves in accordance with their religious
convictions, ethics, cultural beliefs, and the demands of responsible
parenthood.

xxx

At first blush, it appears that the RH Law recognizes and respects

religion and religious beliefs and convictions. It is replete with
assurances the no one can be compelled to violate the tenets of his
religion or defy his religious convictions against his free will.
Provisions in the RH Law respecting religious freedom are the
following:

1. The State recognizes and guarantees the human rights of all

persons including their right to equality and nondiscrimination of
these rights, the right to sustainable human development, the right
to health which includes reproductive health, the right to education
and information, and the right to choose and make decisions for
themselves in accordance with their religious convictions, ethics,
cultural beliefs, and the demands of responsible parenthood. [Section
2, Declaration of Policy]

2 . The State recognizes marriage as an inviolable social institution

and the foundation of the family which in turn is the foundation of
the nation. Pursuant thereto, the State shall defend:

(a) The right of spouses to found a family in accordance with their

religious convictions and the demands of responsible parenthood."
[Section 2, Declaration of Policy]

3. The State shall promote and provide information and access,

without bias, to all methods of family planning, including effective
natural and modern methods which have been proven medically safe,
legal, non-abortifacient, and effective in accordance with scientific
and evidence-based medical research standards such as those
registered and approved by the FDA for the poor and marginalized as
identified through the NHTS-PR and other government measures of
identifying marginalization: Provided, That the State shall also
provide funding support to promote modern natural methods of
family planning, especially the Billings Ovulation Method, consistent
with the needs of acceptors and their religious convictions. [Section
3(e), Declaration of Policy]

4. The State shall promote programs that: (1) enable individuals and
couples to have the number of children they desire with due
consideration to the health, particularly of women, and the resources
available and affordable to them and in accordance with existing
laws, public morals and their religious convictions. [Section 3CDJ

5. The State shall respect individuals' preferences and choice of

family planning methods that are in accordance with their religious
convictions and cultural beliefs, taking into consideration the State's
obligations under various human rights instruments. [Section 3(h)]

6. Active participation by nongovernment organizations (NGOs) ,

women's and people's organizations, civil society, faith-based
organizations, the religious sector and communities is crucial to
ensure that reproductive health and population and development
policies, plans, and programs will address the priority needs of
women, the poor, and the marginalized. [Section 3(i)]

7. Responsible parenthood refers to the will and ability of a parent to

respond to the needs and aspirations of the family and children. It is
likewise a shared responsibility between parents to determine and
achieve the desired number of children, spacing and timing of their
children according to their own family life aspirations, taking into
account psychological preparedness, health status, sociocultural and
economic concerns consistent with their religious convictions.
[Section 4(v)] (Emphases supplied)

While the Constitution prohibits abortion, laws were enacted allowing

the use of contraceptives. To some medical practitioners, however,
the whole idea of using contraceptives is an anathema. Consistent
with the principle of benevolent neutrality, their beliefs should be
respected.

Imbong v Ochoa, G.R. No. 204819, April 8, 2014

It may also be noted that this heightened degree of protection
afforded to free expression to comment on public figures or matters
against criminal prosecution for libel has also gained a foothold in
Europe. Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms provides that "[e]veryone has the right to
freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold
opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without
interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers." 62 The
European Court of Human Rights applied this provision in Lingens v.
Austria,63 in ruling that the Republic of Austria was liable to pay
monetary damages "as just satisfaction" to a journalist who was
found guilty for defamation under the Austrian Criminal Code. 64 The
European Court noted:

[Article 10] is applicable not only to ‘information’ or ‘ideas’ that are

favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of
indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb. Such are
the demands of that pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness
without which there is no ‘democratic society’. . . . These principles
are of particular importance as far as the press is concerned. Whilst
the press must not overstep the bounds set, inter alia, for the
‘protection of the reputation of others’, it is nevertheless incumbent
on it to impart information and ideas on political issues just as on
those in other areas of public interest. Not only does the press have
the task of imparting such information and ideas: the public also has
the right to receive them. . . .65

The international trend in diminishing the scope, if not the viability, of

criminal libel prosecutions is clear. Most pertinently, it is also evident
in our own acceptance in this jurisdiction of the principles applied by
the U.S. Supreme Court in cases such as New York
Times and Garrison.

Guingguing v Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 128959, September 30,

2005

According to the Philippine Commission on Women (the National

Machinery for Gender Equality and Women's Empowerment),
violence against women (VAW) is deemed to be closely linked with
the unequal power relationship between women and men otherwise
known as "gender-based violence". Societal norms and traditions
dictate people to think men are the leaders, pursuers, providers, and
take on dominant roles in society while women are nurturers, men's
companions and supporters, and take on subordinate roles in society.
This perception leads to men gaining more power over women. With
power comes the need to control to retain that power. And VAW is a
form of men's expression of controlling women to retain power. 71

The United Nations, which has long recognized VAW as a human

rights issue, passed its Resolution 48/104 on the Declaration on
Elimination of Violence Against Women on December 20, 1993
stating that "violence against women is a manifestation of historically
unequal power relations between men and women, which have led to
domination over and discrimination against women by men and to
the prevention of the full advancement of women, and that violence
against women is one of the crucial social mechanisms by which
women are forced into subordinate positions, compared with men."

xxx

Finally in 1994, the United States Congress enacted the Violence

Against Women Act.

In the International front, the women's struggle for equality was no

less successful. The United States Charter and the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights affirmed the equality of all human
beings. In 1979, the UN General Assembly adopted the landmark
Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against
Women (CEDAW). In 1993, the UN General Assembly also adopted
the Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women. World
conferences on the role and rights of women have been regularly
held in Mexico City, Copenhagen, Nairobi and Beijing. The UN itself
established a Commission on the Status of Women.

The Philippines has been in cadence with the half – and full – steps
of all these women's movements. No less than Section 14, Article II
of our 1987 Constitution mandates the State to recognize the role of
women in nation building and to ensure the fundamental equality
before the law of women and men. Our Senate has ratified the
CEDAW as well as the Convention on the Rights of the Child and its
two protocols. To cap it all, Congress, on March 8, 2004, enacted
Rep. Act No. 9262, entitled "An Act Defining Violence Against Women
and Their Children, Providing for Protective Measures for Victims,
Prescribing Penalties therefor and for other Purposes." (Citations
omitted)

B. Women are the "usual" and "most likely"

victims of violence.

At the time of the presentation of Senate Bill No. 2723, official

statistics on violence against women and children show that –

x x x physical injuries had the highest number of cases at 5,058 in

2002 representing 55.63% of total cases reported (9,903). And for
the first semester of 2003, there were 2,381 reported cases out of
4,354 cases which represent 54.31%. xxx (T)he total number of
women in especially difficult circumstances served by the Department
of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) for the year 2002, there
are 1,417 physically abused/maltreated cases out of the total of
5,608 cases. xxx (T)here are 1,091 DSWD cases out of a total
number of 3,471 cases for the first semester of 2003. Female
violence comprised more than 90% of all forms of abuse and violence
and more than 90% of these reported cases were committed by the
women's intimate partners such as their husbands and live-in
partners.

xxx

The distinction between men and women is germane to the purpose

of R.A. 9262, which is to address violence committed against women
and children, spelled out in its Declaration of Policy, as follows:

SEC. 2. Declaration of Policy. – It is hereby declared that the State

values the dignity of women and children and guarantees full respect
for human rights. The State also recognizes the need to protect the
family and its members particularly women and children, from
violence and threats to their personal safety and security.

Towards this end, the State shall exert efforts to address violence
committed against women and children in keeping with the
fundamental freedoms guaranteed under the Constitution and the
provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against
Women, Convention on the Rights of the Child and other
international human rights instruments of which the Philippines is a
party.

In 1979, the U.N. General Assembly adopted the CEDAW, which the
Philippines ratified on August 5, 1981. Subsequently, the Optional
Protocol to the CEDAW was also ratified by the Philippines on
October 6, 2003.86 This Convention mandates that State parties shall
accord to women equality with men before the law 87 and shall take all
appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women in
all matters relating to marriage and family relations on the basis of
equality of men and women.88 The Philippines likewise ratified the
Convention on the Rights of the Child and its two protocols. 89 It is,
thus, bound by said Conventions and their respective protocols.

III. The classification is not limited to existing

conditions only, and apply equally to all members

Moreover, the application of R.A. 9262 is not limited to the existing

conditions when it was promulgated, but to future conditions as well,
for as long as the safety and security of women and their children are
threatened by violence and abuse.

Garcia v Drilon, G.R. No. 179267, June 25, 2013