Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers
Adopted by the Eighth Crime Congress, Havana, 27 August-7 September 1990
Access to lawyers and legal services
All persons are entitled to call upon the assistance of a lawyer of their choice to protect and establish their rights and defend them in all stages of criminal proceedings.
Governments shall ensure that efficient procedures and responsive mechanisms for effective and equal access to lawyers are provided for all persons within their territory and subject to their jurisdiction without distinction or discrimination of any kind.
Governments shall ensure sufficient funding and other resources for legal services to the poor and, as necessary, other disadvantaged persons. Professional associations of lawyers shall cooperate to this end.
Programmes to inform the public about their rights and duties under the law and the important role of lawyers in protecting fundamental freedoms are to be promoted. Special attention should be given to the poor and disadvantaged to enable them to assert their rights and where necessary call upon the assistance of lawyers.
Special safeguards in criminal justice matters
All persons are to be informed immediately by a competent authority of their right to be assisted by a lawyer of their own choice upon arrest or detention or when charged with a criminal offense.
All persons are entitled to have a lawyer of experience and competence commensurate with the nature of the offense assigned to them without payment if they lack sufficient means.
All persons arrested or detained shall have prompt access to a lawyer, and in any case within 48 hours.
All arrested, detained or imprisoned persons shall be provided with adequate opportunities, time and facilities to be visited by and to communicate and consult with a lawyer, without delay, interception or censorship and in full confidentiality. Such consultations may be with insight, but not within hearing, of law enforcement officials.
Qualifications and training
Lawyers are to have appropriate education and training and be made aware of the ideals and ethical duties of the lawyer and of human rights and fundamental freedoms recognized by national and international law.
There is to be no discrimination of any kind against a person with respect to entry into or continued practice within the legal profession, except that a requirement that a lawyer must be a national of the country concerned shall not be considered discriminatory.
In countries where there exist groups, communities or regions whose needs for legal services are not met, particularly where such groups have distinct cultures, traditions or languages or have been the victims of past discrimination, special measures should be taken to provide opportunities for candidates from these groups to enter the legal profession and receive training appropriate to the needs of their groups.
Duties and responsibilities
Lawyers shall at all times maintain the honor and dignity of their profession as essential agents of the administration of justice.
The duties of lawyers towards their clients shall include:
a. Advising clients as to their legal rights and obligations, and to the working of the legal system in so far as it is relevant to the rights and obligations of their Clients;
b. Assisting clients in every appropriate way, and taking legal action to protect their interests;
c. Assisting clients before courts, tribunals or administrative authorities, where appropriate.
Lawyers shall seek to uphold human rights and fundamental freedoms recognized by national and international law and at all times act freely and diligently in accord with the law and recognized standards of the legal profession.
Lawyers shall always loyally respect the interests of their clients.
Guarantees for the functioning of lawyers
Where the security of lawyers is threatened as a result of discharging their functions, they shall be adequately safeguarded by the authorities.
Lawyers shall not be identified with their clients or their clients' causes as a result of discharging their functions.
No court or administrative authority before whom the right to counsel is recognized shall refuse to recognize the right of a lawyer to appear before it for his or her client unless that lawyer has been disqualified in accord with national law and practice.
Lawyers shall enjoy civil and penal immunity for relevant statements made in good faith in written or oral pleadings or in their professional appearances before a court, tribunal or other legal or administrative authority.
It is the duty of the competent authorities to ensure that lawyers have access to appropriate information, files and documents in their possession or control in time to enable lawyers to provide effective legal assistance to their clients and at the
earliest appropriate time.
Governments shall recognize and respect that all communications and consultations between lawyers and their clients within their professional relationship are confidential.
Freedom of expression and association
Lawyers, like other citizens, are entitled to freedom of expression, belief, association and assembly. In particular, they shall have the right to take part in public discussion of matters concerning the law and human rights and to join or form local, national or international organizations and attend meetings, without suffering professional restrictions. In exercising these rights, lawyers shall always conduct themselves in accord with the law and recognized standards of the profession.
Professional associations of lawyers
Lawyers are entitled to form and join self-governing professional associations to represent their interests, promote continuing education and training and protect professional integrity. The executive body of the professional associations shall be elected by its members and exercise its functions without external interference.
Professional associations of lawyers shall cooperate with Governments to ensure effective and equal access to legal services for all and that lawyers are able, without improper interference, to counsel and assist their clients.
Disciplinary proceedings
Codes of professional conduct are to be established by the legal profession through appropriate organs, or by legislation, in accord with national law and custom and recognized international standards and norms.
Charges or complaints made against lawyers in their professional capacities shall be processed expeditiously and fairly under appropriate procedures. Lawyers have the right to a fair hearing, including the right to be assisted by a lawyer of their choice.
Disciplinary proceedings shall be determined in accord with the code of professional conduct and other recognized standards and ethics of the legal profession.
I am not a pro bono lawyer. See the PAO or IBP chapter near you for free legal aid.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Prosecutors
Adopted by the Eighth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, Havana, Cuba, 27 August to 7 September 1990
GUIDELINES ON THE ROLE OF PROSECUTORS
Whereas in the Charter of the United Nations the peoples of the world affirm, inter alia, their determination to establish conditions under which justice can be maintained, and proclaim as one of their purposes the achievement of international cooperation in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion,
Whereas the Universal Declaration of Human Rights enshrines the principles of equality before the law, the presumption of innocence and the right to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal,
Whereas frequently there still exists a gap between the vision underlying those principles and the actual situation,
Whereas the organization and administration of justice in every country should be inspired by those principles, and efforts undertaken to translate them fully into reality,
Whereas prosecutors play a crucial role in the administration of justice, and rules concerning the performance of their important responsibilities should promote their respect for and compliance with the above-mentioned principles, thus contributing to fair and equitable criminal justice and the effective protection of citizens against crime,
Whereas it is essential to ensure that prosecutors possess the professional qualifications required for the accomplishment of their functions, through improved methods of recruitment and legal and professional training, and through the provision of all necessary means for the proper performance of their role in combating criminality, particularly in its new forms and dimensions,
Whereas the General Assembly, by its resolution 34/169 of 17 December 1979, adopted the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, on the recommendation of the Fifth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders,
Whereas in resolution 16 of the Sixth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, the Committee on Crime Prevention and Control was called upon to include among its priorities the elaboration of guidelines relating to the independence of judges and the selection, professional training and status of judges and prosecutors,
Whereas the Seventh United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders adopted the Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, subsequently endorsed by the General Assembly in its resolutions 40/32 of 29 November 1985 and 40/146 of 13 December 1985,
Whereas the Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power recommends measures to be taken at the international and national levels to improve access to justice and fair treatment, restitution, compensation and assistance for victims of crime,
Whereas, in resolution 7 of the Seventh Congress, the Committee was called upon to consider the need for guidelines relating, inter alia, to the selection, professional training and status of prosecutors, their expected tasks and conduct, means to enhance their contribution to the smooth functioning of the criminal justice system and their cooperation with the police, the scope of their discretionary powers, and their role in criminal proceedings, and to report thereon to future United Nations congresses,
The Guidelines set forth below, which have been formulated to assist Member States in their tasks of securing and promoting the effectiveness, impartiality and fairness of prosecutors in criminal proceedings, should be respected and taken into account by Governments within the framework of their national legislation and practice, and should be brought to the attention of prosecutors, as well as other persons, such as judges, lawyers, members of the executive and the legislature and the public in general. The present Guidelines have been formulated principally with public prosecutors in mind, but they apply equally, as appropriate, to prosecutors appointed on an ad hoc basis.
Qualifications, selection and training
1. Persons selected as prosecutors shall be individuals of integrity and ability, with appropriate training and qualifications.
2. States shall ensure that:
(a) Selection criteria for prosecutors embody safeguards against appointments based on partiality or prejudice, excluding any discrimination against a person on the grounds of race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, social or ethnic origin, property, birth, economic or other status, except that it shall not be considered discriminatory to require a candidate for prosecutorial office to be a national of the country concerned;
(b) Prosecutors have appropriate education and training and should be made aware of the ideals and ethical duties of their office, of the constitutional and statutory protections for the rights of the suspect and the victim, and of human rights and fundamental freedoms recognized by national and international law.
Status and conditions of service
3. Prosecutors, as essential agents of the administration of justice, shall at all times maintain the honour and dignity of their profession.
4. States shall ensure that prosecutors are able to perform their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment, improper interference or unjustified exposure to civil, penal or other liability.
5. Prosecutors and their families shall be physically protected by the authorities when their personal safety is threatened as a result of the discharge of prosecutorial functions.
6. Reasonable conditions of service of prosecutors, adequate remuneration and, where applicable, tenure, pension and age of retirement shall be set out by law or published rules or regulations.
7. Promotion of prosecutors, wherever such a system exists, shall be based on objective factors, in particular professional qualifications, ability, integrity and experience, and decided upon in accordance with fair and impartial procedures.
Freedom of expression and association
8. Prosecutors like other citizens are entitled to freedom of expression, belief, association and assembly. In particular, they shall have the right to take part in public discussion of matters concerning the law, the administration of justice and the promotion and protection of human rights and to join or form local, national or international organizations and attend their meetings, without suffering professional disadvantage by reason of their lawful action or their membership in a lawful organization. In exercising these rights, prosecutors shall always conduct themselves in accordance with the law and the recognized standards and ethics of their profession.
9. Prosecutors shall be free to form and join professional associations or other organizations to represent their interests, to promote their professional training and to protect their status.
Role in criminal proceedings
10. The office of prosecutors shall be strictly separated from judicial functions.
11. Prosecutors shall perform an active role in criminal proceedings, including institution of prosecution and, where authorized by law or consistent with local practice, in the investigation of crime, supervision over the legality of these investigations, supervision of the execution of court decisions and the exercise of other functions as representatives of the public interest.
12. Prosecutors shall, in accordance with the law, perform their duties fairly, consistently and expeditiously, and respect and protect human dignity and uphold human rights, thus contributing to ensuring due process and the smooth functioning of the criminal justice system.
13. In the performance of their duties, prosecutors shall:
(a) Carry out their functions impartially and avoid all political, social, religious, racial, cultural, sexual or any other kind of discrimination;
(b) Protect the public interest, act with objectivity, take proper account of the position of the suspect and the victim, and pay attention to all relevant circumstances, irrespective of whether they are to the advantage or disadvantage of the suspect;
(c) Keep matters in their possession confidential, unless the performance of duty or the needs of justice require otherwise;
(d) Consider the views and concerns of victims when their personal interests are affected and ensure that victims are informed of their rights in accordance with the Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power.
14. Prosecutors shall not initiate or continue prosecution, or shall make every effort to stay proceedings, when an impartial investigation shows the charge to be unfounded.
15. Prosecutors shall give due attention to the prosecution of crimes committed by public officials, particularly corruption, abuse of power, grave violations of human rights and other crimes recognized by international law and, where authorized by law or consistent with local practice, the investigation of such offences.
16. When prosecutors come into possession of evidence against suspects that they know or believe on reasonable grounds was obtained through recourse to unlawful methods, which constitute a grave violation of the suspect's human rights, especially involving torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, or other abuses of human rights, they shall refuse to use such evidence against anyone other than those who used such methods, or inform the Court accordingly, and shall take all necessary steps to ensure that those responsible for using such methods are brought to justice.
Discretionary functions
17. In countries where prosecutors are vested with discretionary functions, the law or published rules or regulations shall provide guidelines to enhance fairness and consistency of approach in taking decisions in the prosecution process, including institution or waiver of prosecution.
Alternatives to prosecution
18. In accordance with national law, prosecutors shall give due consideration to waiving prosecution, discontinuing proceedings conditionally or unconditionally, or diverting criminal cases from the formal justice system, with full respect for the rights of suspect(s) and the victim(s). For this purpose, States should fully explore the possibility of adopting diversion schemes not only to alleviate excessive court loads, but also to avoid the stigmatization of pre-trial detention, indictment and conviction, as well as the possible adverse effects of imprisonment.
19. In countries where prosecutors are vested with discretionary functions as to the decision whether or not to prosecute a juvenile, special considerations shall be given to the nature and gravity of the offence, protection of society and the personality and background of the juvenile. In making that decision, prosecutors shall particularly consider available alternatives to prosecution under the relevant juvenile justice laws and procedures. Prosecutors shall use their best efforts to take prosecutory action against juveniles only to the extent strictly necessary.
Relations with other government agencies or institutions
20. In order to ensure the fairness and effectiveness of prosecution, prosecutors shall strive to cooperate with the police, the courts, the legal profession, public defenders and other government agencies or institutions.
Disciplinary proceedings
21. Disciplinary offences of prosecutors shall be based on law or lawful regulations. Complaints against prosecutors which allege that they acted in a manner clearly out of the range of professional standards shall be processed expeditiously and fairly under appropriate procedures. Prosecutors shall have the right to a fair hearing. The decision shall be subject to independent review.
22. Disciplinary proceedings against prosecutors shall guarantee an objective evaluation and decision. They shall be determined in accordance with the law, the code of professional conduct and other established standards and ethics and in the light of the present Guidelines.
Observance of the Guidelines
23. Prosecutors shall respect the present Guidelines. They shall also, to the best of their capability, prevent and actively oppose any violations thereof.
24. Prosecutors who have reason to believe that a violation of the present Guidelines has occurred or is about to occur shall report the matter to their superior authorities and, where necessary, to other appropriate authorities or organs vested with reviewing or remedial power.
www.lawphil.net
The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation
GUIDELINES ON THE ROLE OF PROSECUTORS
Whereas in the Charter of the United Nations the peoples of the world affirm, inter alia, their determination to establish conditions under which justice can be maintained, and proclaim as one of their purposes the achievement of international cooperation in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion,
Whereas the Universal Declaration of Human Rights enshrines the principles of equality before the law, the presumption of innocence and the right to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal,
Whereas frequently there still exists a gap between the vision underlying those principles and the actual situation,
Whereas the organization and administration of justice in every country should be inspired by those principles, and efforts undertaken to translate them fully into reality,
Whereas prosecutors play a crucial role in the administration of justice, and rules concerning the performance of their important responsibilities should promote their respect for and compliance with the above-mentioned principles, thus contributing to fair and equitable criminal justice and the effective protection of citizens against crime,
Whereas it is essential to ensure that prosecutors possess the professional qualifications required for the accomplishment of their functions, through improved methods of recruitment and legal and professional training, and through the provision of all necessary means for the proper performance of their role in combating criminality, particularly in its new forms and dimensions,
Whereas the General Assembly, by its resolution 34/169 of 17 December 1979, adopted the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, on the recommendation of the Fifth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders,
Whereas in resolution 16 of the Sixth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, the Committee on Crime Prevention and Control was called upon to include among its priorities the elaboration of guidelines relating to the independence of judges and the selection, professional training and status of judges and prosecutors,
Whereas the Seventh United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders adopted the Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, subsequently endorsed by the General Assembly in its resolutions 40/32 of 29 November 1985 and 40/146 of 13 December 1985,
Whereas the Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power recommends measures to be taken at the international and national levels to improve access to justice and fair treatment, restitution, compensation and assistance for victims of crime,
Whereas, in resolution 7 of the Seventh Congress, the Committee was called upon to consider the need for guidelines relating, inter alia, to the selection, professional training and status of prosecutors, their expected tasks and conduct, means to enhance their contribution to the smooth functioning of the criminal justice system and their cooperation with the police, the scope of their discretionary powers, and their role in criminal proceedings, and to report thereon to future United Nations congresses,
The Guidelines set forth below, which have been formulated to assist Member States in their tasks of securing and promoting the effectiveness, impartiality and fairness of prosecutors in criminal proceedings, should be respected and taken into account by Governments within the framework of their national legislation and practice, and should be brought to the attention of prosecutors, as well as other persons, such as judges, lawyers, members of the executive and the legislature and the public in general. The present Guidelines have been formulated principally with public prosecutors in mind, but they apply equally, as appropriate, to prosecutors appointed on an ad hoc basis.
Qualifications, selection and training
1. Persons selected as prosecutors shall be individuals of integrity and ability, with appropriate training and qualifications.
2. States shall ensure that:
(a) Selection criteria for prosecutors embody safeguards against appointments based on partiality or prejudice, excluding any discrimination against a person on the grounds of race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, social or ethnic origin, property, birth, economic or other status, except that it shall not be considered discriminatory to require a candidate for prosecutorial office to be a national of the country concerned;
(b) Prosecutors have appropriate education and training and should be made aware of the ideals and ethical duties of their office, of the constitutional and statutory protections for the rights of the suspect and the victim, and of human rights and fundamental freedoms recognized by national and international law.
Status and conditions of service
3. Prosecutors, as essential agents of the administration of justice, shall at all times maintain the honour and dignity of their profession.
4. States shall ensure that prosecutors are able to perform their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment, improper interference or unjustified exposure to civil, penal or other liability.
5. Prosecutors and their families shall be physically protected by the authorities when their personal safety is threatened as a result of the discharge of prosecutorial functions.
6. Reasonable conditions of service of prosecutors, adequate remuneration and, where applicable, tenure, pension and age of retirement shall be set out by law or published rules or regulations.
7. Promotion of prosecutors, wherever such a system exists, shall be based on objective factors, in particular professional qualifications, ability, integrity and experience, and decided upon in accordance with fair and impartial procedures.
Freedom of expression and association
8. Prosecutors like other citizens are entitled to freedom of expression, belief, association and assembly. In particular, they shall have the right to take part in public discussion of matters concerning the law, the administration of justice and the promotion and protection of human rights and to join or form local, national or international organizations and attend their meetings, without suffering professional disadvantage by reason of their lawful action or their membership in a lawful organization. In exercising these rights, prosecutors shall always conduct themselves in accordance with the law and the recognized standards and ethics of their profession.
9. Prosecutors shall be free to form and join professional associations or other organizations to represent their interests, to promote their professional training and to protect their status.
Role in criminal proceedings
10. The office of prosecutors shall be strictly separated from judicial functions.
11. Prosecutors shall perform an active role in criminal proceedings, including institution of prosecution and, where authorized by law or consistent with local practice, in the investigation of crime, supervision over the legality of these investigations, supervision of the execution of court decisions and the exercise of other functions as representatives of the public interest.
12. Prosecutors shall, in accordance with the law, perform their duties fairly, consistently and expeditiously, and respect and protect human dignity and uphold human rights, thus contributing to ensuring due process and the smooth functioning of the criminal justice system.
13. In the performance of their duties, prosecutors shall:
(a) Carry out their functions impartially and avoid all political, social, religious, racial, cultural, sexual or any other kind of discrimination;
(b) Protect the public interest, act with objectivity, take proper account of the position of the suspect and the victim, and pay attention to all relevant circumstances, irrespective of whether they are to the advantage or disadvantage of the suspect;
(c) Keep matters in their possession confidential, unless the performance of duty or the needs of justice require otherwise;
(d) Consider the views and concerns of victims when their personal interests are affected and ensure that victims are informed of their rights in accordance with the Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power.
14. Prosecutors shall not initiate or continue prosecution, or shall make every effort to stay proceedings, when an impartial investigation shows the charge to be unfounded.
15. Prosecutors shall give due attention to the prosecution of crimes committed by public officials, particularly corruption, abuse of power, grave violations of human rights and other crimes recognized by international law and, where authorized by law or consistent with local practice, the investigation of such offences.
16. When prosecutors come into possession of evidence against suspects that they know or believe on reasonable grounds was obtained through recourse to unlawful methods, which constitute a grave violation of the suspect's human rights, especially involving torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, or other abuses of human rights, they shall refuse to use such evidence against anyone other than those who used such methods, or inform the Court accordingly, and shall take all necessary steps to ensure that those responsible for using such methods are brought to justice.
Discretionary functions
17. In countries where prosecutors are vested with discretionary functions, the law or published rules or regulations shall provide guidelines to enhance fairness and consistency of approach in taking decisions in the prosecution process, including institution or waiver of prosecution.
Alternatives to prosecution
18. In accordance with national law, prosecutors shall give due consideration to waiving prosecution, discontinuing proceedings conditionally or unconditionally, or diverting criminal cases from the formal justice system, with full respect for the rights of suspect(s) and the victim(s). For this purpose, States should fully explore the possibility of adopting diversion schemes not only to alleviate excessive court loads, but also to avoid the stigmatization of pre-trial detention, indictment and conviction, as well as the possible adverse effects of imprisonment.
19. In countries where prosecutors are vested with discretionary functions as to the decision whether or not to prosecute a juvenile, special considerations shall be given to the nature and gravity of the offence, protection of society and the personality and background of the juvenile. In making that decision, prosecutors shall particularly consider available alternatives to prosecution under the relevant juvenile justice laws and procedures. Prosecutors shall use their best efforts to take prosecutory action against juveniles only to the extent strictly necessary.
Relations with other government agencies or institutions
20. In order to ensure the fairness and effectiveness of prosecution, prosecutors shall strive to cooperate with the police, the courts, the legal profession, public defenders and other government agencies or institutions.
Disciplinary proceedings
21. Disciplinary offences of prosecutors shall be based on law or lawful regulations. Complaints against prosecutors which allege that they acted in a manner clearly out of the range of professional standards shall be processed expeditiously and fairly under appropriate procedures. Prosecutors shall have the right to a fair hearing. The decision shall be subject to independent review.
22. Disciplinary proceedings against prosecutors shall guarantee an objective evaluation and decision. They shall be determined in accordance with the law, the code of professional conduct and other established standards and ethics and in the light of the present Guidelines.
Observance of the Guidelines
23. Prosecutors shall respect the present Guidelines. They shall also, to the best of their capability, prevent and actively oppose any violations thereof.
24. Prosecutors who have reason to believe that a violation of the present Guidelines has occurred or is about to occur shall report the matter to their superior authorities and, where necessary, to other appropriate authorities or organs vested with reviewing or remedial power.
www.lawphil.net
The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation
Independent judiciary
Unknown to many, as early as 1985, the United Nations General Assembly had approved a document on the independence of the judiciary acting on the recommendation of the 7th UN Congress on the prevention of crime and the treatment of offenders held in the same year.
(See: United Nations General Assembly Resolutions 40/32 of 29 November 1985 and 40/146 of 13 December 1985).
I wish to reproduce the same verbatim hereinbelow for legal research purposes of legal researchers visiting this blog.
BASIC PRINCIPLES ON THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY
Whereas in the Charter of the United Nations the peoples of the world affirm, inter alia, their determination to establish conditions under which justice can be maintained to achieve international co-operation in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms without any discrimination,
Whereas the Universal Declaration of Human Rights enshrines in particular the principles of equality before the law, of the presumption of innocence and of the right to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law,
Whereas the International Covenants on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and on Civil and Political Rights both guarantee the exercise of those rights, and in addition, the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights further guarantees the right to be tried without undue delay,
Whereas frequently there still exists a gap between the vision underlying those principles and the actual situation,
Whereas the organization and administration of justice in every country should be inspired by those principles, and efforts should be undertaken to translate them fully into reality,
Whereas rules concerning the exercise of judicial office should aim at enabling judges to act in accordance with those principles,
Whereas judges are charged with the ultimate decision over life, freedoms, rights, duties and property of citizens,
Whereas the Sixth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, by its resolution 16, called upon the Committee on Crime Prevention and Control to include among its priorities the elaboration of guidelines relating to the independence of judges and the selection, professional training and status of judges and prosecutors,
Whereas it is, therefore, appropriate that consideration be first given to the role of judges in relation to the system of justice and to the importance of their selection, training and conduct,
The following basic principles, formulated to assist Member States in their task of securing and promoting the independence of the judiciary should be taken into account and respected by Governments within the framework of their national legislation and practice and be brought to the attention of judges, lawyers, members of the executive and the legislature and the public in general. The principles have been formulated principally with professional judges in mind, but they apply equally, as appropriate, to lay judges, where they exist.
Independence of the Judiciary
1. The independence of the judiciary shall be guaranteed by the State and enshrined in the Constitution or the law of the country. It is the duty of all governmental and other institutions to respect and observe the independence of the judiciary.
2. The judiciary shall decide matters before them impartially, on the basis of facts and in accordance with the law, without any restrictions, improper influences, inducements, pressures, threats or interferences, direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason.
3. The judiciary shall have jurisdiction over all issues of a judicial nature and shall have exclusive authority to decide whether an issue submitted for its decision is within its competence as defined by law.
4. There shall not be any inappropriate or unwarranted interference with the judicial process, nor shall judicial decisions by the courts be subject to revision. This principle is without prejudice to judicial review or to mitigation or commutation by competent authorities of sentences imposed by the judiciary, in accordance with the law.
5. Everyone shall have the right to be tried by ordinary courts or tribunals using established legal procedures. Tribunals that do not use the duly established procedures of the legal process shall not be created to displace the jurisdiction belonging to the ordinary courts or judicial tribunals.
6. The principle of the independence of the judiciary entitles and requires the judiciary to ensure that judicial proceedings are conducted fairly and that the rights of the parties are respected.
7. It is the duty of each Member State to provide adequate resources to enable the judiciary to properly perform its functions.
Freedom of Expression and Association
8. In accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, members of the judiciary are like other citizens entitled to freedom of expression, belief, association and assembly; provided, however, that in exercising such rights, judges shall always conduct themselves in such a manner as to preserve the dignity of their office and the impartiality and independence of the judiciary.
9. Judges shall be free to form and join associations of judges or other organizations to represent their interests, to promote their professional training and to protect their judicial independence.
Qualifications, Selection And Training
10. Persons selected for judicial office shall be individuals of integrity and ability with appropriate training or qualifications in law. Any method of judicial selection shall safeguard against judicial appointments for improper motives. In the selection of judges, there shall be no discrimination against a person on the grounds of race, colour, sex, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or status, except that a requirement, that a candidate for judicial office must be a national of the country concerned, shall not be considered discriminatory.
Conditions of Service and Tenure
11. The term of office of judges, their independence, security, adequate remuneration, conditions of service, pensions and the age of retirement shall be adequately secured by law.
12. Judges, whether appointed or elected, shall have guaranteed tenure until a mandatory retirement age or the expiry of their term of office, where such exists.
13. Promotion of judges, wherever such a system exists, should be based on objective factors, in particular ability, integrity and experience.
14. The assignment of cases to judges within the court to which they belong is an internal matter of judicial administration.
Professional Secrecy and Immunity
15. The judiciary shall be bound by professional secrecy with regard to their deliberations and to confidential information acquired in the course of their duties other than in public proceedings, and shall not be compelled to testify on such matters.
16. Without prejudice to any disciplinary procedure or to any right of appeal or to compensation from the State, in accordance with national law, judges should enjoy personal immunity from civil suits for monetary damages for improper acts or omissions in the exercise of their judicial functions.
Discipline, Suspension and Removal
17. A charge or complaint made against a judge in his/her judicial and professional capacity shall be processed expeditiously and fairly under an appropriate procedure. The judge shall have the right to a fair hearing. The examination of the matter at its initial stage shall be kept confidential, unless otherwise requested by the judge.
18. Judges shall be subject to suspension or removal only for reasons of incapacity or behaviour that renders them unfit to discharge their duties.
19. All disciplinary, suspension or removal proceedings shall be determined in accordance with established standards of judicial conduct.
20. Decisions in disciplinary, suspension or removal proceedings should be subject to an independent review. This principle may not apply to the decisions of the highest court and those of the legislature in impeachment or similar proceedings.
See:
www.lawphil.net
The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation
(See: United Nations General Assembly Resolutions 40/32 of 29 November 1985 and 40/146 of 13 December 1985).
I wish to reproduce the same verbatim hereinbelow for legal research purposes of legal researchers visiting this blog.
BASIC PRINCIPLES ON THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY
Whereas in the Charter of the United Nations the peoples of the world affirm, inter alia, their determination to establish conditions under which justice can be maintained to achieve international co-operation in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms without any discrimination,
Whereas the Universal Declaration of Human Rights enshrines in particular the principles of equality before the law, of the presumption of innocence and of the right to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law,
Whereas the International Covenants on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and on Civil and Political Rights both guarantee the exercise of those rights, and in addition, the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights further guarantees the right to be tried without undue delay,
Whereas frequently there still exists a gap between the vision underlying those principles and the actual situation,
Whereas the organization and administration of justice in every country should be inspired by those principles, and efforts should be undertaken to translate them fully into reality,
Whereas rules concerning the exercise of judicial office should aim at enabling judges to act in accordance with those principles,
Whereas judges are charged with the ultimate decision over life, freedoms, rights, duties and property of citizens,
Whereas the Sixth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, by its resolution 16, called upon the Committee on Crime Prevention and Control to include among its priorities the elaboration of guidelines relating to the independence of judges and the selection, professional training and status of judges and prosecutors,
Whereas it is, therefore, appropriate that consideration be first given to the role of judges in relation to the system of justice and to the importance of their selection, training and conduct,
The following basic principles, formulated to assist Member States in their task of securing and promoting the independence of the judiciary should be taken into account and respected by Governments within the framework of their national legislation and practice and be brought to the attention of judges, lawyers, members of the executive and the legislature and the public in general. The principles have been formulated principally with professional judges in mind, but they apply equally, as appropriate, to lay judges, where they exist.
Independence of the Judiciary
1. The independence of the judiciary shall be guaranteed by the State and enshrined in the Constitution or the law of the country. It is the duty of all governmental and other institutions to respect and observe the independence of the judiciary.
2. The judiciary shall decide matters before them impartially, on the basis of facts and in accordance with the law, without any restrictions, improper influences, inducements, pressures, threats or interferences, direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason.
3. The judiciary shall have jurisdiction over all issues of a judicial nature and shall have exclusive authority to decide whether an issue submitted for its decision is within its competence as defined by law.
4. There shall not be any inappropriate or unwarranted interference with the judicial process, nor shall judicial decisions by the courts be subject to revision. This principle is without prejudice to judicial review or to mitigation or commutation by competent authorities of sentences imposed by the judiciary, in accordance with the law.
5. Everyone shall have the right to be tried by ordinary courts or tribunals using established legal procedures. Tribunals that do not use the duly established procedures of the legal process shall not be created to displace the jurisdiction belonging to the ordinary courts or judicial tribunals.
6. The principle of the independence of the judiciary entitles and requires the judiciary to ensure that judicial proceedings are conducted fairly and that the rights of the parties are respected.
7. It is the duty of each Member State to provide adequate resources to enable the judiciary to properly perform its functions.
Freedom of Expression and Association
8. In accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, members of the judiciary are like other citizens entitled to freedom of expression, belief, association and assembly; provided, however, that in exercising such rights, judges shall always conduct themselves in such a manner as to preserve the dignity of their office and the impartiality and independence of the judiciary.
9. Judges shall be free to form and join associations of judges or other organizations to represent their interests, to promote their professional training and to protect their judicial independence.
Qualifications, Selection And Training
10. Persons selected for judicial office shall be individuals of integrity and ability with appropriate training or qualifications in law. Any method of judicial selection shall safeguard against judicial appointments for improper motives. In the selection of judges, there shall be no discrimination against a person on the grounds of race, colour, sex, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or status, except that a requirement, that a candidate for judicial office must be a national of the country concerned, shall not be considered discriminatory.
Conditions of Service and Tenure
11. The term of office of judges, their independence, security, adequate remuneration, conditions of service, pensions and the age of retirement shall be adequately secured by law.
12. Judges, whether appointed or elected, shall have guaranteed tenure until a mandatory retirement age or the expiry of their term of office, where such exists.
13. Promotion of judges, wherever such a system exists, should be based on objective factors, in particular ability, integrity and experience.
14. The assignment of cases to judges within the court to which they belong is an internal matter of judicial administration.
Professional Secrecy and Immunity
15. The judiciary shall be bound by professional secrecy with regard to their deliberations and to confidential information acquired in the course of their duties other than in public proceedings, and shall not be compelled to testify on such matters.
16. Without prejudice to any disciplinary procedure or to any right of appeal or to compensation from the State, in accordance with national law, judges should enjoy personal immunity from civil suits for monetary damages for improper acts or omissions in the exercise of their judicial functions.
Discipline, Suspension and Removal
17. A charge or complaint made against a judge in his/her judicial and professional capacity shall be processed expeditiously and fairly under an appropriate procedure. The judge shall have the right to a fair hearing. The examination of the matter at its initial stage shall be kept confidential, unless otherwise requested by the judge.
18. Judges shall be subject to suspension or removal only for reasons of incapacity or behaviour that renders them unfit to discharge their duties.
19. All disciplinary, suspension or removal proceedings shall be determined in accordance with established standards of judicial conduct.
20. Decisions in disciplinary, suspension or removal proceedings should be subject to an independent review. This principle may not apply to the decisions of the highest court and those of the legislature in impeachment or similar proceedings.
See:
www.lawphil.net
The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation
Monday, July 27, 2009
Thirst for eternal power
The corrupt leadership and dangerous ambitions of tunnel-vision Pres. Gloria Arroyo have deteriorated so much to the frightening point of scandalous disarray and hell-bottom repulsiveness that her own former presidential legal counsel and defense secretary, Atty. Avelino Cruz Jr., has urged Filipino lawyers, in a recent speech before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, to unite and courageously oppose the evil designs of Pres. Arroyo and her cliques of government bureaucrats, military and police officers, and economic oligarchs to perpetuate themselves in power beyond the end of her term next year. See a recent editorial of the Philippine Daily Inquirer below.
Inquirer Opinion/ Editorial
Fair warning
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 01:49:00 07/24/2009
For every Romulo Neri or Ignacio Bunye, senior administration officials who kept their mouths shut or flapped their lips to protect President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo from the worst effects of self-inflicted scandals, there is an Avelino Cruz Jr., who resigned rather than betray the public trust. Once one of the President’s favorite lawyers, Cruz quit one of the most powerful portfolios in the Cabinet, the Department of National Defense, in 2006, over the issue of the obviously fabricated people’s initiative.
Last Wednesday, the resolutely low-profile Cruz once again placed public interest ahead of personal considerations when he warned the nation against what he called a “disturbing pattern” in the actions of the administration.
Pointing to several troubling indicators, such as the worrisome fact that at least 50 retired generals from the Armed Forces and the Philippine National Police now occupy key posts in the government, Cruz asked: “Is this indicative of an administration consolidating its grip on our country’s security apparatus?”
Cruz raised at least three significant concerns in wide-ranging remarks at a forum organized by the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, the Parish Pastoral Council for Responsible Voting and the Legal Network for Truthful Elections.
He said that, based on what he knew of the fake people’s initiative campaign in 2006 that the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional and called “a grand deception,” the President was also likely behind the continuing attempts to revise the Constitution, including controversial House Resolution 1109. Now this is nothing new, of course—except for the fact that a former member of the President’s inner circle said it.
This is additional confirmation of a special sort; it tells us, yet again, that the attempt to create a legal framework that would allow Ms Arroyo to stay in power has a long history. It goes back to immediately after the “Hello, Garci” scandal and the first impeachment complaint.
Cruz also said that he believes former Speaker Jose de Venecia, once a close ally and now, after the ZTE scandal, a political enemy of the President’s, was telling the truth about Malacañang’s attempt to obtain American support for emergency rule. “What I can say is that indeed Speaker Joe de Venecia has intimate knowledge of these events. I have also heard our former ambassador to the United States, Alberto del Rosario, narrate on television a similar version of events taking place in the last quarter of 2005. I have no reason to doubt the veracity of his narration.”
Indeed, as defense chief at the time, Cruz must have been privy to more inside information than he would, or could, or was ready to, reveal.
He also said, or implied, that the Arroyo administration was preparing a military option. He expressed confidence that any attempt by the Armed Forces of the Philippines to extend the President’s tenure would fail—but the attempt would necessarily entail “bloodshed.” He said: “I fear more for the consequences that our nation will have to suffer for the failed ambitions of a powerful few.”
It was in this context that Cruz issued the impassioned call to the men and women he used to serve as defense secretary. “It is for this reason that I renew my call to our professional men and women in uniform to remain faithful to the flag and the Constitution and to disobey patently unlawful orders that only serve selfish political ends.”
Patently unlawful orders. By that Cruz can only mean any attempt by President Arroyo or her key officials to use the country’s soldiers to create an emergency situation (such as the bombs-designed-to-be-discovered which De Venecia had earlier described as the hallmark of government “special operations”); or to manipulate the May 2010 elections (in a repeat of the interventionist role played by key military officials in the 2004 elections, as exposed by the Garcillano wiretaps); or to engineer a form of transition government (such as the latest wild-eyed idea from National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales) through sheer force.
The country should consider itself warned. We should not let the undeniable build-up in anticipation for next year’s elections lead us to a false sense of security. “Can we trust her word this time? Or is the country again being lulled into complacency? Is she creating the lull before the storm?” Cruz’s questions must be raised again, and again, and again.
See:
http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/editorial/view/20090724-216943/Fair-warning
Inquirer Opinion/ Editorial
Fair warning
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 01:49:00 07/24/2009
For every Romulo Neri or Ignacio Bunye, senior administration officials who kept their mouths shut or flapped their lips to protect President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo from the worst effects of self-inflicted scandals, there is an Avelino Cruz Jr., who resigned rather than betray the public trust. Once one of the President’s favorite lawyers, Cruz quit one of the most powerful portfolios in the Cabinet, the Department of National Defense, in 2006, over the issue of the obviously fabricated people’s initiative.
Last Wednesday, the resolutely low-profile Cruz once again placed public interest ahead of personal considerations when he warned the nation against what he called a “disturbing pattern” in the actions of the administration.
Pointing to several troubling indicators, such as the worrisome fact that at least 50 retired generals from the Armed Forces and the Philippine National Police now occupy key posts in the government, Cruz asked: “Is this indicative of an administration consolidating its grip on our country’s security apparatus?”
Cruz raised at least three significant concerns in wide-ranging remarks at a forum organized by the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, the Parish Pastoral Council for Responsible Voting and the Legal Network for Truthful Elections.
He said that, based on what he knew of the fake people’s initiative campaign in 2006 that the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional and called “a grand deception,” the President was also likely behind the continuing attempts to revise the Constitution, including controversial House Resolution 1109. Now this is nothing new, of course—except for the fact that a former member of the President’s inner circle said it.
This is additional confirmation of a special sort; it tells us, yet again, that the attempt to create a legal framework that would allow Ms Arroyo to stay in power has a long history. It goes back to immediately after the “Hello, Garci” scandal and the first impeachment complaint.
Cruz also said that he believes former Speaker Jose de Venecia, once a close ally and now, after the ZTE scandal, a political enemy of the President’s, was telling the truth about Malacañang’s attempt to obtain American support for emergency rule. “What I can say is that indeed Speaker Joe de Venecia has intimate knowledge of these events. I have also heard our former ambassador to the United States, Alberto del Rosario, narrate on television a similar version of events taking place in the last quarter of 2005. I have no reason to doubt the veracity of his narration.”
Indeed, as defense chief at the time, Cruz must have been privy to more inside information than he would, or could, or was ready to, reveal.
He also said, or implied, that the Arroyo administration was preparing a military option. He expressed confidence that any attempt by the Armed Forces of the Philippines to extend the President’s tenure would fail—but the attempt would necessarily entail “bloodshed.” He said: “I fear more for the consequences that our nation will have to suffer for the failed ambitions of a powerful few.”
It was in this context that Cruz issued the impassioned call to the men and women he used to serve as defense secretary. “It is for this reason that I renew my call to our professional men and women in uniform to remain faithful to the flag and the Constitution and to disobey patently unlawful orders that only serve selfish political ends.”
Patently unlawful orders. By that Cruz can only mean any attempt by President Arroyo or her key officials to use the country’s soldiers to create an emergency situation (such as the bombs-designed-to-be-discovered which De Venecia had earlier described as the hallmark of government “special operations”); or to manipulate the May 2010 elections (in a repeat of the interventionist role played by key military officials in the 2004 elections, as exposed by the Garcillano wiretaps); or to engineer a form of transition government (such as the latest wild-eyed idea from National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales) through sheer force.
The country should consider itself warned. We should not let the undeniable build-up in anticipation for next year’s elections lead us to a false sense of security. “Can we trust her word this time? Or is the country again being lulled into complacency? Is she creating the lull before the storm?” Cruz’s questions must be raised again, and again, and again.
See:
http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/editorial/view/20090724-216943/Fair-warning
Human rights situationer
The true state of human rights in the Philippines is described in the analysis of Leila de Lima. Chair of the Commission on Human Rights, recently published by the Philippine Daily Inquirer, which I wish to reproduce verbatim below, for legal research purposes of the visitors of this blog.
De Lima is the youngest and the most courageous and dynamic chair the CHR has ever had, as far as I can recall, since its landmark constitutional creation in 1987 after the bloodless and historical EDSA Revolution of 1986.
Let not the deodorized reports of the corrupt leaders of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police fool us into believing that the Philippines is a truly free, democratic and safe haven for freedom-loving human beings.
9 YEARS OF ARROYO: A REVIEW
Human rights violations rise
Culture of impunity prevailing
By Leila de Lima
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 04:11:00 07/23/2009
Filed Under: Human Rights, Justice & Rights, Treaties & International Organisations, Crime, Legislation, political killings
Editor’s Note: On the occasion of the ostensibly final State of the Nation Address of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo on July 27, the Inquirer presents this review of her governance which runs into its ninth year by the time she steps down from office next year, the longest-serving Filipino leader next to Ferdinand Marcos.
The judgment of history is still out. So, call the Inquirer series—which covers the economy, peace and order, human rights, justice system, education, health and environment—the first draft of that history.)
MANILA, Philippines—Every administration will insist that protection of human rights is a priority. This article does not seek to contradict the claim that steps have been taken to protect human rights. The Arroyo administration has indeed undertaken initiatives aimed at promoting human rights.
However, one cannot deny that human rights violations continue to happen. In fact, we are dealing with the same human rights issues that have plagued the country for decades. It is therefore imperative that we determine whether the administration’s responses have addressed these concerns.
This article looks at a number of key issues and themes.
First of all, one way to gauge the true commitment of President Macapagal-Arroyo to the promotion and protection of human rights is whether she will certify the charter of the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) as urgent. This would help write finis to the impression of the CHR as a “toothless tiger.”
Another way to gauge the commitment of a country to human rights is to see which treaties it has ratified. It is one thing for Ms Arroyo to make pleasing statements, but it is a different matter for her to actually ratify a treaty and commit to fulfill certain obligations.
In 2007, the Philippine government ratified the 2nd Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This aims to abolish the death penalty.
Another laudable development was the move by Congress a year before to pass Republic Act No. 9346 prohibiting the imposition of the death penalty. These developments are laudable.
Ms Arroyo, however, has recently made statements expressing an intention to revive the death penalty. We remind her of our binding legal obligations under the protocol. We cannot renege on this duty.
In 2003, the government ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. This contains specific duties on the part of governments to combat discrimination. It allows individuals whose rights have been violated, to go directly to the United Nations for action, allowing for stronger oversight.
In 2008, the Philippine government ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. This treaty contains duties to ensure and promote the full realization of the rights of persons with disabilities (PWDs). Its ratification is therefore appreciated.
Still to be ratified
The Philippines has not ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (OPCAT), the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICAED), and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Rome Statute).
This situation is very problematic. The OPCAT is important because it establishes a system of regular visits by independent international and national bodies to places where people are deprived of their liberty. This would prevent torture.
The ICAED is significant because we are plagued by enforced disappearances. We continue to look for the disappeared, notably, Jonas Burgos, the two University of the Philippines students and James Balao. The inability of the government thus far to ratify the treaty devoted to this very issue is a travesty.
Finally, the Rome Statute is key because it would allow the International Criminal Court to prosecute crimes and atrocities of the gravest nature carried out in the Philippines and break the culture of impunity.
A number of important bills related to human rights have yet to be passed. These include proposed measures on torture, enforced disappearance and extrajudicial killing. There are also bills on command responsibility as well as on strengthening the witness protection program.
Killings, disappearances, torture
The UN Special Rapporteur has noted the extrajudicial executions of members of civil society, indigenous organizations and media practitioners.
Based on the CHR database, the number of extrajudicial killings has escalated during the current administration. The number increased from 36 victims in 2001 to 144 victims in 2008.
The commission has also documented 239 cases of enforced disappearances, abduction and kidnapping from 2001 up to the middle of this year.
Statistics on extrajudicial killing and enforced disappearances may differ depending on who you ask, but regardless of this disparity, the fact remains that extrajudicial killings have been occurring.
Culture of impunity
What makes this worse is that a majority of the victims of this violence have not attained justice. A culture of impunity continues to be pervasive.
Statistics are likewise difficult to procure on vigilante-style killings because it is difficult to classify these cases with reasonable certainty. Distinguishing between state-sponsored killings and simple criminality is challenging.
The sheer number of reported deaths in the cities of Davao and Cebu, and now in Metro Manila, points to a significant problem.
There are currently no government statistics on torture but its prevalence is irrefutable. The recorded accounts of survivors, such as the Manalo brothers and Fil-Am activist Melissa Roxas, all but put a human face on the horrors of torture.
Lack of criminal convictions
The UN Committee on Human Rights has noted the lack of appropriate measures to investigate crimes allegedly committed by government security forces, in particular those crimes committed against members of civil society, human rights defenders, journalists and leaders of indigenous peoples, as well as the lack of measures taken to prosecute and punish perpetrators.
The current capacity of law enforcement officers to meaningfully carry out forensic investigations, and witness documentation and protection is significantly limited. The passage of time and the efforts of various sectors of government and civil society aimed at addressing this weakness have brought some progress, but this capacity is still very far from what is needed.
The UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression noted the lack of security surrounding media practitioners in the Philippines. They noted charges of rebellion and libel as well as raids on media establishments.
On internal displacement
In areas of armed conflict and counterinsurgency operations, large displacements of civilian populations are a common occurrence.
We continue to witness a repeated exodus of civilians marching down dirt roads with their belongings, livestock and children in tow.
Improvements in transportation and passable roads are needed so that evacuation can be done in a manner that expedites removal of civilians from the front lines and saves lives.
Public declarations from the Department of National Defense on how the Armed Forces of the Philippines should crush the Abu Sayyaf foreshadow further tension and conflict.
Protection of children
Laws for the protection of children, such as the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act, look good on paper. But visits by the CHR tell a different story. At one point, 40 children were found to have been detained, for more than eight hours, in violation of the law.
We also found that detention facilities are congested and poorly ventilated. They lack clean toilets, clean water, medicine and beds. Children sleep on the floor.
Many fall ill.
It has also been found that children are at times kept in the same facilities as adults. This is unacceptable since adults may subject them to harassment, torture or rape.
In a position to do good
On July 27, the President will be giving her last State of the Nation Address. When she leaves office, she will have served as President for more than nine years. Having been in power longer than usual, she should have been in a position to do more good.
Her ascension to power held the promise that our situation could only get better. However, human rights violations have escalated since she took office.
The current administration has several months left to turn things around. Whether it will do so is an open question.
(Leila de Lima is the chairperson of the Commission on Human Rights)
See:
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view/20090723-216804/Human-rights-violations-rise
De Lima is the youngest and the most courageous and dynamic chair the CHR has ever had, as far as I can recall, since its landmark constitutional creation in 1987 after the bloodless and historical EDSA Revolution of 1986.
Let not the deodorized reports of the corrupt leaders of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police fool us into believing that the Philippines is a truly free, democratic and safe haven for freedom-loving human beings.
9 YEARS OF ARROYO: A REVIEW
Human rights violations rise
Culture of impunity prevailing
By Leila de Lima
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 04:11:00 07/23/2009
Filed Under: Human Rights, Justice & Rights, Treaties & International Organisations, Crime, Legislation, political killings
Editor’s Note: On the occasion of the ostensibly final State of the Nation Address of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo on July 27, the Inquirer presents this review of her governance which runs into its ninth year by the time she steps down from office next year, the longest-serving Filipino leader next to Ferdinand Marcos.
The judgment of history is still out. So, call the Inquirer series—which covers the economy, peace and order, human rights, justice system, education, health and environment—the first draft of that history.)
MANILA, Philippines—Every administration will insist that protection of human rights is a priority. This article does not seek to contradict the claim that steps have been taken to protect human rights. The Arroyo administration has indeed undertaken initiatives aimed at promoting human rights.
However, one cannot deny that human rights violations continue to happen. In fact, we are dealing with the same human rights issues that have plagued the country for decades. It is therefore imperative that we determine whether the administration’s responses have addressed these concerns.
This article looks at a number of key issues and themes.
First of all, one way to gauge the true commitment of President Macapagal-Arroyo to the promotion and protection of human rights is whether she will certify the charter of the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) as urgent. This would help write finis to the impression of the CHR as a “toothless tiger.”
Another way to gauge the commitment of a country to human rights is to see which treaties it has ratified. It is one thing for Ms Arroyo to make pleasing statements, but it is a different matter for her to actually ratify a treaty and commit to fulfill certain obligations.
In 2007, the Philippine government ratified the 2nd Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This aims to abolish the death penalty.
Another laudable development was the move by Congress a year before to pass Republic Act No. 9346 prohibiting the imposition of the death penalty. These developments are laudable.
Ms Arroyo, however, has recently made statements expressing an intention to revive the death penalty. We remind her of our binding legal obligations under the protocol. We cannot renege on this duty.
In 2003, the government ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. This contains specific duties on the part of governments to combat discrimination. It allows individuals whose rights have been violated, to go directly to the United Nations for action, allowing for stronger oversight.
In 2008, the Philippine government ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. This treaty contains duties to ensure and promote the full realization of the rights of persons with disabilities (PWDs). Its ratification is therefore appreciated.
Still to be ratified
The Philippines has not ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (OPCAT), the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICAED), and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Rome Statute).
This situation is very problematic. The OPCAT is important because it establishes a system of regular visits by independent international and national bodies to places where people are deprived of their liberty. This would prevent torture.
The ICAED is significant because we are plagued by enforced disappearances. We continue to look for the disappeared, notably, Jonas Burgos, the two University of the Philippines students and James Balao. The inability of the government thus far to ratify the treaty devoted to this very issue is a travesty.
Finally, the Rome Statute is key because it would allow the International Criminal Court to prosecute crimes and atrocities of the gravest nature carried out in the Philippines and break the culture of impunity.
A number of important bills related to human rights have yet to be passed. These include proposed measures on torture, enforced disappearance and extrajudicial killing. There are also bills on command responsibility as well as on strengthening the witness protection program.
Killings, disappearances, torture
The UN Special Rapporteur has noted the extrajudicial executions of members of civil society, indigenous organizations and media practitioners.
Based on the CHR database, the number of extrajudicial killings has escalated during the current administration. The number increased from 36 victims in 2001 to 144 victims in 2008.
The commission has also documented 239 cases of enforced disappearances, abduction and kidnapping from 2001 up to the middle of this year.
Statistics on extrajudicial killing and enforced disappearances may differ depending on who you ask, but regardless of this disparity, the fact remains that extrajudicial killings have been occurring.
Culture of impunity
What makes this worse is that a majority of the victims of this violence have not attained justice. A culture of impunity continues to be pervasive.
Statistics are likewise difficult to procure on vigilante-style killings because it is difficult to classify these cases with reasonable certainty. Distinguishing between state-sponsored killings and simple criminality is challenging.
The sheer number of reported deaths in the cities of Davao and Cebu, and now in Metro Manila, points to a significant problem.
There are currently no government statistics on torture but its prevalence is irrefutable. The recorded accounts of survivors, such as the Manalo brothers and Fil-Am activist Melissa Roxas, all but put a human face on the horrors of torture.
Lack of criminal convictions
The UN Committee on Human Rights has noted the lack of appropriate measures to investigate crimes allegedly committed by government security forces, in particular those crimes committed against members of civil society, human rights defenders, journalists and leaders of indigenous peoples, as well as the lack of measures taken to prosecute and punish perpetrators.
The current capacity of law enforcement officers to meaningfully carry out forensic investigations, and witness documentation and protection is significantly limited. The passage of time and the efforts of various sectors of government and civil society aimed at addressing this weakness have brought some progress, but this capacity is still very far from what is needed.
The UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression noted the lack of security surrounding media practitioners in the Philippines. They noted charges of rebellion and libel as well as raids on media establishments.
On internal displacement
In areas of armed conflict and counterinsurgency operations, large displacements of civilian populations are a common occurrence.
We continue to witness a repeated exodus of civilians marching down dirt roads with their belongings, livestock and children in tow.
Improvements in transportation and passable roads are needed so that evacuation can be done in a manner that expedites removal of civilians from the front lines and saves lives.
Public declarations from the Department of National Defense on how the Armed Forces of the Philippines should crush the Abu Sayyaf foreshadow further tension and conflict.
Protection of children
Laws for the protection of children, such as the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act, look good on paper. But visits by the CHR tell a different story. At one point, 40 children were found to have been detained, for more than eight hours, in violation of the law.
We also found that detention facilities are congested and poorly ventilated. They lack clean toilets, clean water, medicine and beds. Children sleep on the floor.
Many fall ill.
It has also been found that children are at times kept in the same facilities as adults. This is unacceptable since adults may subject them to harassment, torture or rape.
In a position to do good
On July 27, the President will be giving her last State of the Nation Address. When she leaves office, she will have served as President for more than nine years. Having been in power longer than usual, she should have been in a position to do more good.
Her ascension to power held the promise that our situation could only get better. However, human rights violations have escalated since she took office.
The current administration has several months left to turn things around. Whether it will do so is an open question.
(Leila de Lima is the chairperson of the Commission on Human Rights)
See:
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view/20090723-216804/Human-rights-violations-rise
Command responsibility
In my past blogs, I discussed the need to enforce the international law doctrine of command responsibility in the domestic legal system of the Philippines, because it is one of the best tools against the criminal and obnoxious human rights abuses, tortures, extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances being committed by power-hungry government officials, trigger-happy military and police officers, and their soul-less underlings in the underworld. I am glad that the incumbent Speaker, despite all his faults and mistakes as the leader of our pork barrel-conscious lawmakers, has proposed last week a bill along this line. I am sure the President and her military and police sycophants will oppose the idea. I am not raising my hopes prematurely at this time. At any rate, let me reproduce the news item thereon verbatim.
Bill to place killings on execs’ shoulders
By Leila Salaverria
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 02:19:00 07/26/2009
MANILA, Philippines—Speaker Prospero Nograles wants to have government officials punished for failing to check extrajudicial killings in their jurisdictions, noting that the officials were taking government money to maintain law and order.
Nograles has filed a bill that says any public officer, person in authority or his agent would be presumed administratively negligent, except in areas of conflict or combat zones, “if there is an increase in the number of extrajudicial killing or ‘salvaging’ in his area of responsibility, as determined by the Commission on Human Rights (CHR), despite the continuous allocation and disbursement of peace and order and intelligence funds or similar allocations.”
The bill also seeks the preventive suspension of public officials or agents facing charges of failing to take action to prevent extrajudicial killings.
“The inaction, inability or unwillingness to solve extrajudicial killings by public officers despite the availability of peace and order and intelligence funds and other resources at their disposal, constitutes negligence or dereliction of duty to serve the people,” Nograles said in a statement.
He said that if public money was obtained for peace and order purposes, there should be satisfactory results not only in investigating the killings, but also in preventing them.
His bill also seeks to designate “salvaging” or extrajudicial killings by any public officer, person of authority or his agent as a heinous crime punishable by the maximum penalty prescribed by law.
“At present, the Philippines is one of the countries with the highest number of outstanding cases of extrajudicial killings still unsolved after many decades, with the perpetrators left unpunished,” he said.
Nograles’ hometown, Davao City, is one of the areas where “salvaging” has been rampant. The CHR is investigating the alleged existence of the group Davao Death Squad that carries out vigilante-style executions.
Nograles’ political rival, Davao City Mayor Rodrigo Duterte, has denied the city government is involved in the operations of the group.
Nograles said that with the filing of his “antisalvaging” bill, there would be no need for the House of Representatives to investigate the summary executions in Davao City.
See:
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view/20090726-217237/Bill-to-place-killings-on-execs-shoulders
Bill to place killings on execs’ shoulders
By Leila Salaverria
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 02:19:00 07/26/2009
MANILA, Philippines—Speaker Prospero Nograles wants to have government officials punished for failing to check extrajudicial killings in their jurisdictions, noting that the officials were taking government money to maintain law and order.
Nograles has filed a bill that says any public officer, person in authority or his agent would be presumed administratively negligent, except in areas of conflict or combat zones, “if there is an increase in the number of extrajudicial killing or ‘salvaging’ in his area of responsibility, as determined by the Commission on Human Rights (CHR), despite the continuous allocation and disbursement of peace and order and intelligence funds or similar allocations.”
The bill also seeks the preventive suspension of public officials or agents facing charges of failing to take action to prevent extrajudicial killings.
“The inaction, inability or unwillingness to solve extrajudicial killings by public officers despite the availability of peace and order and intelligence funds and other resources at their disposal, constitutes negligence or dereliction of duty to serve the people,” Nograles said in a statement.
He said that if public money was obtained for peace and order purposes, there should be satisfactory results not only in investigating the killings, but also in preventing them.
His bill also seeks to designate “salvaging” or extrajudicial killings by any public officer, person of authority or his agent as a heinous crime punishable by the maximum penalty prescribed by law.
“At present, the Philippines is one of the countries with the highest number of outstanding cases of extrajudicial killings still unsolved after many decades, with the perpetrators left unpunished,” he said.
Nograles’ hometown, Davao City, is one of the areas where “salvaging” has been rampant. The CHR is investigating the alleged existence of the group Davao Death Squad that carries out vigilante-style executions.
Nograles’ political rival, Davao City Mayor Rodrigo Duterte, has denied the city government is involved in the operations of the group.
Nograles said that with the filing of his “antisalvaging” bill, there would be no need for the House of Representatives to investigate the summary executions in Davao City.
See:
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view/20090726-217237/Bill-to-place-killings-on-execs-shoulders
State of the nation
For legal research purposes of the visitors of this blog, I am reproducing verbatim a recent commentary published by the Philippine Daily Inquirer on the state of the nation based on economic and other data and analyses from reliable research and public interest groups in the country, knowing fully well that social justice is meaningless and empty in the face of the poverty, disease and ignorance of the poorest of the poor in the country who continue to wallow in the sea of hopelessness and despair. Let not the repulsive self-glorification on the part of Pres. Gloria Arroyo and her propagandists deceive and lull us.
Sona 2001 revisited
Performance against targets
By Ibon Foundation
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 06:54:00 07/26/2009
ECONOMIC growth under the administration of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo is higher than that of her three predecessors.
Growth in gross domestic product (GDP) since 2001 has averaged 4.8 percent annually compared with 4.6 percent in the Aquino administration (1986-1991), 3.1 percent in the Ramos administration (1992-1998) and 3.9 percent in the Estrada administration (1999-2000).
Yet, the economy has become more distorted in the Arroyo administration and the gains from this growth and economic policy in general have gone to only a few people. Most Filipinos have not felt the gains.
The targets listed here were set by Ms Arroyo in her first State of the Nation Address (Sona) on July 23, 2001.
1. “Our challenge is clear: sugpuin ang kahirapan [reduce poverty incidence].”
An increase of 530,642 in the number of poor families to 4.7 million between 2000 and 2006. (NSCB, using low official poverty lines)
A 2.1-million increase in the number of poor Filipinos to 27.6 million between 2000 and 2006. (NSCB, using low official poverty lines)
Meanwhile, the net income of the Top 1,000 corporations in the Philippines increased 490 percent between 2001 and 2007, from P116 billion to P686 billion. (BW)
In 2006, the net worth of the 20 richest Filipinos – including close Arroyo allies Lucio Tan, Enrique Razon Jr., Eduardo Cojuangco Jr. and Enrique Aboitiz – was P801 billion ($15.6 billion), which was equivalent to the combined income for the year of the poorest 10.4 million Filipino families. (Forbes Asia , NSCB)
2. “The way to fight poverty is to create jobs, not destroy them.”
The period 2001-2008 saw one of the longest periods of sustained high unemployment in the country – the true unemployment rate averaged 11.2 percent. (NSO, Ibon estimates)
A 621,000-increase in unemployment between January 2001 and April 2009 to 4.2 million. (NSO, Ibon estimates)
A 1.9-million increase in underemployment between January 2001 and April 2009 to 6.6 million. (NSO)
Combined unemployment and underemployment increased 2.5 million between January 2001 and April 2009 to 10.8 million. (NSO, Ibon estimates)
The quality of jobs has worsened: Part-time work increased by 5.9 million and now accounts for 14.3 million or 2 out of every 5 jobs. Moreover, those “with jobs but not working” more than doubled and increased by 489,000 to 839,000. (NSO)
The period 2001-2008 saw the biggest number of Filipinos going abroad to find jobs –deployment averaged 990,000 annually compared with 469,709 in the Aquino administration, 713,505 in the Ramos administration and 839,324 in the Estrada administration. Some 1.24 million were deployed last year or 3,400 Filipinos leaving every day. (POEA) There are more than 9 million Filipinos forced to find work abroad. (DFA-CFO)
3. ‘‘The complaint of the masses about high prices and inadequate wages should be addressed.”
The gap between the minimum wage in Metro Manila and the family-living wage more than doubled to P535 in 2008 (minimum wage of P382, family living wage of P917) from just P257 in 2001 (minimum wage of P252, family living wage of P509). (Dole, NWPC)
Nominal minimum wages are stagnant and barely able to keep up with inflation. While nominal wages in Metro Manila increased from P252 in 2001 to P382 in 2008—or a P130 increase – the real increase was worth just P12 because of inflation. (Dole, Ibon estimates)
4. “To reduce excessive friction in labor and management relations, we will go the extra mile to work for industrial peace.”
Since 2001, 62 workers have been extrajudicially killed and 15 others forcibly disappeared. (Karapatan) There have also been 1,478 cases of trade union human rights violations, with 116,356 victims. (CTUHR)
5. “With regard to the fiscal sector, we will control the budget deficit by collecting taxes vigorously and spending money prudently.”
The cumulative national government deficit from 2001 to May 2009 was P1.29 trillion –triple the deficits of the Aquino, Ramos and Estrada administrations combined. (BTr)
The Arroyo administration has paid P4.8 trillion in debt service since 2001—this is two-and-a-half times the P1.8 billion in debt payments made over 15 years by the Aquino, Ramos and Estrada administrations combined. (BTr)
Yet, government debt continued to rise to P4.23 trillion in March 2009, almost double the P2.17-trillion debt inherited from the Estrada administration. The Arroyo administration has effectively been borrowing an additional P256.8 billion annually since coming to power. (BTr)
6. “A social bias toward the disadvantaged to balance our economic development plan. Nurture members of our society left by progress. ”
The Arroyo administration (2001-2009) allotted 15.1 percent of the national budget to education which is lower than that of the Estrada administration (18 percent) and that of the Ramos administration (16.6 percent). (DBM)
To health, it allotted only 1.8 percent of the national budget which is lower than that of Estrada (2.4 percent), Ramos (2.5 percent) and Aquino (3.1 percent). (DBM)
To housing, it allotted only 0.4 percent of the national budget which is lower than that of Estrada (1.0 percent), Ramos (0.7 percent) and Aquino (0.5 percent). (DBM)
In 2009, the Arroyo administration is spending P6 per Filipino a day on education, P1 on health and 12 centavos on housing – while paying the equivalent of P21 for debt service. (Ibon computations based on DBM data)
7. “Increase the chances of Filipino children finishing school … [knowledge] for the masses.”
The number of out-of-school children and youth increased by 2.45 million between school years 2000-2001 and 2008-2009, consisting of an additional 1.62 million children aged 7-12 and an additional 822,097 children aged 13-16 or a total of 4.69 million. (DepEd)
The number of elementary-age out-of-school children increased by 1.62 million between school years 2000-2001 and 2008-2009 to 2.04 million.
The number of high school-age out-of-school youth increased by 822,097 between school years 2000-2001 and 2008-2009 to 2.66 million.
A total of 1.95 million of these children and youth—consisting of 1.59 million of elementary-age children and 360,000 of high-school age children—is directly due to the deterioration of participation rates during the Arroyo administration. (Ibon computations based on DepEd data)
Elementary-school-participation rate dropped from 96.8 percent in school year 2000-2001 to 85.1 percent in 2008-2009; the high-school-participation rate dropped from 66.1 percent to 60.7 percent over the same period. (DepEd)
8. “There can be a million new jobs in agriculture and fisheries [within the year] …
I don’t want the one million new jobs to come in the long term.”
An average of 258,200 agricultural jobs was created annually in the past eight years—from 10.25 million agricultural-sector jobs in 2000, the year before Arroyo came to power, to 12.32 million in 2008. (NSO)
The share of agriculture in GDP shrank to its lowest level – 18.1 percent in 2008. (NSCB)
9. “We will strive to achieve rice self-sufficiency.”
Rice imports increased 280 percent from 639,000 tons in 2001 to a record 2.4 million tons in 2008. (DA)
10. “Cheap rice and prosperous farmers.”
The price of rice increased 68 percent between 2000, the year before Ms Arroyo came to power, and 2008: regular-milled rice to P29.38 a kilo from P17.59 and well-milled rice to P32.71 a kilo from P19.45 in 2000. (DA)
11. “Every year, government will distribute 200,000 hectares for agrarian reform: 100,000 of private land and 100,000 hectares of public land, including 100 ancestral-domain titles for indigenous peoples.”
The Department of Agrarian Reform distributed an average of 119,301 hectares annually in 2001-2008, smaller than that of Estrada (121,274 ha), Ramos (296,395 ha) and Aquino (169,063 ha). No equivalent data are available for land distributed by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
12. “Information and communications technology will jumpstart our old stalling economy and make it leapfrog into the new economy.”
The business process outsourcing industry rapidly grew from 5,600 employees and $56 million in revenue in 2001 to 372,000 employees and $6.1 billion in revenue in 2008. (Neda) But in 2008 the sector still accounted for just 1.1 percent of total employment and only about 2 percent of GDP. (Ibon computations based on NSCB data)
The manufacturing sector, meanwhile, shrank to as small as that of the 1950s – 23.1 percent of GDP in 2008. (NSCB) The sector lost 51,000 jobs between January 2001 (2,885,000 jobs) and April 2009 (2,834,000). (NSO)
13. “Government is taking action to stop the increase in prices of basic necessities of workers. We are watching oil prices.”
The price of diesel rose 220 percent between 2001 (average P13.96 per liter) and 2008 (P44.31) and of gasoline by 180 percent (from P16.58 to P45.92). (Ibon monitoring)
The peso price per liter of Dubai crude has increased by an average of P0.16 per month since January 2001 – yet the pump price of diesel has increased by an average of P0.26 per month, which is excessive even if the effect of the RVAT law since November 2005 is factored in. (Ibon)
14. “Increase the number of categories of workers who need not pay taxes. ”
On average, every Filipino 15 years old and over paid the government an extra P5,059 in taxes over the last three years (2006-2008). This is equivalent to the additional P287 billion in taxes paid by Filipinos due to the imposition of RVAT in November 2005. (DOF, Ibon computations)
15. “Reduce corruption in the executive branch … investigate and prosecute corruption in high places … reduce corruption among elective officials… no one is above the law.”
The total amount of kickbacks, ill-gotten wealth and payoffs involved in just 16 major corruption cases reached P20.9 billion ($430 million). The amount remains substantial even if the interrupted NBN-ZTE and Cyber-Education deals are excluded. (Pagbabago! Research Working Group)
16. “We will enhance our relations with the United States, whose economic and military power continues to make it important as a factor in the affairs of the region and the nation.”
Since 2002, up to 500 US Special Forces personnel have been permanently deployed in Mindanao in a “forward operating base.” They participated in and supported combat operations, and built fixed facilities.
In addition, more than 40,000 US soldiers came to Albay, Basilan, Batanes, Capiz, Cavite, Cebu, Nueva Ecija, Laguna, Leyte, Masbate, Palawan, Pampanga, Bataan, Sorsogon, Sulu, Tarlac, Quezon and Zamboanga for just the largest “exercises” such as the annual Balikatan. This does not include scores of other smaller exercises—there were for instance 163 exercises in 2008—and concealed operations. (Ibon monitoring)
Ibon Foundation Inc., an independent development institution established in 1978, provides research, education, publications, information work and advocacy support on socioeconomic issues.)
Sources:
Bureau of Treasury (BTr), Department of Agriculture (DA),
Department of Budget and Management (DBM), Department of Education (DepEd), Department of Foreign Affairs-Commission on Filipinos
Overseas (DFA-CFO), National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB), National Statistics Office (NSO), National Wages and Productivity Council (NWPC), Philippine Overseas Employment
Administration (POEA), BusinessWorld Top 1,000 Corporations (BW), Forbes Asia, Center for Trade Union Human Rights (CTUHR), Karapatan and
Pagbabago! Research Working Group
See:
http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/talkofthetown/view/20090726-217262/Sona-2001-revisited
Sona 2001 revisited
Performance against targets
By Ibon Foundation
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 06:54:00 07/26/2009
ECONOMIC growth under the administration of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo is higher than that of her three predecessors.
Growth in gross domestic product (GDP) since 2001 has averaged 4.8 percent annually compared with 4.6 percent in the Aquino administration (1986-1991), 3.1 percent in the Ramos administration (1992-1998) and 3.9 percent in the Estrada administration (1999-2000).
Yet, the economy has become more distorted in the Arroyo administration and the gains from this growth and economic policy in general have gone to only a few people. Most Filipinos have not felt the gains.
The targets listed here were set by Ms Arroyo in her first State of the Nation Address (Sona) on July 23, 2001.
1. “Our challenge is clear: sugpuin ang kahirapan [reduce poverty incidence].”
An increase of 530,642 in the number of poor families to 4.7 million between 2000 and 2006. (NSCB, using low official poverty lines)
A 2.1-million increase in the number of poor Filipinos to 27.6 million between 2000 and 2006. (NSCB, using low official poverty lines)
Meanwhile, the net income of the Top 1,000 corporations in the Philippines increased 490 percent between 2001 and 2007, from P116 billion to P686 billion. (BW)
In 2006, the net worth of the 20 richest Filipinos – including close Arroyo allies Lucio Tan, Enrique Razon Jr., Eduardo Cojuangco Jr. and Enrique Aboitiz – was P801 billion ($15.6 billion), which was equivalent to the combined income for the year of the poorest 10.4 million Filipino families. (Forbes Asia , NSCB)
2. “The way to fight poverty is to create jobs, not destroy them.”
The period 2001-2008 saw one of the longest periods of sustained high unemployment in the country – the true unemployment rate averaged 11.2 percent. (NSO, Ibon estimates)
A 621,000-increase in unemployment between January 2001 and April 2009 to 4.2 million. (NSO, Ibon estimates)
A 1.9-million increase in underemployment between January 2001 and April 2009 to 6.6 million. (NSO)
Combined unemployment and underemployment increased 2.5 million between January 2001 and April 2009 to 10.8 million. (NSO, Ibon estimates)
The quality of jobs has worsened: Part-time work increased by 5.9 million and now accounts for 14.3 million or 2 out of every 5 jobs. Moreover, those “with jobs but not working” more than doubled and increased by 489,000 to 839,000. (NSO)
The period 2001-2008 saw the biggest number of Filipinos going abroad to find jobs –deployment averaged 990,000 annually compared with 469,709 in the Aquino administration, 713,505 in the Ramos administration and 839,324 in the Estrada administration. Some 1.24 million were deployed last year or 3,400 Filipinos leaving every day. (POEA) There are more than 9 million Filipinos forced to find work abroad. (DFA-CFO)
3. ‘‘The complaint of the masses about high prices and inadequate wages should be addressed.”
The gap between the minimum wage in Metro Manila and the family-living wage more than doubled to P535 in 2008 (minimum wage of P382, family living wage of P917) from just P257 in 2001 (minimum wage of P252, family living wage of P509). (Dole, NWPC)
Nominal minimum wages are stagnant and barely able to keep up with inflation. While nominal wages in Metro Manila increased from P252 in 2001 to P382 in 2008—or a P130 increase – the real increase was worth just P12 because of inflation. (Dole, Ibon estimates)
4. “To reduce excessive friction in labor and management relations, we will go the extra mile to work for industrial peace.”
Since 2001, 62 workers have been extrajudicially killed and 15 others forcibly disappeared. (Karapatan) There have also been 1,478 cases of trade union human rights violations, with 116,356 victims. (CTUHR)
5. “With regard to the fiscal sector, we will control the budget deficit by collecting taxes vigorously and spending money prudently.”
The cumulative national government deficit from 2001 to May 2009 was P1.29 trillion –triple the deficits of the Aquino, Ramos and Estrada administrations combined. (BTr)
The Arroyo administration has paid P4.8 trillion in debt service since 2001—this is two-and-a-half times the P1.8 billion in debt payments made over 15 years by the Aquino, Ramos and Estrada administrations combined. (BTr)
Yet, government debt continued to rise to P4.23 trillion in March 2009, almost double the P2.17-trillion debt inherited from the Estrada administration. The Arroyo administration has effectively been borrowing an additional P256.8 billion annually since coming to power. (BTr)
6. “A social bias toward the disadvantaged to balance our economic development plan. Nurture members of our society left by progress. ”
The Arroyo administration (2001-2009) allotted 15.1 percent of the national budget to education which is lower than that of the Estrada administration (18 percent) and that of the Ramos administration (16.6 percent). (DBM)
To health, it allotted only 1.8 percent of the national budget which is lower than that of Estrada (2.4 percent), Ramos (2.5 percent) and Aquino (3.1 percent). (DBM)
To housing, it allotted only 0.4 percent of the national budget which is lower than that of Estrada (1.0 percent), Ramos (0.7 percent) and Aquino (0.5 percent). (DBM)
In 2009, the Arroyo administration is spending P6 per Filipino a day on education, P1 on health and 12 centavos on housing – while paying the equivalent of P21 for debt service. (Ibon computations based on DBM data)
7. “Increase the chances of Filipino children finishing school … [knowledge] for the masses.”
The number of out-of-school children and youth increased by 2.45 million between school years 2000-2001 and 2008-2009, consisting of an additional 1.62 million children aged 7-12 and an additional 822,097 children aged 13-16 or a total of 4.69 million. (DepEd)
The number of elementary-age out-of-school children increased by 1.62 million between school years 2000-2001 and 2008-2009 to 2.04 million.
The number of high school-age out-of-school youth increased by 822,097 between school years 2000-2001 and 2008-2009 to 2.66 million.
A total of 1.95 million of these children and youth—consisting of 1.59 million of elementary-age children and 360,000 of high-school age children—is directly due to the deterioration of participation rates during the Arroyo administration. (Ibon computations based on DepEd data)
Elementary-school-participation rate dropped from 96.8 percent in school year 2000-2001 to 85.1 percent in 2008-2009; the high-school-participation rate dropped from 66.1 percent to 60.7 percent over the same period. (DepEd)
8. “There can be a million new jobs in agriculture and fisheries [within the year] …
I don’t want the one million new jobs to come in the long term.”
An average of 258,200 agricultural jobs was created annually in the past eight years—from 10.25 million agricultural-sector jobs in 2000, the year before Arroyo came to power, to 12.32 million in 2008. (NSO)
The share of agriculture in GDP shrank to its lowest level – 18.1 percent in 2008. (NSCB)
9. “We will strive to achieve rice self-sufficiency.”
Rice imports increased 280 percent from 639,000 tons in 2001 to a record 2.4 million tons in 2008. (DA)
10. “Cheap rice and prosperous farmers.”
The price of rice increased 68 percent between 2000, the year before Ms Arroyo came to power, and 2008: regular-milled rice to P29.38 a kilo from P17.59 and well-milled rice to P32.71 a kilo from P19.45 in 2000. (DA)
11. “Every year, government will distribute 200,000 hectares for agrarian reform: 100,000 of private land and 100,000 hectares of public land, including 100 ancestral-domain titles for indigenous peoples.”
The Department of Agrarian Reform distributed an average of 119,301 hectares annually in 2001-2008, smaller than that of Estrada (121,274 ha), Ramos (296,395 ha) and Aquino (169,063 ha). No equivalent data are available for land distributed by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
12. “Information and communications technology will jumpstart our old stalling economy and make it leapfrog into the new economy.”
The business process outsourcing industry rapidly grew from 5,600 employees and $56 million in revenue in 2001 to 372,000 employees and $6.1 billion in revenue in 2008. (Neda) But in 2008 the sector still accounted for just 1.1 percent of total employment and only about 2 percent of GDP. (Ibon computations based on NSCB data)
The manufacturing sector, meanwhile, shrank to as small as that of the 1950s – 23.1 percent of GDP in 2008. (NSCB) The sector lost 51,000 jobs between January 2001 (2,885,000 jobs) and April 2009 (2,834,000). (NSO)
13. “Government is taking action to stop the increase in prices of basic necessities of workers. We are watching oil prices.”
The price of diesel rose 220 percent between 2001 (average P13.96 per liter) and 2008 (P44.31) and of gasoline by 180 percent (from P16.58 to P45.92). (Ibon monitoring)
The peso price per liter of Dubai crude has increased by an average of P0.16 per month since January 2001 – yet the pump price of diesel has increased by an average of P0.26 per month, which is excessive even if the effect of the RVAT law since November 2005 is factored in. (Ibon)
14. “Increase the number of categories of workers who need not pay taxes. ”
On average, every Filipino 15 years old and over paid the government an extra P5,059 in taxes over the last three years (2006-2008). This is equivalent to the additional P287 billion in taxes paid by Filipinos due to the imposition of RVAT in November 2005. (DOF, Ibon computations)
15. “Reduce corruption in the executive branch … investigate and prosecute corruption in high places … reduce corruption among elective officials… no one is above the law.”
The total amount of kickbacks, ill-gotten wealth and payoffs involved in just 16 major corruption cases reached P20.9 billion ($430 million). The amount remains substantial even if the interrupted NBN-ZTE and Cyber-Education deals are excluded. (Pagbabago! Research Working Group)
16. “We will enhance our relations with the United States, whose economic and military power continues to make it important as a factor in the affairs of the region and the nation.”
Since 2002, up to 500 US Special Forces personnel have been permanently deployed in Mindanao in a “forward operating base.” They participated in and supported combat operations, and built fixed facilities.
In addition, more than 40,000 US soldiers came to Albay, Basilan, Batanes, Capiz, Cavite, Cebu, Nueva Ecija, Laguna, Leyte, Masbate, Palawan, Pampanga, Bataan, Sorsogon, Sulu, Tarlac, Quezon and Zamboanga for just the largest “exercises” such as the annual Balikatan. This does not include scores of other smaller exercises—there were for instance 163 exercises in 2008—and concealed operations. (Ibon monitoring)
Ibon Foundation Inc., an independent development institution established in 1978, provides research, education, publications, information work and advocacy support on socioeconomic issues.)
Sources:
Bureau of Treasury (BTr), Department of Agriculture (DA),
Department of Budget and Management (DBM), Department of Education (DepEd), Department of Foreign Affairs-Commission on Filipinos
Overseas (DFA-CFO), National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB), National Statistics Office (NSO), National Wages and Productivity Council (NWPC), Philippine Overseas Employment
Administration (POEA), BusinessWorld Top 1,000 Corporations (BW), Forbes Asia, Center for Trade Union Human Rights (CTUHR), Karapatan and
Pagbabago! Research Working Group
See:
http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/talkofthetown/view/20090726-217262/Sona-2001-revisited
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Weakened judiciary
I wish to reproduce verbatim hereinbelow a recent article of Purple Romero (ABA CBN Newsbreak) on the issue of the weakening independence of the Philippine judiciary under the administration of Pres. Gloria Arroyo, for legal research purposes of the visitors of this blog.
Judiciary independence compromised under GMA
Written by Purple S. Romero
Thursday, 16 July 2009
On the 100th anniversary of the Supreme Court, Pres. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo declared that redemption for the Philippines is well within its grasp because the highest court of the land is imbued with integrity.
“We proudly proclaim, as the Bible’s reading said today, that the kingdom of heaven is at hand, that God rules the Philippines, because we have a centennial Supreme Court that enjoys the great respect of our people because of its integrity,” she said in a speech she delivered before the jurists in June 2001, months after she replaced deposed President Joseph Estrada.
She went on to say that the judiciary is key in uplifting the moral standards of the government; hence the need to carefully select its members.
“Improving moral standards in government and society mainly involves the judiciary. This is because it is the judiciary which interprets what is right or wrong and what is lawful and what is not,” she explained. “Thus, it is essential that the process of the selection of the members of judiciary be in itself a model of high standards.”
Not a few would say, however, that the president failed to give justice to her own words, almost nine years into her term.
Control over JBC
Court observers said that Arroyo’s appointments to the Supreme Court have been determined more by loyalty to the Palace rather than independence and integrity.
Take the case of Sandiganbayan Justice Gregory Ong. In 2007, Newsbreak reported that the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC), the body which vets nominees for the judiciary to the president, sent a curiously long list of eight contenders for the replacement of retired Justice Romeo Callejo. Ong was one of the nominees.
Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano, a former JBC member, told Abs-cbnnews.com/Newsbreak that a shortlist for the SC usually contains three names; five at most.
Ong’s brother, Andrew, was a classmate of the President’s brother, Diosdado “Buboy” Macapagal Jr., at the Asian Institute of Management.
Arroyo eventually appointed Ong, but the SC nullified his appointment because his birth certificate showed that he is not a natural-born Filipino. The 1987 Constitution requires members of the judiciary to be natural-born Filipino citizens.
Court observers said that this showed the leaks in the selection process of the nominees, and the vulnerability of the JBC to the influence of Malacañang.
The JBC is composed of eight members: the chief justice, a senator and a congressman, the justice secretary, an SC retired jurist and representatives from the private sector, academe and Integrated Bar of the Philippines.
The last four, who serve as regular members, are appointed by the president.
So far, Pres. Arroyo has re-appointed three of them – retired SC Justice Regino Hermosisima, UST law dean Amado Dimayuga and IBP representative J. Conrado Castro.
She put Hermosisima, who was scheduled to retire last July 9, back to the JBC for the third time, making him the longest-serving JBC member.
This system of appointment, which is stipulated in the 1987 Constitution, has been recently criticized by civil society groups, however, because it allegedly encourages political loyalty.
Cayetano admitted that this perception has a leg to stand on. He said that the president could always tap some of his colleagues if she wants her pick to be included in the shortlist.
“Usually they don’t do that to members of Congress,” he told Abs-cbnnews.com/Newsbreak.
Decisions that divide
A porous appointment process invites questions on the independence of the justices appointed, Vincent Lazatin, executive director of Transparency and Accountability Network (TAN) said. TAN is a convenor in Supreme Court Appointments Watch, one of the SC watchdogs along with Bantay Korte Suprema which have been pushing for a more transparent process of choosing SC magistrates.
Pacifico Agabin, former dean of UP Law, holds a similar view. He said that while not all those who have been appointed by Arroyo have dubious credibility, a number have obviously voted in the favor of the president especially in cases crucial to her political survival.
“Some of the appointees toed the line for her,” he said.
The split between SC jurists on their decisions on key cases purportedly showed the dent that politics made on the independence of the highest court of the land.
He cited the case Neri v. Senate, where the SC, by a vote of 9-6, ruled that former socioeconomic planning Romulo Neri can invoke executive privilege in the Senate inquiry on the anomalous NBN-ZTE deal.
The decision kept Neri from answering questions which would show if the president pressured him to approve the aborted $300 million-deal.
Lazatin, on the other hand, cited the Lambino v. Comelec case. The SC, in a vote of 8-7, declared the petition of Sigaw ng Bayan to revise the Constitution through people’s initiative as unconstitutional. People’s initiative, according to Sec. 2, Article 17 of the 1987 charter is a mode to amend, not overhaul, the Constitution.
The SC was recently faced with another case involving charter change. Lawyers Oliver Lozano and Louis Biraogo asked the SC to nullify House Resolution 1109, which allows the House of Representatives to amend the charter as a constituent assembly (con-ass).
The SC dismissed the petition for being premature as the lower house is yet to adopt procedures for convening the con-ass and has not in fact, proposed any amendments.
However, moves to amend the charter would inevitably be questioned at the SC again as HR 1109 was intentionally passed to force the high tribunal to determine the voting requirement for a con-ass.
The 1987 Constitution states that amendments to the charter could be introduced by ¾ of all the members of Congress. However, it does not specify if the Senate and the lower house should vote jointly or separately.
This set off the alarm bells for the legal community and the public as well as Arroyo would have appointed 14 out of the 15 SC justices by the time she steps down in 2010.
Bigger budget
While Arroyo may have paralyzed the appointment process to the judiciary, it was under her term, however, when judges and justices were granted special allowances. Arroyo signed the Judicial Compensation Act of 2003, which provided judges and justices allowances equivalent to 100 percent of their salaries.
In May 2008, she also brought the three branches of the government together to form the Judicial Executive Legislative Advisory and Consultative Council (JELACC). The JELACC aimed to increase the budget of the judiciary.
The president has also stated in her budget speech for the years 2008 and 2009 that the judiciary is one of the top ten government departments given with the larger slice of the budget pie. For this year, the SC came in at tenth with P12.8 billion, while it ranked ninth in 2008 with P10.1 billion.
“Of the P12.1 billion allotted to the Judiciary, P423 million will be spent for the maintenance of 334 Halls of Justice; P600 million to fund 533 new positions for new court salas; and P20 million for the creation of positions for the third division of the Court of Tax Appeals,” she said.
However, a deeper look at the judiciary’s budget would show that it only increased nominally. The judiciary hardly had a one percent share in the national budget since 2003. In 2008, its funds were only over 0.84 percent of the national funds, while for 2009, it only has a 0.90 percent cut in overall appropriations.
Also, in 2008, the Department of Budget and Management slashed its proposed P14.6 billion-budget by P4 billion.
Open the process
In 2005, Arroyo allotted P161 million for the Judicial Reform Program, which was conceptualized under the term of Chief Justice Hilario Davide. The program aims to fix the problem on docket congestion, widen the access to justice and improve the administrative management of the judiciary.
The president, however, seemed to have failed in actualizing one of the crucial reforms aimed for by the program – and that is to insulate appointments to the judiciary from politics.
The next president then would need to go beyond lip service and ensure the independence of the judiciary by starting with the JBC, critics said. Cayetano suggested that the application and appointment process of the body should be made more transparent.
“It should be a two-pronged strategy…Fix the environment first, appoint good people,” he said.
Agabin seconded this. “The next president should appoint members of the JBC who are more independent and conscious of their position,” he stressed.
See:
http://newsbreak.com.ph/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6435&Itemid=88889005
Judiciary independence compromised under GMA
Written by Purple S. Romero
Thursday, 16 July 2009
On the 100th anniversary of the Supreme Court, Pres. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo declared that redemption for the Philippines is well within its grasp because the highest court of the land is imbued with integrity.
“We proudly proclaim, as the Bible’s reading said today, that the kingdom of heaven is at hand, that God rules the Philippines, because we have a centennial Supreme Court that enjoys the great respect of our people because of its integrity,” she said in a speech she delivered before the jurists in June 2001, months after she replaced deposed President Joseph Estrada.
She went on to say that the judiciary is key in uplifting the moral standards of the government; hence the need to carefully select its members.
“Improving moral standards in government and society mainly involves the judiciary. This is because it is the judiciary which interprets what is right or wrong and what is lawful and what is not,” she explained. “Thus, it is essential that the process of the selection of the members of judiciary be in itself a model of high standards.”
Not a few would say, however, that the president failed to give justice to her own words, almost nine years into her term.
Control over JBC
Court observers said that Arroyo’s appointments to the Supreme Court have been determined more by loyalty to the Palace rather than independence and integrity.
Take the case of Sandiganbayan Justice Gregory Ong. In 2007, Newsbreak reported that the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC), the body which vets nominees for the judiciary to the president, sent a curiously long list of eight contenders for the replacement of retired Justice Romeo Callejo. Ong was one of the nominees.
Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano, a former JBC member, told Abs-cbnnews.com/Newsbreak that a shortlist for the SC usually contains three names; five at most.
Ong’s brother, Andrew, was a classmate of the President’s brother, Diosdado “Buboy” Macapagal Jr., at the Asian Institute of Management.
Arroyo eventually appointed Ong, but the SC nullified his appointment because his birth certificate showed that he is not a natural-born Filipino. The 1987 Constitution requires members of the judiciary to be natural-born Filipino citizens.
Court observers said that this showed the leaks in the selection process of the nominees, and the vulnerability of the JBC to the influence of Malacañang.
The JBC is composed of eight members: the chief justice, a senator and a congressman, the justice secretary, an SC retired jurist and representatives from the private sector, academe and Integrated Bar of the Philippines.
The last four, who serve as regular members, are appointed by the president.
So far, Pres. Arroyo has re-appointed three of them – retired SC Justice Regino Hermosisima, UST law dean Amado Dimayuga and IBP representative J. Conrado Castro.
She put Hermosisima, who was scheduled to retire last July 9, back to the JBC for the third time, making him the longest-serving JBC member.
This system of appointment, which is stipulated in the 1987 Constitution, has been recently criticized by civil society groups, however, because it allegedly encourages political loyalty.
Cayetano admitted that this perception has a leg to stand on. He said that the president could always tap some of his colleagues if she wants her pick to be included in the shortlist.
“Usually they don’t do that to members of Congress,” he told Abs-cbnnews.com/Newsbreak.
Decisions that divide
A porous appointment process invites questions on the independence of the justices appointed, Vincent Lazatin, executive director of Transparency and Accountability Network (TAN) said. TAN is a convenor in Supreme Court Appointments Watch, one of the SC watchdogs along with Bantay Korte Suprema which have been pushing for a more transparent process of choosing SC magistrates.
Pacifico Agabin, former dean of UP Law, holds a similar view. He said that while not all those who have been appointed by Arroyo have dubious credibility, a number have obviously voted in the favor of the president especially in cases crucial to her political survival.
“Some of the appointees toed the line for her,” he said.
The split between SC jurists on their decisions on key cases purportedly showed the dent that politics made on the independence of the highest court of the land.
He cited the case Neri v. Senate, where the SC, by a vote of 9-6, ruled that former socioeconomic planning Romulo Neri can invoke executive privilege in the Senate inquiry on the anomalous NBN-ZTE deal.
The decision kept Neri from answering questions which would show if the president pressured him to approve the aborted $300 million-deal.
Lazatin, on the other hand, cited the Lambino v. Comelec case. The SC, in a vote of 8-7, declared the petition of Sigaw ng Bayan to revise the Constitution through people’s initiative as unconstitutional. People’s initiative, according to Sec. 2, Article 17 of the 1987 charter is a mode to amend, not overhaul, the Constitution.
The SC was recently faced with another case involving charter change. Lawyers Oliver Lozano and Louis Biraogo asked the SC to nullify House Resolution 1109, which allows the House of Representatives to amend the charter as a constituent assembly (con-ass).
The SC dismissed the petition for being premature as the lower house is yet to adopt procedures for convening the con-ass and has not in fact, proposed any amendments.
However, moves to amend the charter would inevitably be questioned at the SC again as HR 1109 was intentionally passed to force the high tribunal to determine the voting requirement for a con-ass.
The 1987 Constitution states that amendments to the charter could be introduced by ¾ of all the members of Congress. However, it does not specify if the Senate and the lower house should vote jointly or separately.
This set off the alarm bells for the legal community and the public as well as Arroyo would have appointed 14 out of the 15 SC justices by the time she steps down in 2010.
Bigger budget
While Arroyo may have paralyzed the appointment process to the judiciary, it was under her term, however, when judges and justices were granted special allowances. Arroyo signed the Judicial Compensation Act of 2003, which provided judges and justices allowances equivalent to 100 percent of their salaries.
In May 2008, she also brought the three branches of the government together to form the Judicial Executive Legislative Advisory and Consultative Council (JELACC). The JELACC aimed to increase the budget of the judiciary.
The president has also stated in her budget speech for the years 2008 and 2009 that the judiciary is one of the top ten government departments given with the larger slice of the budget pie. For this year, the SC came in at tenth with P12.8 billion, while it ranked ninth in 2008 with P10.1 billion.
“Of the P12.1 billion allotted to the Judiciary, P423 million will be spent for the maintenance of 334 Halls of Justice; P600 million to fund 533 new positions for new court salas; and P20 million for the creation of positions for the third division of the Court of Tax Appeals,” she said.
However, a deeper look at the judiciary’s budget would show that it only increased nominally. The judiciary hardly had a one percent share in the national budget since 2003. In 2008, its funds were only over 0.84 percent of the national funds, while for 2009, it only has a 0.90 percent cut in overall appropriations.
Also, in 2008, the Department of Budget and Management slashed its proposed P14.6 billion-budget by P4 billion.
Open the process
In 2005, Arroyo allotted P161 million for the Judicial Reform Program, which was conceptualized under the term of Chief Justice Hilario Davide. The program aims to fix the problem on docket congestion, widen the access to justice and improve the administrative management of the judiciary.
The president, however, seemed to have failed in actualizing one of the crucial reforms aimed for by the program – and that is to insulate appointments to the judiciary from politics.
The next president then would need to go beyond lip service and ensure the independence of the judiciary by starting with the JBC, critics said. Cayetano suggested that the application and appointment process of the body should be made more transparent.
“It should be a two-pronged strategy…Fix the environment first, appoint good people,” he said.
Agabin seconded this. “The next president should appoint members of the JBC who are more independent and conscious of their position,” he stressed.
See:
http://newsbreak.com.ph/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6435&Itemid=88889005
How poor are we?
How poor are the Filipinos? What is the degree of inequity in Philippine society?
In 2008, Philippine news media carried reports on the extent of the poverty of Philippine society.
As this juncture, I wish to recall the statistics because, as we all know, poverty is directly related to the dispensation of justice and the rule of law in any society.
The fast-growing population and the failure of household incomes to rise as fast as commodity prices have resulted in more poor Filipino families, according to the 2006 Official Poverty Statistics report released by the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB).
The report said 4.7 million families -- equivalent to 26.9 percent of the total number of Filipino families -- were poor in 2006, marking an increase from 4 million poor families in 2003.
It also said poverty incidence -- the proportion of those considered poor to the total number of families -- was at 26.9 percent in 2006, compared to 24.4 percent three years earlier.
Next week (July 27, 2009), Pres. Gloria Arroyo will deliver her state of the nation address. As usual, she will glorify herself and her administration.
But do not be misled. Let the statistics guide you.
Poverty incidence rose despite the average economic growth of 5.4 percent that the Philippines posted from 2004 to 2006. From the statistics, it may be concluded that the benefits of a growing economy are not trickling down to the poor.
The NSCB said that in 2006, the average poverty line for a family of five was determined to be at P6,274 a month. This meant that a family of five earning less than that amount was considered poor.
It also said a family of five could live on the minimum wage of P9,100 a month in 2006 without being poor.
The poverty threshold rose from P5,129 in 2003 because of inflation, or the increase in consumer prices.
In 2006, as many as 1.9 million families -- from 1.7 million in 2003 -- were considered “food-poor,” or those whose incomes fell below the minimum requirement for food expenditure set by the government, the NSCB said.
The food poverty incidence worsened from 10.2 percent of the total number of families in 2003 to 11 percent.
On an individual basis, 32.9 percent of the population, or 27.6 million Filipinos, were poor in 2006, the NSCB said. The figures showed deterioration from the 30 percent and 23.8 million, respectively, recorded in 2003.
There were 12.2 million Filipinos -- equivalent to 14.6 percent of the population -- who were food poor in 2006, showing deterioration from 10.8 million and 13.5 percent, respectively, in 2003.
Tawi-tawi, the southernmost province with 8 out of 10 families considered poor, was the poorest province in 2006. No wonder why our Muslim brothers in the south continue to rebel up to this time.
The year 2006 was the year when the government increased the rate of the value-added tax from 10 to 12 percent in compliance with the Reformed Value-Added Tax Law of 2005, which also expanded the coverage of the tax to include electricity and oil starting in November 2005.
The higher prices of commodities were the undesirable result of the government’s need to improve its revenue collection.
Showing an entirely different statistical picture, the office of Pres. Arroyo alleged that poverty incidence actually fell during the Arroyo administration. It claimed that poverty incidence dropped by 4.8 percentage points between 2000 and 2006, or from 27.2 percent to 22.4 percent of families for the six-year period. It alleged that poverty incidence would fall in the family income and expenditure survey in 2009, with primary spending in the national budget for antipoverty projects and programs up by P281 billion in 2006-2008, or a fivefold increase in budgetary allocations since the period 2003-2005 (assuming that such amount is not stolen by crooks in the Arroyo government).
The dream of Pres. Arroyo (which remains an impossible dream) is to reduce poverty incidence of between 17 and 20 percent by 2010, assuming the government would continue its policy of increasing spending for social services.
In January, the private polling firm Social Weather Stations released survey results showing that self-rated poverty had gone down to 46 percent from 52 percent in the fourth quarter of 2007. SWS data showed that the last time self-rated poverty went below 50 percent under the Arroyo administration was in June 2007 at 47 percent, down from 49 percent in August 2005.
The leftist Ibon Foundation presented an entirely different picture. It reported that in the Philippines, not only was poverty increasing, so were income inequalities. As the old line goes, the rich are getting richer while the poor are sinking deeper into poverty-- and this has proved especially true under the Arroyo administration.
Based on various years of the Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES), income distribution is skewed and has worsened since 1985. Over the period, the share of the poorest 60% of families in the national income decreased by 1.8 percentage points while the top 20% were able to increase their share by 1.2 percentage points.
According to the 2003 FIES, the richest 20% of the population accounted for 53% of total national income while the bottom 20% got only 4.63 percent. The income of the richest 10% of households was 21 times that of the poorest 10 percent.
Income inequality was primarily due to the differences in the ownership and control of the country’s resources within the regions, provinces, urban or rural areas, and economic activities. In short, inequality was still the result of a few foreign and local elite monopolizing the country’s resources and employing the rest of the people, as shown by examining the country’s agriculture and industry sectors.
Agriculture was still the country’s major economic activity, directly and indirectly accounting for around three-fourths of the gross domestic product (GDP) and 40% of transactions in the market while employing 70% of the labor force. Yet the majority of the country’s poor still live in the countryside, precisely because land remains concentrated in the hands of a relatively few land-owing families.
Based on the latest census of agriculture, less than one-third of total landowners still own more than 80% of the country’s agricultural land. Fifty two percent of the farms in the country covering 51% of total farm area remain under tenancy, lease, and other forms of tenurial arrangements. The average farm size is two hectares– subsistence and household level– while 49% of the farms still use primitive
technology such as plows and carabaos. Forty-two percent of these farms are not even owned by the farmers.
The dominant families in the country are the land-owning ones whose interests also extend to trade, banking and finance, real estate, as well as manufacturing. The country’s regions can virtually be subdivided into fiefdoms according to the ownership of lands by these families, who include Danding Cojuangco who owns 19,000 hectares all over the archipelago; the Roxases with 8,500 hectares in Batangas; the Cojuangcos (of Cory Aquino) who own the 6,000-hectare Hacienda Luisita in Tarlac; and others such as the Floirendos of Southern Mindanao, Dys of Northern Luzon and the Zubiris of Bukidnon, the Ibon Foundation said.
To defend their land monopoly they have also stuffed the legislature with representatives from within their own clans. According to a study by the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism, some 60% of the membership of the 12th Congress (2001-2004) came from the land-owning families or represent their interests in legislation.
On the other hand, foreign and local capitalists dominate local industry and services. Transnational corporations (TNCs) are concentrated to a large extent in manufacturing, followed by wholesale and retail trade and financial intermediation. In manufacturing, TNCs account for the bulk of the revenues derived by the top 1,000 corporations.
The largest TNCs operating in the country include the likes of Texas Instruments, Royal Dutch Shell, Toshiba, Chevron-Texaco, Nestlé, Fujitsu, Philips, Zuellig and Panasonic. By nationality, over half of the TNC revenues are accounted for by Japan (29.4%) and the US (23.8%), distantly followed by the Netherlands (7.3%), Great Britain (6.8%), Switzerland (3.5%) and Germany (1.6%).
The largest transnational banks (TNBs) operating in the country are Citibank, Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation (HSBC), Standard Chartered and Deutsche Bank, and ING Bank, with the top five TNBs net income reaching P5.5 billion in 2004.
Local family conglomerates are owned and controlled by the country’s biggest landlords and businessmen. The top ten conglomerates in 2004 were those owned by the Cojuangcos (San Miguel Corporation); Gokongweis (JG Summit); Ayalas (Ayala Corporation); Henry Sy (SM Investments); Lopezes (Benpres Holdings); George Go and family (Equitable PCI, which has lately merged with Banco de Oro owned by the Sy family); Concepcions (RFM Corporation); Villars (Filinvest); Pangilinans (Metro Pacific); and Andres Soriano and family (A. Soriano Corporation). Their revenues in 2004 totaled P334 billion.
The Arroyo camp predicted in 2006 that per capita income or the share of every Filipino in the country’s wealth as measured by the gross domestic product (GDP) would hit $1,400 (approximately P71,834). But even government economic planners had to admit that the national wealth was not shared equally.
In fact, if the shares to total income defined in the 2003 FIES were used to allocate the 2006 GDP, the poorest 10% would have a per capita annual income of just P2,781 while the richest 10% would have a per capita income of P56,695 (based on an average family size of five).
This inequality is further reflected in the huge gap between the wealth of the country’s richest individuals and families and the poorest Filipinos. The US$12.4 billion net worth as of 2006 of the country’s 10 richest is equivalent to the combined annual income of the poorest 9.8 million households (i.e. P625 billion in 2003).
Hence, according to Ibon Foundation, more than ever, economic growth under Arroyo continues to measure the growing profits and wealth of a few rather than the welfare of the many. But in the context of a Philippine economic system that favors the rich and powerful, it should not be surprising that while poverty increases in the country, so does inequality.
See:
http://archive.inquirer.net/view.php?db=1&story_id=123058
See:
http://info.ibon.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=132&Itemid=50
In 2008, Philippine news media carried reports on the extent of the poverty of Philippine society.
As this juncture, I wish to recall the statistics because, as we all know, poverty is directly related to the dispensation of justice and the rule of law in any society.
The fast-growing population and the failure of household incomes to rise as fast as commodity prices have resulted in more poor Filipino families, according to the 2006 Official Poverty Statistics report released by the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB).
The report said 4.7 million families -- equivalent to 26.9 percent of the total number of Filipino families -- were poor in 2006, marking an increase from 4 million poor families in 2003.
It also said poverty incidence -- the proportion of those considered poor to the total number of families -- was at 26.9 percent in 2006, compared to 24.4 percent three years earlier.
Next week (July 27, 2009), Pres. Gloria Arroyo will deliver her state of the nation address. As usual, she will glorify herself and her administration.
But do not be misled. Let the statistics guide you.
Poverty incidence rose despite the average economic growth of 5.4 percent that the Philippines posted from 2004 to 2006. From the statistics, it may be concluded that the benefits of a growing economy are not trickling down to the poor.
The NSCB said that in 2006, the average poverty line for a family of five was determined to be at P6,274 a month. This meant that a family of five earning less than that amount was considered poor.
It also said a family of five could live on the minimum wage of P9,100 a month in 2006 without being poor.
The poverty threshold rose from P5,129 in 2003 because of inflation, or the increase in consumer prices.
In 2006, as many as 1.9 million families -- from 1.7 million in 2003 -- were considered “food-poor,” or those whose incomes fell below the minimum requirement for food expenditure set by the government, the NSCB said.
The food poverty incidence worsened from 10.2 percent of the total number of families in 2003 to 11 percent.
On an individual basis, 32.9 percent of the population, or 27.6 million Filipinos, were poor in 2006, the NSCB said. The figures showed deterioration from the 30 percent and 23.8 million, respectively, recorded in 2003.
There were 12.2 million Filipinos -- equivalent to 14.6 percent of the population -- who were food poor in 2006, showing deterioration from 10.8 million and 13.5 percent, respectively, in 2003.
Tawi-tawi, the southernmost province with 8 out of 10 families considered poor, was the poorest province in 2006. No wonder why our Muslim brothers in the south continue to rebel up to this time.
The year 2006 was the year when the government increased the rate of the value-added tax from 10 to 12 percent in compliance with the Reformed Value-Added Tax Law of 2005, which also expanded the coverage of the tax to include electricity and oil starting in November 2005.
The higher prices of commodities were the undesirable result of the government’s need to improve its revenue collection.
Showing an entirely different statistical picture, the office of Pres. Arroyo alleged that poverty incidence actually fell during the Arroyo administration. It claimed that poverty incidence dropped by 4.8 percentage points between 2000 and 2006, or from 27.2 percent to 22.4 percent of families for the six-year period. It alleged that poverty incidence would fall in the family income and expenditure survey in 2009, with primary spending in the national budget for antipoverty projects and programs up by P281 billion in 2006-2008, or a fivefold increase in budgetary allocations since the period 2003-2005 (assuming that such amount is not stolen by crooks in the Arroyo government).
The dream of Pres. Arroyo (which remains an impossible dream) is to reduce poverty incidence of between 17 and 20 percent by 2010, assuming the government would continue its policy of increasing spending for social services.
In January, the private polling firm Social Weather Stations released survey results showing that self-rated poverty had gone down to 46 percent from 52 percent in the fourth quarter of 2007. SWS data showed that the last time self-rated poverty went below 50 percent under the Arroyo administration was in June 2007 at 47 percent, down from 49 percent in August 2005.
The leftist Ibon Foundation presented an entirely different picture. It reported that in the Philippines, not only was poverty increasing, so were income inequalities. As the old line goes, the rich are getting richer while the poor are sinking deeper into poverty-- and this has proved especially true under the Arroyo administration.
Based on various years of the Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES), income distribution is skewed and has worsened since 1985. Over the period, the share of the poorest 60% of families in the national income decreased by 1.8 percentage points while the top 20% were able to increase their share by 1.2 percentage points.
According to the 2003 FIES, the richest 20% of the population accounted for 53% of total national income while the bottom 20% got only 4.63 percent. The income of the richest 10% of households was 21 times that of the poorest 10 percent.
Income inequality was primarily due to the differences in the ownership and control of the country’s resources within the regions, provinces, urban or rural areas, and economic activities. In short, inequality was still the result of a few foreign and local elite monopolizing the country’s resources and employing the rest of the people, as shown by examining the country’s agriculture and industry sectors.
Agriculture was still the country’s major economic activity, directly and indirectly accounting for around three-fourths of the gross domestic product (GDP) and 40% of transactions in the market while employing 70% of the labor force. Yet the majority of the country’s poor still live in the countryside, precisely because land remains concentrated in the hands of a relatively few land-owing families.
Based on the latest census of agriculture, less than one-third of total landowners still own more than 80% of the country’s agricultural land. Fifty two percent of the farms in the country covering 51% of total farm area remain under tenancy, lease, and other forms of tenurial arrangements. The average farm size is two hectares– subsistence and household level– while 49% of the farms still use primitive
technology such as plows and carabaos. Forty-two percent of these farms are not even owned by the farmers.
The dominant families in the country are the land-owning ones whose interests also extend to trade, banking and finance, real estate, as well as manufacturing. The country’s regions can virtually be subdivided into fiefdoms according to the ownership of lands by these families, who include Danding Cojuangco who owns 19,000 hectares all over the archipelago; the Roxases with 8,500 hectares in Batangas; the Cojuangcos (of Cory Aquino) who own the 6,000-hectare Hacienda Luisita in Tarlac; and others such as the Floirendos of Southern Mindanao, Dys of Northern Luzon and the Zubiris of Bukidnon, the Ibon Foundation said.
To defend their land monopoly they have also stuffed the legislature with representatives from within their own clans. According to a study by the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism, some 60% of the membership of the 12th Congress (2001-2004) came from the land-owning families or represent their interests in legislation.
On the other hand, foreign and local capitalists dominate local industry and services. Transnational corporations (TNCs) are concentrated to a large extent in manufacturing, followed by wholesale and retail trade and financial intermediation. In manufacturing, TNCs account for the bulk of the revenues derived by the top 1,000 corporations.
The largest TNCs operating in the country include the likes of Texas Instruments, Royal Dutch Shell, Toshiba, Chevron-Texaco, Nestlé, Fujitsu, Philips, Zuellig and Panasonic. By nationality, over half of the TNC revenues are accounted for by Japan (29.4%) and the US (23.8%), distantly followed by the Netherlands (7.3%), Great Britain (6.8%), Switzerland (3.5%) and Germany (1.6%).
The largest transnational banks (TNBs) operating in the country are Citibank, Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation (HSBC), Standard Chartered and Deutsche Bank, and ING Bank, with the top five TNBs net income reaching P5.5 billion in 2004.
Local family conglomerates are owned and controlled by the country’s biggest landlords and businessmen. The top ten conglomerates in 2004 were those owned by the Cojuangcos (San Miguel Corporation); Gokongweis (JG Summit); Ayalas (Ayala Corporation); Henry Sy (SM Investments); Lopezes (Benpres Holdings); George Go and family (Equitable PCI, which has lately merged with Banco de Oro owned by the Sy family); Concepcions (RFM Corporation); Villars (Filinvest); Pangilinans (Metro Pacific); and Andres Soriano and family (A. Soriano Corporation). Their revenues in 2004 totaled P334 billion.
The Arroyo camp predicted in 2006 that per capita income or the share of every Filipino in the country’s wealth as measured by the gross domestic product (GDP) would hit $1,400 (approximately P71,834). But even government economic planners had to admit that the national wealth was not shared equally.
In fact, if the shares to total income defined in the 2003 FIES were used to allocate the 2006 GDP, the poorest 10% would have a per capita annual income of just P2,781 while the richest 10% would have a per capita income of P56,695 (based on an average family size of five).
This inequality is further reflected in the huge gap between the wealth of the country’s richest individuals and families and the poorest Filipinos. The US$12.4 billion net worth as of 2006 of the country’s 10 richest is equivalent to the combined annual income of the poorest 9.8 million households (i.e. P625 billion in 2003).
Hence, according to Ibon Foundation, more than ever, economic growth under Arroyo continues to measure the growing profits and wealth of a few rather than the welfare of the many. But in the context of a Philippine economic system that favors the rich and powerful, it should not be surprising that while poverty increases in the country, so does inequality.
See:
http://archive.inquirer.net/view.php?db=1&story_id=123058
See:
http://info.ibon.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=132&Itemid=50
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Culture of tourism
Let me digress a little from my usual focus on Philippine law and justice.
The Philippines is trying its best to develop and promote the culture of tourism among its people.
Recently, it adopted the new Tourism Act of 2009 (R.A. No. 9693) to entice foreign investors to do business in its expanding tourism sector.
It is our way of meeting head-on the crippling global economic crisis.
In addition to the fact that the Philippines is the showcase of American-type democracy in Asia and is the first republic in Asia (circa 1898), more importantly, it is a beautiful archipelago of more than 7,000 amazing tropical islands with magnetic, virgin and refreshing beaches, rivers, lakes, caves, forests, and mountains.
Were it not for its corrupt political leaders, torture-happy police and military officers, violent bank robbers and kidnappers in notorious cities and poverty-stricken towns, archaic and fraud-prone election systems and procedures these past decades, and its very tragic experiences under the arrogant, abusive and exploitative imperialism of Spain, America and Japan (1521 to 1945), the Philippines could have maintained (or even exceeded) its nostalgic rank as the second most economically developed country in Asia, next only to Japan (circa 1960s).
Considering the talents, skills, success-orientation, socio-psychological flexibility, and free spirit of the Filipinos, I dare say the Philippines could have easily surpassed Hongkong, Singapore, Taiwan and Korea in the 1960s to the 1970s were it not for the abovecited pathetic factors.
At any rate, sour-graping aside, I have summarized the salient parts of the newly adopted R.A. No. 9593, Tourism Act of 2009, for the benefit of lawyers and legal researchers visiting this blog for updates on current Philippine conditions.
Salient Parts of R.A. No. 9593, The Tourism Act of 2009:
1. The law strengthens the Department of Tourism (DOT) and the Duty Free Philippines Corp. (DFPC). It creates the Tourism Infrastructure and Enterprise Zone Authority (TIEZA) and the Tourism Promotion Board (TPB) in order to promote the “culture of tourism” among Filipinos.
2. A Tourism Enterprise Zone (TEZ) and its operator must be registered with the TIEZA.
3. A registered Tourism Enterprise (TE) located within a registered TEZ is given various fiscal and non-fiscal incentives by the said law, the same to be implemented by the TIEZA, to wit:
3.1. Income tax Holiday for 6 years for new TEs, extendible for a maximum period of 6 years if the investor would undertake substantial expansion or upgrade of its facilities.
3.2. Net Operating Losses may be carried over as deduction from gross income for 6 years following the year of the loss.
3.3. Gross Income Tax of 5% (upon expiration of the income tax holiday period), in lieu of all other national and local taxes, license fees, imposts and assessments (except real estate taxes imposed by local government units [LGU] and TIEZA regulatory fees).
3.4. Importation Capital Investment and Equipment is exempted from “all taxes and customs duties.”
3.5. Importation of Transportation and Spare Parts is exempted from “customs duties and national taxes”, provided they are not locally manufactured at fair prices.
3.6. Importation of Goods by TEs within a TEZ is exempted from “all taxes and customs duties”. (TEs are prohibited from engaging in wholesale or retail business in competition with the DFPC).
3.7. Local Purchase of Goods and Services is entitled to Tax Credit equivalent to “all national internal revenue taxes paid”.
3.8. Social Responsibility Incentive in the form of a maximum tax deduction of 50% of the cost of environmental protection or cultural heritage preservation activities, sustainable livelihood programs for local communities and other similar activities.
3.9. Employment of Foreign Nationals is allowed in “executive, supervisory, technical or advisory positions” for such periods as may be allowed by the TIEZA.
3.10. Special Investor’s Resident Visa is given by the TIEZA to a foreign investor with an investment of at least US $200,000.00 in a registered TE.
3.11. Working Visas are given by the TIEZA to foreign personnel with highly technical skills. They are renewable every 2 years. The alien must first secure from the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) an Alien Employment Certificate (AEC).
3.12. Incentives in relation to Foreign Currency Transactions are subject to R.A. No. 7653 (Central Bank Act). The incentives are as follows:
3.12.1. Repatriation of Investments. The full amount of the foreign investment may be repatriated upon its liquidation in the currency in which it was originally made and at the exchange rate at the time of the repatriation.
3.12.2. Remittance of Foreign Exchange. The earnings from a foreign investment may be repatriated in the currency in which it was originally made and at the exchange rate at the time of the repatriation.
3.12.3. Foreign Loans and Contracts. Payments of interest and principal on foreign loans and obligations arising from technological assistance contracts may be remitted at the exchange rate at the time of remittance.
3.12.4. Requisition of Investment. A property of a TE may be requisitioned (expropriated) only in times of war or national emergency and with just compensation. The compensation shall be repatriated in full.
3.12.5. Lease and Ownership of Land. (See R.A. No. 7652, Investors Lease Act). Lands and buildings in a TEZ may be leased to foreign investors for 50 years, renewable for not more than 25 years. The leasehold right may be sold or assigned.
4. Incentives for TEs outside a TEZ are those given under the (a) Omnibus Investments Code of 1987 (E.O. No. 226, 1987), (b) Foreign Investments Act (R.A. No. 7042, as amended by R.A. No. 8179), and (c) Special Economic Zone Act, and Bases Conversion and Development Act;
5. Civil disputes within a TEZ must undergo mandatory mediation under the TIEZA before being filed in civil courts.
6. Labor disputes within a TEZ shall undergo mandatory mediation under the TIEZA in coordination with the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE).
7. The DOT Secretary, in consultation with other concerned government and private agencies, shall issue the detailed Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of the law within 90 days from the approval of the law. (We should read the IRR upon publication thereof).
8. Other incentives given by other agencies (e.g., Bases Conversion and Development Act of 1992 [R.A. No. 7227]; Special Economic Zone Act of 1995 [R.A. No. 7916]) will continue to apply, unless there is a duplication, in which case the investor must choose only one scheme.
9. The Local Government Units (LGUs) are encouraged to provide local incentives to TEs, e.g. reductions in local real estate tax and other local fees and charges.
Prepared by:
Atty. Manuel J. Laserna Jr.
http://attylaserna.blogspot.com
http://lcmlaw.multiply.com
The Philippines is trying its best to develop and promote the culture of tourism among its people.
Recently, it adopted the new Tourism Act of 2009 (R.A. No. 9693) to entice foreign investors to do business in its expanding tourism sector.
It is our way of meeting head-on the crippling global economic crisis.
In addition to the fact that the Philippines is the showcase of American-type democracy in Asia and is the first republic in Asia (circa 1898), more importantly, it is a beautiful archipelago of more than 7,000 amazing tropical islands with magnetic, virgin and refreshing beaches, rivers, lakes, caves, forests, and mountains.
Were it not for its corrupt political leaders, torture-happy police and military officers, violent bank robbers and kidnappers in notorious cities and poverty-stricken towns, archaic and fraud-prone election systems and procedures these past decades, and its very tragic experiences under the arrogant, abusive and exploitative imperialism of Spain, America and Japan (1521 to 1945), the Philippines could have maintained (or even exceeded) its nostalgic rank as the second most economically developed country in Asia, next only to Japan (circa 1960s).
Considering the talents, skills, success-orientation, socio-psychological flexibility, and free spirit of the Filipinos, I dare say the Philippines could have easily surpassed Hongkong, Singapore, Taiwan and Korea in the 1960s to the 1970s were it not for the abovecited pathetic factors.
At any rate, sour-graping aside, I have summarized the salient parts of the newly adopted R.A. No. 9593, Tourism Act of 2009, for the benefit of lawyers and legal researchers visiting this blog for updates on current Philippine conditions.
Salient Parts of R.A. No. 9593, The Tourism Act of 2009:
1. The law strengthens the Department of Tourism (DOT) and the Duty Free Philippines Corp. (DFPC). It creates the Tourism Infrastructure and Enterprise Zone Authority (TIEZA) and the Tourism Promotion Board (TPB) in order to promote the “culture of tourism” among Filipinos.
2. A Tourism Enterprise Zone (TEZ) and its operator must be registered with the TIEZA.
3. A registered Tourism Enterprise (TE) located within a registered TEZ is given various fiscal and non-fiscal incentives by the said law, the same to be implemented by the TIEZA, to wit:
3.1. Income tax Holiday for 6 years for new TEs, extendible for a maximum period of 6 years if the investor would undertake substantial expansion or upgrade of its facilities.
3.2. Net Operating Losses may be carried over as deduction from gross income for 6 years following the year of the loss.
3.3. Gross Income Tax of 5% (upon expiration of the income tax holiday period), in lieu of all other national and local taxes, license fees, imposts and assessments (except real estate taxes imposed by local government units [LGU] and TIEZA regulatory fees).
3.4. Importation Capital Investment and Equipment is exempted from “all taxes and customs duties.”
3.5. Importation of Transportation and Spare Parts is exempted from “customs duties and national taxes”, provided they are not locally manufactured at fair prices.
3.6. Importation of Goods by TEs within a TEZ is exempted from “all taxes and customs duties”. (TEs are prohibited from engaging in wholesale or retail business in competition with the DFPC).
3.7. Local Purchase of Goods and Services is entitled to Tax Credit equivalent to “all national internal revenue taxes paid”.
3.8. Social Responsibility Incentive in the form of a maximum tax deduction of 50% of the cost of environmental protection or cultural heritage preservation activities, sustainable livelihood programs for local communities and other similar activities.
3.9. Employment of Foreign Nationals is allowed in “executive, supervisory, technical or advisory positions” for such periods as may be allowed by the TIEZA.
3.10. Special Investor’s Resident Visa is given by the TIEZA to a foreign investor with an investment of at least US $200,000.00 in a registered TE.
3.11. Working Visas are given by the TIEZA to foreign personnel with highly technical skills. They are renewable every 2 years. The alien must first secure from the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) an Alien Employment Certificate (AEC).
3.12. Incentives in relation to Foreign Currency Transactions are subject to R.A. No. 7653 (Central Bank Act). The incentives are as follows:
3.12.1. Repatriation of Investments. The full amount of the foreign investment may be repatriated upon its liquidation in the currency in which it was originally made and at the exchange rate at the time of the repatriation.
3.12.2. Remittance of Foreign Exchange. The earnings from a foreign investment may be repatriated in the currency in which it was originally made and at the exchange rate at the time of the repatriation.
3.12.3. Foreign Loans and Contracts. Payments of interest and principal on foreign loans and obligations arising from technological assistance contracts may be remitted at the exchange rate at the time of remittance.
3.12.4. Requisition of Investment. A property of a TE may be requisitioned (expropriated) only in times of war or national emergency and with just compensation. The compensation shall be repatriated in full.
3.12.5. Lease and Ownership of Land. (See R.A. No. 7652, Investors Lease Act). Lands and buildings in a TEZ may be leased to foreign investors for 50 years, renewable for not more than 25 years. The leasehold right may be sold or assigned.
4. Incentives for TEs outside a TEZ are those given under the (a) Omnibus Investments Code of 1987 (E.O. No. 226, 1987), (b) Foreign Investments Act (R.A. No. 7042, as amended by R.A. No. 8179), and (c) Special Economic Zone Act, and Bases Conversion and Development Act;
5. Civil disputes within a TEZ must undergo mandatory mediation under the TIEZA before being filed in civil courts.
6. Labor disputes within a TEZ shall undergo mandatory mediation under the TIEZA in coordination with the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE).
7. The DOT Secretary, in consultation with other concerned government and private agencies, shall issue the detailed Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of the law within 90 days from the approval of the law. (We should read the IRR upon publication thereof).
8. Other incentives given by other agencies (e.g., Bases Conversion and Development Act of 1992 [R.A. No. 7227]; Special Economic Zone Act of 1995 [R.A. No. 7916]) will continue to apply, unless there is a duplication, in which case the investor must choose only one scheme.
9. The Local Government Units (LGUs) are encouraged to provide local incentives to TEs, e.g. reductions in local real estate tax and other local fees and charges.
Prepared by:
Atty. Manuel J. Laserna Jr.
http://attylaserna.blogspot.com
http://lcmlaw.multiply.com
Monday, July 13, 2009
Thou shall not borrow
Some trial judges in the Philippine either proudly and misguidedly live beyond their means or are so poor (in spirit and in the wallet caused by pompous lifestyle, vices, or bad social habits) that they use their influence to borrow money from trial lawyers and litigants who have pending cases before their salas. For such “borrower” judges, the penalty is dismissal, according to the Philippine Supreme Court.
In the recent case of Concerned Lawyers of Bulacan v. Judge Villalon-Pornillos, AM No. RTJ-09-2183, July 7, 2009, the Supreme Court found Judge Victoria Villalon-Pornillos of Malolos City Regional Trial Court, Branch 10 “guilty of violating paragraph 7, section 8, Rule 140 of the Rules of Court (borrowing money from a lawyer in a case pending before her court) which also constitutes a gross misconduct for violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct, aggravated by, inter alia, undue delay in rendering decisions or orders and violation of Supreme Court rules, directives, and circulars.”
In imposing the maximum penalty of dismissal, the Court (which, by the way, is composed of Justices with huge salaries, allowances, and other fringe benefits and who enjoy the use of government cars and drivers), noted that it was the third time that Judge Pornillos had been administratively charged. The Court also stated (some would say, with a holier-than-thou attitude), thus: “Those who cannot meet the exacting standards of judicial conduct and integrity have no place in the Judiciary. The various violations of respondent reflect a totality of transgressions of one who no longer deserves a seat in the bench. This Court will not withhold penalty when called for to uphold the people’s faith in the Judiciary.”
Please read below a news item which appeared in the official website of the Philippine Supreme Court on the same subject matter for legal research purposes.
SC Dismisses “Borrower” Judge
Posted: July 8, 2009
By Jay B. Rempillo
A judge shalt not borrow cash or property from a subordinate nor from lawyers or litigants in one’s sala or face the severe penalty of dismissal from service.
The Supreme Court yesterday dismissed a Regional Trial Court judge for borrowing P5, 000 from a lawyer who had at least two cases pending before her sala. It was also found that the said judge had also obtained loans from court personnel.
In a 22-page per curiam decision, the Court found Judge Victoria Villalon-Pornillos of Malolos City Regional Trial Court, Branch 10 guilty of violating paragraph 7, section 8, Rule 140 of the Rules of Court (borrowing money from a lawyer in a case pending before her court) which also constitutes a gross misconduct for violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct, aggravated by, inter alia, undue delay in rendering decisions or orders and violation of Supreme Court rules, directives, and circulars.
The High Court also ordered the forfeiture of all her retirement benefits except accrued leave credits and her perpetual disqualification from re-employment in the government.
“That the loans had already been paid or waived by the creditors do not detract from the fact that certain prohibitions were violated….There is a standing legal proscription on ‘borrowing money by superior officers from subordinate,’ a violation of which is punishable, under the Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service….More severely prohibited is the serious charge of ‘borrowing money or property from lawyers and litigants in a case pending before the court,” the Court said.
In imposing the maximum penalty of dismissal, the Court noted that it was the third time that Judge Pornillos has been administratively charged. “Considering that [Judge Pornillos] is not a first-time offender and taking into account respondent’s less serious violations as aggravating circumstance, the Court imposes the penalty of dismissal for service…Those who cannot meet the exacting standards of judicial conduct and integrity have no place in the Judiciary. The various violations of respondent reflect a totality of transgressions of one who no longer deserves a seat in the bench. This Court will not withhold penalty when called for to uphold the people’s faith in the Judiciary,” the Court ruled.
The case stemmed from the administrative complaint filed in August 2005 by the Concerned Lawyers of Bulacan who had accused respondent judge of graft and corruption by “fixing” cases and “selling” decisions or orders and alleged illicit relationships with her driver and bodyguards.
After investigating the matter, the Office of the Court Administrator found that the allegations of corruption and extortion, or even the illicit amorous relationships were hearsay. However, the OCA confirmed that Judge Pornillos had indeed obtained loans from court personnel and lawyers.
The High Court subsequently ordered an investigation by a judicial audit team which in turn found that Judge Pornillos, among others, had not been promptly acting on several cases.
However, it dismissed OCA’s earlier conclusion that Judge Pornillos has no longer any administrative liability for the loans she had obtained from court personnel and lawyers. The Court held that she had violated certain prohibitions and it does not matter whether the loans had been paid or waived.
The High Court found that respondent judge also failed to fulfill the duties to “dispose of the court’s business promptly and decide cases within the required periods,” to “diligently discharge administrative responsibilities, maintain professional competence in court management, and facilitate the performance of the administrative functions of other judges and court personnel,” and to “organize and supervise the court personnel to ensure the prompt and efficient dispatch of business, and require at all times the observance of high standards of public service and fidelity.”(Concerned Lawyers of Bulacan v. Judge Villalon-Pornillos, AM No. RTJ-09-2183, July 7, 2009).
See:
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/news/courtnews%20flash/2009/07/07080901.php
In the recent case of Concerned Lawyers of Bulacan v. Judge Villalon-Pornillos, AM No. RTJ-09-2183, July 7, 2009, the Supreme Court found Judge Victoria Villalon-Pornillos of Malolos City Regional Trial Court, Branch 10 “guilty of violating paragraph 7, section 8, Rule 140 of the Rules of Court (borrowing money from a lawyer in a case pending before her court) which also constitutes a gross misconduct for violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct, aggravated by, inter alia, undue delay in rendering decisions or orders and violation of Supreme Court rules, directives, and circulars.”
In imposing the maximum penalty of dismissal, the Court (which, by the way, is composed of Justices with huge salaries, allowances, and other fringe benefits and who enjoy the use of government cars and drivers), noted that it was the third time that Judge Pornillos had been administratively charged. The Court also stated (some would say, with a holier-than-thou attitude), thus: “Those who cannot meet the exacting standards of judicial conduct and integrity have no place in the Judiciary. The various violations of respondent reflect a totality of transgressions of one who no longer deserves a seat in the bench. This Court will not withhold penalty when called for to uphold the people’s faith in the Judiciary.”
Please read below a news item which appeared in the official website of the Philippine Supreme Court on the same subject matter for legal research purposes.
SC Dismisses “Borrower” Judge
Posted: July 8, 2009
By Jay B. Rempillo
A judge shalt not borrow cash or property from a subordinate nor from lawyers or litigants in one’s sala or face the severe penalty of dismissal from service.
The Supreme Court yesterday dismissed a Regional Trial Court judge for borrowing P5, 000 from a lawyer who had at least two cases pending before her sala. It was also found that the said judge had also obtained loans from court personnel.
In a 22-page per curiam decision, the Court found Judge Victoria Villalon-Pornillos of Malolos City Regional Trial Court, Branch 10 guilty of violating paragraph 7, section 8, Rule 140 of the Rules of Court (borrowing money from a lawyer in a case pending before her court) which also constitutes a gross misconduct for violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct, aggravated by, inter alia, undue delay in rendering decisions or orders and violation of Supreme Court rules, directives, and circulars.
The High Court also ordered the forfeiture of all her retirement benefits except accrued leave credits and her perpetual disqualification from re-employment in the government.
“That the loans had already been paid or waived by the creditors do not detract from the fact that certain prohibitions were violated….There is a standing legal proscription on ‘borrowing money by superior officers from subordinate,’ a violation of which is punishable, under the Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service….More severely prohibited is the serious charge of ‘borrowing money or property from lawyers and litigants in a case pending before the court,” the Court said.
In imposing the maximum penalty of dismissal, the Court noted that it was the third time that Judge Pornillos has been administratively charged. “Considering that [Judge Pornillos] is not a first-time offender and taking into account respondent’s less serious violations as aggravating circumstance, the Court imposes the penalty of dismissal for service…Those who cannot meet the exacting standards of judicial conduct and integrity have no place in the Judiciary. The various violations of respondent reflect a totality of transgressions of one who no longer deserves a seat in the bench. This Court will not withhold penalty when called for to uphold the people’s faith in the Judiciary,” the Court ruled.
The case stemmed from the administrative complaint filed in August 2005 by the Concerned Lawyers of Bulacan who had accused respondent judge of graft and corruption by “fixing” cases and “selling” decisions or orders and alleged illicit relationships with her driver and bodyguards.
After investigating the matter, the Office of the Court Administrator found that the allegations of corruption and extortion, or even the illicit amorous relationships were hearsay. However, the OCA confirmed that Judge Pornillos had indeed obtained loans from court personnel and lawyers.
The High Court subsequently ordered an investigation by a judicial audit team which in turn found that Judge Pornillos, among others, had not been promptly acting on several cases.
However, it dismissed OCA’s earlier conclusion that Judge Pornillos has no longer any administrative liability for the loans she had obtained from court personnel and lawyers. The Court held that she had violated certain prohibitions and it does not matter whether the loans had been paid or waived.
The High Court found that respondent judge also failed to fulfill the duties to “dispose of the court’s business promptly and decide cases within the required periods,” to “diligently discharge administrative responsibilities, maintain professional competence in court management, and facilitate the performance of the administrative functions of other judges and court personnel,” and to “organize and supervise the court personnel to ensure the prompt and efficient dispatch of business, and require at all times the observance of high standards of public service and fidelity.”(Concerned Lawyers of Bulacan v. Judge Villalon-Pornillos, AM No. RTJ-09-2183, July 7, 2009).
See:
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/news/courtnews%20flash/2009/07/07080901.php
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Rights of women
TREATIES AND CONVENTIONS ON THE RIGHTS OF WOMEN
Compiled by:
Atty. Manuel J. Laserna Jr.
Laserna Cueva-Mercader Law Offices
http://attylaserna.blogspot.com
lcmlaw@gmail.com
1993 UN Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women
Article 1
For the purposes of this Declaration, the term "violence against women" means any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life.
Article 2
Violence against women shall be understood to encompass, but not be limited to, the following:
(a) Physical, sexual and psychological violence occurring in the family, including battering, sexual abuse of female children in the household, dowry-related violence, marital rape, female genital mutilation and other traditional practices harmful to women, non-spousal violence and violence related to exploitation;
(b) Physical, sexual and psychological violence occurring within the general community, including rape, sexual abuse, sexual harassment and intimidation at work, in educational institutions and elsewhere, trafficking in women and forced prostitution;
(c) Physical, sexual and psychological violence perpetrated or condoned by the State, wherever it occurs.
Article 3
Women are entitled to the equal enjoyment and protection of all human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field. These rights include, inter alia:
(a) The right to life; 6/
(b) The right to equality; 7/
Article 4
States should condemn violence against women and should not invoke any custom, tradition or religious consideration to avoid their obligations with respect to its elimination. States should pursue by all appropriate means and without delay a policy of eliminating violence against women and, to this end, should:
(a) Consider, where they have not yet done so, ratifying or acceding to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women or withdrawing reservations to that Convention;
(b) Refrain from engaging in violence against women;
(c) Exercise due diligence to prevent, investigate and, in accordance with national legislation, punish acts of violence against women, whether those acts are perpetrated by the State or by private persons;
Article 5
The organs and specialized agencies of the United Nations system should, within their respective fields of competence, contribute to the recognition and realization of the rights and the principles set forth in the present Declaration and, to this end, should, inter alia:
(a) Foster international and regional cooperation with a view to defining regional strategies for combating violence, exchanging experiences and financing programmes relating to the elimination of violence against women;
(b) Promote meetings and seminars with the aim of creating and raising awareness among all persons of the issue of the elimination of violence against women;
(c) Foster coordination and exchange within the United Nations system between human rights treaty bodies to address the issue of violence against women effectively;
(d) Include in analyses prepared by organizations and bodies of the United Nations system of social trends and problems, such as the periodic reports on the world social situation, examination of trends in violence against women;
(e) Encourage coordination between organizations and bodies of the United Nations system to incorporate the issue of violence against women into ongoing programmes, especially with reference to groups of women particularly vulnerable to violence;
(f) Promote the formulation of guidelines or manuals relating to violence against women, taking into account the measures referred to in the present Declaration;
(g) Consider the issue of the elimination of violence against women, as appropriate, in fulfilling their mandates with respect to the implementation of human rights instruments;
(h) Cooperate with non-governmental organizations in addressing the issue of violence against women.
Article 6
Nothing in the present Declaration shall affect any provision that is more conducive to the elimination of violence against women that may be contained in the legislation of a State or in any international convention, treaty or other instrument in force in a State.
1999 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women
Article 1
A State Party to the present Protocol (“State Party”) recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (“the Committee”) to receive and consider communications submitted in accordance with article 2.
Article 2
Communications may be submitted by or on behalf of individuals or groups of individuals, under the jurisdiction of a State Party, claiming to be victims of a violation of any of the rights set forth in the Convention by that State Party. Where a communication is submitted on behalf of individuals or groups of individuals, this
shall be with their consent unless the author can justify acting on their behalf without such consent.
Article 3
Communications shall be in writing and shall not be anonymous. No communication shall be received by the Committee if it concerns a State Party to the Convention that is not a party to the present Protocol.
Article 4
1. The Committee shall not consider a communication unless it has ascertained that all available domestic remedies have been exhausted unless the application of such remedies is unreasonably prolonged or unlikely to bring effective relief.
2. The Committee shall declare a communication inadmissible where:
(a) The same matter has already been examined by the Committee or has been or is being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement;
(b) It is incompatible with the provisions of the Convention;
(c) It is manifestly ill-founded or not sufficiently substantiated;
(d) It is an abuse of the right to submit a communication;
(e) The facts that are the subject of the communication occurred prior to the entry into force of the present Protocol for the State Party concerned unless those facts continued after that date.
Article 5
1. At any time after the receipt of a communication and before a determination on the merits has been reached, the Committee may transmit to the State Party concerned for its urgent consideration a request that the State Party take such interim measures as may be necessary to avoid possible irreparable damage to the
victim or victims of the alleged violation.
2. Where the Committee exercises its discretion under paragraph 1 of the present article, this does not imply a determination on admissibility or on the merits of the communication.
Article 6
1. Unless the Committee considers a communication inadmissible without reference to the State Party concerned, and provided that the individual or individuals consent to the disclosure of their identity to that State Party, the Committee shall bring any communication submitted to it under the present Protocol confidentially
to the attention of the State Party concerned.
2. Within six months, the receiving State Party shall submit to the Committee written explanations or statements clarifying the matter and the remedy, if any, that may have been provided by that State Party.
Article 7
1. The Committee shall consider communications received under the present Protocol in the light of all information made available to it by or on behalf of individuals or groups of individuals and by the State Party concerned, provided that this information is transmitted to the parties concerned.
2. The Committee shall hold closed meetings when examining communications under the present Protocol.
3. After examining a communication, the Committee shall transmit its views on the communication, together with its recommendations, if any, to the parties concerned.
4. The State Party shall give due consideration to the views of the Committee, together with its recommendations, if any, and shall submit to the Committee, within six months, a written response, including information on any action taken in the light of the views and recommendations of the Committee.
5. The Committee may invite the State Party to submit further information about any measures the State Party has taken in response to its views or recommendations, if any, including as deemed appropriate by the Committee, in the State Party’s subsequent reports under article 18 of the Convention.
Article 8
1. If the Committee receives reliable information indicating grave or systematic violations by a State Party of rights set forth in the Convention, the Committee shall invite that State Party to cooperate in the examination of the information and to this end to submit observations with regard to the information concerned.
2. Taking into account any observations that may have been submitted by the State Party concerned as well as any other reliable information available to it, the Committee may designate one or more of its members to conduct an inquiry and to report urgently to the Committee. Where warranted and with the consent of the State Party, the inquiry may include a visit to its territory.
3. After examining the findings of such an inquiry, the Committee shall transmit these findings to the State Party concerned together with any comments and recommendations.
4. The State Party concerned shall, within six months of receiving the findings, comments and recommendations transmitted by the Committee, submit its observations to the Committee.
5. Such an inquiry shall be conducted confidentially and the cooperation of the State Party shall be sought at all stages of the proceedings.
Article 9
1. The Committee may invite the State Party concerned to include in its report under article 18 of the Convention details of any measures taken in response to an inquiry conducted under article 8 of the present Protocol.
2. The Committee may, if necessary, after the end of the period of six months referred to in article 8.4, invite the State Party concerned to inform it of the measures taken in response to such an inquiry.
Article 10
1. Each State Party may, at the time of signature or ratification of the present Protocol or accession thereto, declare that it does not recognize the competence of the Committee provided for in articles 8 and 9.
2. Any State Party having made a declaration in accordance with paragraph 1 of the present article may, at
any time, withdraw this declaration by notification to the Secretary-General.
Article 11
A State Party shall take all appropriate steps to ensure that individuals under its jurisdiction are not subjected to ill treatment or intimidation as a consequence of communicating with the Committee pursuant to the present Protocol.
Article 12
The Committee shall include in its annual report under article 21 of the Convention a summary of its activities under the present Protocol.
Article 13
Each State Party undertakes to make widely known and to give publicity to the Convention and the present Protocol and to facilitate access to information about the views and recommendations of the Committee, in particular, on matters involving that State Party.
Article 14
The Committee shall develop its own rules of procedure to be followed when exercising the functions conferred on it by the present Protocol.
Article 15
1. The present Protocol shall be open for signature by any State that has signed, ratified or acceded to the Convention.
2. The present Protocol shall be subject to ratification by any State that has ratified or acceded to the Convention. Instruments of ratification shall be deposited with the
Secretary-General of the United Nations.
3. The present Protocol shall be open to accession by any State that has ratified or acceded to the Convention.
4. Accession shall be effected by the deposit of an instrument of accession with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
Article 16
1. The present Protocol shall enter into force three months after the date of the deposit with the Secretary-General of the United Nations of the tenth instrument of ratification or accession.
2. For each State ratifying the present Protocol or acceding to it after its entry into force, the present Protocol shall enter into force three months after the date of the deposit of its own instrument of ratification or accession.
Article 17
No reservations to the present Protocol shall be permitted.
Article 18
1. Any State Party may propose an amendment to the present Protocol and file it with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. The Secretary-General shall thereupon communicate any proposed amendments to the States Parties with a request that they notify her or him whether they favour a conference of States Parties for the purpose of considering and voting on the proposal. In the event that at least one third of the States Parties favour such a conference, the Secretary-General shall convene the conference under the auspices of the United
Nations. Any amendment adopted by a majority of the States Parties present and voting at the conference shall be submitted to the General Assembly of the United Nations for approval.
2. Amendments shall come into force when they have been approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations and accepted by a two-thirds majority of the States Parties to the present Protocol in accordance with their respective constitutional processes.
3. When amendments come into force, they shall be binding on those States Parties that have accepted them, other States Parties still being bound by the provisions of the present Protocol and any earlier amendments that they have accepted.
Article 19
1. Any State Party may denounce the present Protocol at any time by written notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Denunciation shall take effect six months after the date of receipt of the notification by the Secretary-General.
2. Denunciation shall be without prejudice to the continued application of the provisions of the present Protocol to any communication submitted under article 2 or any inquiry initiated under article 8 before the effective date of denunciation.
Article 20
The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall inform all States of:
(a) Signatures, ratifications and accessions under the present Protocol;
(b) The date of entry into force of the present Protocol and of any amendment under article 18;
(c) Any denunciation under article 19.
Article 21
1. The present Protocol, of which the Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited in the archives of the United Nations.
2. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall transmit certified copies of the present Protocol to all States referred to in article 25 of the Convention.
1967 Declaration on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women
Article 1
Discrimination against women, denying or limiting as it does their equality of rights with men, is fundamentally unjust and constitutes an offence against human dignity.
Article 2
All appropriate measures shall be taken to abolish existing laws, customs, regulations and practices which are discriminatory against women, and to establish adequate legal protection for equal rights of men and women, in particular:
(a) The principle of equality of rights shall be embodied in the constitution or otherwise guaranteed by law;
(b) The international instruments of the United Nations and the specialized agencies relating to the elimination of discrimination against women shall be ratified or acceded to and fully implemented as soon as practicable.
Article 3
All appropriate measures shall be taken to educate public opinion and to direct national aspirations towards the eradication of prejudice and the abolition of customary and all other practices which are based on the idea of the inferiority of women.
Article 4
All appropriate measures shall be taken to ensure to women on equal terms with men, without any discrimination:
(a) The right to vote in all elections and be eligible for election to all publicly elected bodies;
(b) The right to vote in all public referenda;
(c) The right to hold public office and to exercise all public functions.
Such rights shall be guaranteed by legislation.
Article 5
Women shall have the same rights as men to acquire, change or retain their nationality. Marriage to an alien shall not automatically affect the nationality of the wife either by rendering her stateless or by forcing upon her the nationality of her husband.
Article 6
1. Without prejudice to the safeguarding of the unity and the harmony of the family, which remains the basic unit of any society, all appropriate measures, particularly legislative measures, shall be taken to ensure to women, married or unmarried, equal rights with men in the field of civil law, and in particular:
(a) The right to acquire, administer, enjoy, dispose of and inherit property, including property acquired during marriage;
(b) The right to equality in legal capacity and the exercise thereof;
(c) The same rights as men with regard to the law on the movement of persons.
2. All appropriate measures shall be taken to ensure the principle of equality of status of the husband and wife, and in particular:
(a) Women shall have the same right as men to free choice of a spouse and to enter into marriage only with their free and full consent;
(b) Women shall have equal rights with men during marriage and at its dissolution. In all cases the interest of the children shall be paramount;
(c) Parents shall have equal rights and duties in matters relating to their children. In all cases the interest of the children shall be paramount.
3. Child marriage and the betrothal of young girls before puberty shall be prohibited, and effective action, including legislation, shall be taken to specify a minimum age for marriage and to make the registration of marriages in an official registry compulsory.
Article 7
All provisions of penal codes which constitute discrimination against women shall be repealed.
Article 8
All appropriate measures, including legislation, shall be taken to combat all forms of traffic in women and exploitation of prostitution of women.
Article 9
All appropriate measures shall be taken to ensure to girls and women, married or unmarried, equal rights with men in education at all levels, and in particular:
(a) Equal conditions of access to, and study in, educational institutions of all types, including universities and vocational, technical and professional schools;
(b) The same choice of curricula, the same examinations, teaching staff with qualifications of the same standard, and school premises and equipment of the same quality, whether the institutions are co-educational or not;
(c) Equal opportunities to benefit from scholarships and other study grants;
(d) Equal opportunities for access to programmes of continuing education, including adult literacy programmes;
(e) Access to educational information to help in ensuring the health and well-being of families.
Article 10
1. All appropriate measures shall be taken to ensure to women, married or unmarried, equal rights with men in the field of economic and social life, and in particular:
(a) The right, without discrimination on grounds of marital status or any other grounds, to receive vocational training, to work, to free choice of profession and employment, and to professional and vocational advancement;
(b) The right to equal remuneration with men and to equality of treatment in respect of work of equal value;
(c) The right to leave with pay, retirement privileges and provision for security in respect of unemployment, sickness, old age or other incapacity to work;
(d) The right to receive family allowances on equal terms with men.
2. In order to prevent discrimination against women on account of marriage or maternity and to ensure their effective right to work, measures shall be taken to prevent their dismissal in the event of marriage or maternity and to provide paid maternity leave, with the guarantee of returning to former employment, and to provide the necessary social services, including child-care facilities.
3. Measures taken to protect women in certain types of work, for reasons inherent in their physical nature, shall not be regarded as discriminatory.
Article 11
1. The principle of equality of rights of men and women demands implementation in all States in accordance with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
2. Governments, non-governmental organizations and individuals are urged, therefore, to do all in their power to promote the implementation of the principles contained in this Declaration.
1954 Convention on the Political Rights of Women
Article I
Women shall be entitled to vote in all elections on equal terms with men, without any discrimination.
Article II
Women shall be eligible for election to all publicly elected bodies, established by national law, on equal terms with men, without any discrimination.
Article III
Women shall be entitled to hold public office and to exercise all public functions, established by national law, on equal terms with men, without any discrimination.
Article IV
1. This Convention shall be open for signature on behalf of any Member of the United Nations and also on behalf of any other State to which an invitation has been addressed by the General Assembly.
2. This Convention shall be ratified and the instruments of ratification shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
Article V
1. This Convention shall be open for accession to all States referred to in paragraph 1 of article IV.
2. Accession shall be effected by the deposit of an instrument of accession with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
Article VI
1. This Convention shall come into force on the ninetieth day following the date of deposit of the sixth instrument of ratification or accession.
2. For each State ratifying or acceding to the Convention after the deposit of the sixth instrument of ratification or accession the Convention shall enter into force on the ninetieth day after deposit by such State of its instrument of ratification or accession.
Article VII
In the event that any State submits a reservation to any of the articles of this Convention at the time of signature, ratification or accession, the Secretary-General shall communicate the text of the reservation to all States which are or may become Parties to this Convention. Any State which objects to the reservation may, within a period of ninety days from the date of the said communication (or upon the date of its becoming a Party to the Convention), notify the Secretary-General that it does not accept it. In such case, the Convention shall not enter into force as between such State and the State making the reservation.
Article VIII
1. Any State may denounce this Convention by written notification to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Denunciation shall take effect one year after the date of receipt of the notification by the Secretary-General.
2. This Convention shall cease to be in force as from the date when the denunciation which reduces the number of Parties to less than six becomes effective.
Article IX
Any dispute which may arise between any two or more Contracting States concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention, which is not settled by negotiation, shall at the request of any one of the parties to the dispute be referred to the International Court of Justice for decision, unless they agree to another mode of settlement.
Article X
The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall notify all Members of the United Nations and the non-member States contemplated in paragraph 1 of article IV of this Convention of the following:
(a) Signatures and instruments of ratification received in accordance with article IV;
(b) Instruments of accession received in accordance with article V;
(c) The date upon which this Convention enters into force in accordance with article VI;
(d) Communications and notifications received in accordance with article VII;
(e) Notifications of denunciation received in accordance with paragraph 1 of article VIII;
(f) Abrogation in accordance with paragraph 2 of article VIII.
Article XI
1. This Convention, of which the Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts shall be equally authentic, shall be deposited in the archives of the United Nations.
2. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall transmit a certified copy to all Members of the United Nations and to the non-member States contemplated in paragraph 1 of article IV.
1974 Declaration on the Protection of Women and Children
in Emergency and Armed Conflict
X x x.
Solemnly proclaims this Declaration on the Protection of Women and Children in Emergency and Armed Conflict and calls for the strict observance of the Declaration by all Member States:
1. Attacks and bombings on the civilian population, inflicting incalculable suffering, especially on women and children, who are the most vulnerable members of the population, shall be prohibited, and such acts shall be condemned.
2. The use of chemical and bacteriological weapons in the course of military operations constitutes one of the most flagrant violations of the Geneva Protocol of 1925, the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the principles of international humanitarian law and inflicts heavy losses on civilian populations, including defenceless women and children, and shall be severely condemned.
3. All States shall abide fully by their obligations under the Geneva Protocol of 1925 and the Geneva Conventions of 1949, as well as other instruments of international law relative to respect for human rights in armed conflicts, which offer important guarantees for the protection of women and children.
4. All efforts shall be made by States involved in armed conflicts, military operations in foreign territories or military operations in territories still under colonial domination to spare women and children from the ravages of war. All the necessary steps shall be taken to ensure the prohibition of measures such as persecution, torture, punitive measures, degrading treatment and violence, particularly against that part of the civilian population that consists of women and children.
5. All forms of repression and cruel and inhuman treatment of women and children, including imprisonment, torture, shooting, mass arrests, collective punishment, destruction of dwellings and forcible eviction, committed by belligerents in the course of military operations or in occupied territories shall be considered criminal.
6. Women and children belonging to the civilian population and finding themselves in circumstances of emergency and armed conflict in the struggle for peace, self-determination, national liberation and independence, or who live in occupied territories, shall not be deprived of shelter, food, medical aid or other inalienable rights, in accordance with the provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Declaration of the Rights of the Child or other instruments of international law.
1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
PART I
Article 1
1. All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.
2. All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence.
3. The States Parties to the present Covenant, including those having responsibility for the administration of Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territories, shall promote the realization of the right of self-determination, and shall respect that right, in conformity with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.
PART II
Article 2
1. Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to take steps, individually and through international assistance and co-operation, especially economic and technical, to the maximum of its available resources, with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of the rights recognized in the present Covenant by all appropriate means, including particularly the adoption of legislative measures.
2. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to guarantee that the rights enunciated in the present Covenant will be exercised without discrimination of any kind as to race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
3. Developing countries, with due regard to human rights and their national economy, may determine to what extent they would guarantee the economic rights recognized in the present Covenant to non-nationals.
Article 3
The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to ensure the equal right of men and women to the enjoyment of all economic, social and cultural rights set forth in the present Covenant.
Article 4
The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize that, in the enjoyment of those rights provided by the State in conformity with the present Covenant, the State may subject such rights only to such limitations as are determined by law only in so far as this may be compatible with the nature of these rights and solely for the purpose of promoting the general welfare in a democratic society.
Article 5
1. Nothing in the present Covenant may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights or freedoms recognized herein, or at their limitation to a greater extent than is provided for in the present Covenant.
2. No restriction upon or derogation from any of the fundamental human rights recognized or existing in any country in virtue of law, conventions, regulations or custom shall be admitted on the pretext that the present Covenant does not recognize such rights or that it recognizes them to a lesser extent.
PART III
Article 6
1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right to work, which includes the right of everyone to the opportunity to gain his living by work which he freely chooses or accepts, and will take appropriate steps to safeguard this right.
2. The steps to be taken by a State Party to the present Covenant to achieve the full realization of this right shall include technical and vocational guidance and training programmes, policies and techniques to achieve steady economic, social and cultural development and full and productive employment under conditions safeguarding fundamental political and economic freedoms to the individual.
Article 7
The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to the enjoyment of just and favourable conditions of work which ensure, in particular:
(a) Remuneration which provides all workers, as a minimum, with:
(i) Fair wages and equal remuneration for work of equal value without distinction of any kind, in particular women being guaranteed conditions of work not inferior to those enjoyed by men, with equal pay for equal work;
(ii) A decent living for themselves and their families in accordance with the provisions of the present Covenant;
(b) Safe and healthy working conditions;
(c) Equal opportunity for everyone to be promoted in his employment to an appropriate higher level, subject to no considerations other than those of seniority and competence;
(d ) Rest, leisure and reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay, as well as remuneration for public holidays
Article 8
1. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to ensure:
(a) The right of everyone to form trade unions and join the trade union of his choice,
subject only to the rules of the organization concerned, for the promotion and protection of his economic and social interests. No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right other than those prescribed by law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public order or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others;
(b) The right of trade unions to establish national federations or confederations and the right of the latter to form or join international trade-union organizations;
(c) The right of trade unions to function freely subject to no limitations other than those prescribed by law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public order or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others;
(d) The right to strike, provided that it is exercised in conformity with the laws of the particular country.
2. This article shall not prevent the imposition of lawful restrictions on the exercise of these rights by members of the armed forces or of the police or of the administration of the State.
3. Nothing in this article shall authorize States Parties to the International Labour Organisation Convention of 1948 concerning Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize to take legislative measures which would prejudice, or apply the law in such a manner as would prejudice, the guarantees provided for in that Convention.
Article 9
The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to social security, including social insurance.
Article 10
The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize that:
1. The widest possible protection and assistance should be accorded to the family, which is the natural and fundamental group unit of society, particularly for its establishment and while it is responsible for the care and education of dependent children. Marriage must be entered into with the free consent of the intending spouses.
2. Special protection should be accorded to mothers during a reasonable period before and after childbirth. During such period working mothers should be accorded
paid leave or leave with adequate social security benefits.
3. Special measures of protection and assistance should be taken on behalf of all children and young persons without any discrimination for reasons of parentage or other conditions. Children and young persons should be protected from economic and social exploitation. Their employment in work harmful to their morals or health or dangerous to life or likely to hamper their normal development should be punishable by law. States should also set age limits below which the paid employment of child labour should be prohibited and punishable by law.
Article 11
1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions. The States Parties will take appropriate steps to ensure the realization of this right, recognizing to this effect the essential importance of international co-operation based on free consent.
2. The States Parties to the present Covenant, recognizing the fundamental right of everyone to be free from hunger, shall take, individually and through international co-operation, the measures, including specific programmes, which are needed:
(a) To improve methods of production, conservation and distribution of food by making full use of technical and scientific knowledge, by disseminating knowledge of the principles of nutrition and by developing or reforming agrarian systems in such a way as to achieve the most efficient development and utilization of natural resources;
(b) Taking into account the problems of both food-importing and food-exporting countries, to ensure an equitable distribution of world food supplies in relation to need.
Article 12
1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health.
2. The steps to be taken by the States Parties to the present Covenant to achieve the full realization of this right shall include those necessary for:
(a) The provision for the reduction of the stillbirth-rate and of infant mortality and for the healthy development of the child;
(b) The improvement of all aspects of environmental and industrial hygiene;
(c) The prevention, treatment and control of epidemic, endemic, occupational and other diseases;
(d) The creation of conditions which would assure to all medical service and medical attention in the event of sickness.
Article 13
1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to education. They agree that education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and the sense of its dignity, and shall strengthen the respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. They further agree that education shall enable all persons to participate effectively in a free society, promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations and all racial, ethnic or religious groups, and further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
2. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize that, with a view to achieving the full realization of this right:
(a) Primary education shall be compulsory and available free to all;
(b) Secondary education in its different forms, including technical and vocational
secondary education, shall be made generally available and accessible to all by every appropriate means, and in particular by the progressive introduction of free education;
(c) Higher education shall be made equally accessible to all, on the basis of capacity, by every appropriate means, and in particular by the progressive introduction of free education;
(d) Fundamental education shall be encouraged or intensified as far as possible for those persons who have not received or completed the whole period of their primary
education;
(e) The development of a system of schools at all levels shall be actively pursued, an adequate fellowship system shall be established, and the material conditions of teaching staff shall be continuously improved.
3. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to choose for their children schools, other than those established by the public authorities, which conform to such minimum educational standards as may be laid down or approved by the State and to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions.
4. No part of this article shall be construed so as to interfere with the liberty of individuals and bodies to establish and direct educational institutions, subject always to the observance of the principles set forth in paragraph I of this article and to the requirement that the education given in such institutions shall conform to such minimum standards as may be laid down by the State.
Article 14
Each State Party to the present Covenant which, at the time of becoming a Party, has not been able to secure in its metropolitan territory or other territories under its jurisdiction compulsory primary education, free of charge, undertakes, within two years, to work out and adopt a detailed plan of action for the progressive implementation, within a reasonable number of years, to be fixed in the plan, of the principle of compulsory education free of charge for all.
Article 15
1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone:
(a) To take part in cultural life;
(b) To enjoy the benefits of scientific progress and its applications;
(c) To benefit from the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.
2. The steps to be taken by the States Parties to the present Covenant to achieve the full realization of this right shall include those necessary for the conservation, the development and the diffusion of science and culture.
3. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to respect the freedom indispensable for scientific research and creative activity.
4. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the benefits to be derived from the encouragement and development of international contacts and co-operation in the scientific and cultural fields.
PART IV
Article 16
1. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to submit in conformity with this part of the Covenant reports on the measures which they have adopted and the progress made in achieving the observance of the rights recognized herein.
2. (a) All reports shall be submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall transmit copies to the Economic and Social Council for consideration in accordance with the provisions of the present Covenant;
(b) The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall also transmit to the specialized agencies copies of the reports, or any relevant parts therefrom, from States Parties to the present Covenant which are also members of these specialized agencies in so far as these reports, or parts therefrom, relate to any matters which fall within the responsibilities of the said agencies in accordance with their constitutional instruments.
Article 17
1. The States Parties to the present Covenant shall furnish their reports in stages, in accordance with a programme to be established by the Economic and Social Council within one year of the entry into force of the present Covenant after consultation with the States Parties and the specialized agencies concerned.
2. Reports may indicate factors and difficulties affecting the degree of fulfilment of obligations under the present Covenant.
3. Where relevant information has previously been furnished to the United Nations or to any specialized agency by any State Party to the present Covenant, it will not be necessary to reproduce that information, but a precise reference to the information so furnished will suffice.
Article 18
Pursuant to its responsibilities under the Charter of the United Nations in the field of human rights and fundamental freedoms, the Economic and Social Council may make arrangements with the specialized agencies in respect of their reporting to it on the progress made in achieving the observance of the provisions of the present Covenant falling within the scope of their activities. These reports may include particulars of decisions and recommendations on such implementation adopted by their competent organs.
Article 19
The Economic and Social Council may transmit to the Commission on Human Rights for study and general recommendation or, as appropriate, for information the reports concerning human rights submitted by States in accordance with articles 16 and 17, and those concerning human rights submitted by the specialized agencies in accordance with article 18.
Article 20
The States Parties to the present Covenant and the specialized agencies concerned may submit comments to the Economic and Social Council on any general recommendation under article 19 or reference to such general recommendation in any report of the Commission on Human Rights or any documentation referred to therein.
Article 21
The Economic and Social Council may submit from time to time to the General Assembly reports with recommendations of a general nature and a summary of the information received from the States Parties to the present Covenant and the specialized agencies on the measures taken and the progress made in achieving general observance of the rights recognized in the present Covenant.
Article 22
The Economic and Social Council may bring to the attention of other organs of the United Nations, their subsidiary organs and specialized agencies concerned with furnishing technical assistance any matters arising out of the reports referred to in this part of the present Covenant which may assist such bodies in deciding, each within its field of competence, on the advisability of international measures likely to contribute to the effective progressive implementation of the present Covenant.
Article 23
The States Parties to the present Covenant agree that international
action for the achievement of the rights recognized in the present Covenant includes such methods as the conclusion of conventions, the adoption of recommendations, the furnishing of technical assistance and the holding of regional meetings and technical meetings for the purpose of consultation and study organized in conjunction with the Governments concerned.
Article 24
Nothing in the present Covenant shall be interpreted as impairing the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations and of the constitutions of the specialized agencies which define the respective responsibilities of the various organs of the United Nations and of the specialized agencies in regard to the matters dealt with in the present Covenant.
Article 25
Nothing in the present Covenant shall be interpreted as impairing the inherent right of all peoples to enjoy and utilize fully and freely their natural wealth and resources.
PART V
Article 26
1. The present Covenant is open for signature by any State Member of the United Nations or member of any of its specialized agencies, by any State Party to the Statute of the International Court of Justice, and by any other State which has been invited by the General Assembly of the United Nations to become a party to the present Covenant.
2. The present Covenant is subject to ratification. Instruments of ratification shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
3. The present Covenant shall be open to accession by any State referred to in paragraph 1 of this article.
4. Accession shall be effected by the deposit of an instrument of accession with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
5. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall inform all States which have signed the present Covenant or acceded to it of the deposit of each instrument of ratification or accession.
Article 27
1. The present Covenant shall enter into force three months after the date of the deposit with the Secretary-General of the United Nations of the thirty-fifth instrument of ratification or instrument of accession.
2. For each State ratifying the present Covenant or acceding to it after the deposit of the thirty-fifth instrument of ratification or instrument of accession, the present Covenant shall enter into force three months after the date of the deposit of its own instrument of ratification or instrument of accession.
Article 28
The provisions of the present Covenant shall extend to all parts of federal States without any limitations or exceptions.
Article 29
1. Any State Party to the present Covenant may propose an amendment and file it with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. The Secretary-General shall thereupon communicate any proposed amendments to the States Parties to the present Covenant with a request that they notify him whether they favour a conference of States Parties for the purpose of considering and voting upon the proposals. In the event that at least one third of the States Parties favours such a conference, the Secretary-General shall convene the conference under the auspices of the United Nations. Any amendment adopted by a majority of the States Parties present and voting at the conference shall be submitted to the General Assembly of the United Nations for approval.
2. Amendments shall come into force when they have been approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations and accepted by a two-thirds majority of the States Parties to the present Covenant in accordance with their respective constitutional processes.
3. When amendments come into force they shall be binding on those States Parties which have accepted them, other States Parties still being bound by the provisions of the present Covenant and any earlier amendment which they have accepted.
Article 30
Irrespective of the notifications made under article 26, paragraph 5, the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall inform all States referred to in paragraph I of the same article of the following particulars:
(a) Signatures, ratifications and accessions under article 26;
(b) The date of the entry into force of the present Covenant under article 27 and the date of the entry into force of any amendments under article 29.
Article 31
1. The present Covenant, of which the Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited in the archives of the United Nations.
2. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall transmit certified copies of the present Covenant to all States referred to in article 26.
1948 UNIVERSAL DXECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Article 1.
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Article 2.
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
Article 3.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Article 4.
No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.
Article 5.
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Article 6.
Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.
Article 7.
All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.
Article 8.
Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.
Article 9.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
Article 10.
Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.
Article 11.
(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.
Article 12.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
Article 13.
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.
Article 14.
(1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
(2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Article 15.
(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.
Article 16.
(1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
(2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
Article 17.
(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
Article 19.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
Article 20.
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.
Article 21.
(1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
(2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.
(3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.
Article 22.
Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.
Article 23.
(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
(3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.
Article 24.
Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.
Article 25.
(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.
Article 26.
(1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
(2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
(3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.
Article 27.
(1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
(2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.
Article 28.
Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.
Article 29.
(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Article 30.
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.
Compiled by:
Atty. Manuel J. Laserna Jr.
Laserna Cueva-Mercader Law Offices
http://attylaserna.blogspot.com
lcmlaw@gmail.com
1993 UN Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women
Article 1
For the purposes of this Declaration, the term "violence against women" means any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life.
Article 2
Violence against women shall be understood to encompass, but not be limited to, the following:
(a) Physical, sexual and psychological violence occurring in the family, including battering, sexual abuse of female children in the household, dowry-related violence, marital rape, female genital mutilation and other traditional practices harmful to women, non-spousal violence and violence related to exploitation;
(b) Physical, sexual and psychological violence occurring within the general community, including rape, sexual abuse, sexual harassment and intimidation at work, in educational institutions and elsewhere, trafficking in women and forced prostitution;
(c) Physical, sexual and psychological violence perpetrated or condoned by the State, wherever it occurs.
Article 3
Women are entitled to the equal enjoyment and protection of all human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field. These rights include, inter alia:
(a) The right to life; 6/
(b) The right to equality; 7/
Article 4
States should condemn violence against women and should not invoke any custom, tradition or religious consideration to avoid their obligations with respect to its elimination. States should pursue by all appropriate means and without delay a policy of eliminating violence against women and, to this end, should:
(a) Consider, where they have not yet done so, ratifying or acceding to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women or withdrawing reservations to that Convention;
(b) Refrain from engaging in violence against women;
(c) Exercise due diligence to prevent, investigate and, in accordance with national legislation, punish acts of violence against women, whether those acts are perpetrated by the State or by private persons;
Article 5
The organs and specialized agencies of the United Nations system should, within their respective fields of competence, contribute to the recognition and realization of the rights and the principles set forth in the present Declaration and, to this end, should, inter alia:
(a) Foster international and regional cooperation with a view to defining regional strategies for combating violence, exchanging experiences and financing programmes relating to the elimination of violence against women;
(b) Promote meetings and seminars with the aim of creating and raising awareness among all persons of the issue of the elimination of violence against women;
(c) Foster coordination and exchange within the United Nations system between human rights treaty bodies to address the issue of violence against women effectively;
(d) Include in analyses prepared by organizations and bodies of the United Nations system of social trends and problems, such as the periodic reports on the world social situation, examination of trends in violence against women;
(e) Encourage coordination between organizations and bodies of the United Nations system to incorporate the issue of violence against women into ongoing programmes, especially with reference to groups of women particularly vulnerable to violence;
(f) Promote the formulation of guidelines or manuals relating to violence against women, taking into account the measures referred to in the present Declaration;
(g) Consider the issue of the elimination of violence against women, as appropriate, in fulfilling their mandates with respect to the implementation of human rights instruments;
(h) Cooperate with non-governmental organizations in addressing the issue of violence against women.
Article 6
Nothing in the present Declaration shall affect any provision that is more conducive to the elimination of violence against women that may be contained in the legislation of a State or in any international convention, treaty or other instrument in force in a State.
1999 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women
Article 1
A State Party to the present Protocol (“State Party”) recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (“the Committee”) to receive and consider communications submitted in accordance with article 2.
Article 2
Communications may be submitted by or on behalf of individuals or groups of individuals, under the jurisdiction of a State Party, claiming to be victims of a violation of any of the rights set forth in the Convention by that State Party. Where a communication is submitted on behalf of individuals or groups of individuals, this
shall be with their consent unless the author can justify acting on their behalf without such consent.
Article 3
Communications shall be in writing and shall not be anonymous. No communication shall be received by the Committee if it concerns a State Party to the Convention that is not a party to the present Protocol.
Article 4
1. The Committee shall not consider a communication unless it has ascertained that all available domestic remedies have been exhausted unless the application of such remedies is unreasonably prolonged or unlikely to bring effective relief.
2. The Committee shall declare a communication inadmissible where:
(a) The same matter has already been examined by the Committee or has been or is being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement;
(b) It is incompatible with the provisions of the Convention;
(c) It is manifestly ill-founded or not sufficiently substantiated;
(d) It is an abuse of the right to submit a communication;
(e) The facts that are the subject of the communication occurred prior to the entry into force of the present Protocol for the State Party concerned unless those facts continued after that date.
Article 5
1. At any time after the receipt of a communication and before a determination on the merits has been reached, the Committee may transmit to the State Party concerned for its urgent consideration a request that the State Party take such interim measures as may be necessary to avoid possible irreparable damage to the
victim or victims of the alleged violation.
2. Where the Committee exercises its discretion under paragraph 1 of the present article, this does not imply a determination on admissibility or on the merits of the communication.
Article 6
1. Unless the Committee considers a communication inadmissible without reference to the State Party concerned, and provided that the individual or individuals consent to the disclosure of their identity to that State Party, the Committee shall bring any communication submitted to it under the present Protocol confidentially
to the attention of the State Party concerned.
2. Within six months, the receiving State Party shall submit to the Committee written explanations or statements clarifying the matter and the remedy, if any, that may have been provided by that State Party.
Article 7
1. The Committee shall consider communications received under the present Protocol in the light of all information made available to it by or on behalf of individuals or groups of individuals and by the State Party concerned, provided that this information is transmitted to the parties concerned.
2. The Committee shall hold closed meetings when examining communications under the present Protocol.
3. After examining a communication, the Committee shall transmit its views on the communication, together with its recommendations, if any, to the parties concerned.
4. The State Party shall give due consideration to the views of the Committee, together with its recommendations, if any, and shall submit to the Committee, within six months, a written response, including information on any action taken in the light of the views and recommendations of the Committee.
5. The Committee may invite the State Party to submit further information about any measures the State Party has taken in response to its views or recommendations, if any, including as deemed appropriate by the Committee, in the State Party’s subsequent reports under article 18 of the Convention.
Article 8
1. If the Committee receives reliable information indicating grave or systematic violations by a State Party of rights set forth in the Convention, the Committee shall invite that State Party to cooperate in the examination of the information and to this end to submit observations with regard to the information concerned.
2. Taking into account any observations that may have been submitted by the State Party concerned as well as any other reliable information available to it, the Committee may designate one or more of its members to conduct an inquiry and to report urgently to the Committee. Where warranted and with the consent of the State Party, the inquiry may include a visit to its territory.
3. After examining the findings of such an inquiry, the Committee shall transmit these findings to the State Party concerned together with any comments and recommendations.
4. The State Party concerned shall, within six months of receiving the findings, comments and recommendations transmitted by the Committee, submit its observations to the Committee.
5. Such an inquiry shall be conducted confidentially and the cooperation of the State Party shall be sought at all stages of the proceedings.
Article 9
1. The Committee may invite the State Party concerned to include in its report under article 18 of the Convention details of any measures taken in response to an inquiry conducted under article 8 of the present Protocol.
2. The Committee may, if necessary, after the end of the period of six months referred to in article 8.4, invite the State Party concerned to inform it of the measures taken in response to such an inquiry.
Article 10
1. Each State Party may, at the time of signature or ratification of the present Protocol or accession thereto, declare that it does not recognize the competence of the Committee provided for in articles 8 and 9.
2. Any State Party having made a declaration in accordance with paragraph 1 of the present article may, at
any time, withdraw this declaration by notification to the Secretary-General.
Article 11
A State Party shall take all appropriate steps to ensure that individuals under its jurisdiction are not subjected to ill treatment or intimidation as a consequence of communicating with the Committee pursuant to the present Protocol.
Article 12
The Committee shall include in its annual report under article 21 of the Convention a summary of its activities under the present Protocol.
Article 13
Each State Party undertakes to make widely known and to give publicity to the Convention and the present Protocol and to facilitate access to information about the views and recommendations of the Committee, in particular, on matters involving that State Party.
Article 14
The Committee shall develop its own rules of procedure to be followed when exercising the functions conferred on it by the present Protocol.
Article 15
1. The present Protocol shall be open for signature by any State that has signed, ratified or acceded to the Convention.
2. The present Protocol shall be subject to ratification by any State that has ratified or acceded to the Convention. Instruments of ratification shall be deposited with the
Secretary-General of the United Nations.
3. The present Protocol shall be open to accession by any State that has ratified or acceded to the Convention.
4. Accession shall be effected by the deposit of an instrument of accession with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
Article 16
1. The present Protocol shall enter into force three months after the date of the deposit with the Secretary-General of the United Nations of the tenth instrument of ratification or accession.
2. For each State ratifying the present Protocol or acceding to it after its entry into force, the present Protocol shall enter into force three months after the date of the deposit of its own instrument of ratification or accession.
Article 17
No reservations to the present Protocol shall be permitted.
Article 18
1. Any State Party may propose an amendment to the present Protocol and file it with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. The Secretary-General shall thereupon communicate any proposed amendments to the States Parties with a request that they notify her or him whether they favour a conference of States Parties for the purpose of considering and voting on the proposal. In the event that at least one third of the States Parties favour such a conference, the Secretary-General shall convene the conference under the auspices of the United
Nations. Any amendment adopted by a majority of the States Parties present and voting at the conference shall be submitted to the General Assembly of the United Nations for approval.
2. Amendments shall come into force when they have been approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations and accepted by a two-thirds majority of the States Parties to the present Protocol in accordance with their respective constitutional processes.
3. When amendments come into force, they shall be binding on those States Parties that have accepted them, other States Parties still being bound by the provisions of the present Protocol and any earlier amendments that they have accepted.
Article 19
1. Any State Party may denounce the present Protocol at any time by written notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Denunciation shall take effect six months after the date of receipt of the notification by the Secretary-General.
2. Denunciation shall be without prejudice to the continued application of the provisions of the present Protocol to any communication submitted under article 2 or any inquiry initiated under article 8 before the effective date of denunciation.
Article 20
The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall inform all States of:
(a) Signatures, ratifications and accessions under the present Protocol;
(b) The date of entry into force of the present Protocol and of any amendment under article 18;
(c) Any denunciation under article 19.
Article 21
1. The present Protocol, of which the Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited in the archives of the United Nations.
2. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall transmit certified copies of the present Protocol to all States referred to in article 25 of the Convention.
1967 Declaration on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women
Article 1
Discrimination against women, denying or limiting as it does their equality of rights with men, is fundamentally unjust and constitutes an offence against human dignity.
Article 2
All appropriate measures shall be taken to abolish existing laws, customs, regulations and practices which are discriminatory against women, and to establish adequate legal protection for equal rights of men and women, in particular:
(a) The principle of equality of rights shall be embodied in the constitution or otherwise guaranteed by law;
(b) The international instruments of the United Nations and the specialized agencies relating to the elimination of discrimination against women shall be ratified or acceded to and fully implemented as soon as practicable.
Article 3
All appropriate measures shall be taken to educate public opinion and to direct national aspirations towards the eradication of prejudice and the abolition of customary and all other practices which are based on the idea of the inferiority of women.
Article 4
All appropriate measures shall be taken to ensure to women on equal terms with men, without any discrimination:
(a) The right to vote in all elections and be eligible for election to all publicly elected bodies;
(b) The right to vote in all public referenda;
(c) The right to hold public office and to exercise all public functions.
Such rights shall be guaranteed by legislation.
Article 5
Women shall have the same rights as men to acquire, change or retain their nationality. Marriage to an alien shall not automatically affect the nationality of the wife either by rendering her stateless or by forcing upon her the nationality of her husband.
Article 6
1. Without prejudice to the safeguarding of the unity and the harmony of the family, which remains the basic unit of any society, all appropriate measures, particularly legislative measures, shall be taken to ensure to women, married or unmarried, equal rights with men in the field of civil law, and in particular:
(a) The right to acquire, administer, enjoy, dispose of and inherit property, including property acquired during marriage;
(b) The right to equality in legal capacity and the exercise thereof;
(c) The same rights as men with regard to the law on the movement of persons.
2. All appropriate measures shall be taken to ensure the principle of equality of status of the husband and wife, and in particular:
(a) Women shall have the same right as men to free choice of a spouse and to enter into marriage only with their free and full consent;
(b) Women shall have equal rights with men during marriage and at its dissolution. In all cases the interest of the children shall be paramount;
(c) Parents shall have equal rights and duties in matters relating to their children. In all cases the interest of the children shall be paramount.
3. Child marriage and the betrothal of young girls before puberty shall be prohibited, and effective action, including legislation, shall be taken to specify a minimum age for marriage and to make the registration of marriages in an official registry compulsory.
Article 7
All provisions of penal codes which constitute discrimination against women shall be repealed.
Article 8
All appropriate measures, including legislation, shall be taken to combat all forms of traffic in women and exploitation of prostitution of women.
Article 9
All appropriate measures shall be taken to ensure to girls and women, married or unmarried, equal rights with men in education at all levels, and in particular:
(a) Equal conditions of access to, and study in, educational institutions of all types, including universities and vocational, technical and professional schools;
(b) The same choice of curricula, the same examinations, teaching staff with qualifications of the same standard, and school premises and equipment of the same quality, whether the institutions are co-educational or not;
(c) Equal opportunities to benefit from scholarships and other study grants;
(d) Equal opportunities for access to programmes of continuing education, including adult literacy programmes;
(e) Access to educational information to help in ensuring the health and well-being of families.
Article 10
1. All appropriate measures shall be taken to ensure to women, married or unmarried, equal rights with men in the field of economic and social life, and in particular:
(a) The right, without discrimination on grounds of marital status or any other grounds, to receive vocational training, to work, to free choice of profession and employment, and to professional and vocational advancement;
(b) The right to equal remuneration with men and to equality of treatment in respect of work of equal value;
(c) The right to leave with pay, retirement privileges and provision for security in respect of unemployment, sickness, old age or other incapacity to work;
(d) The right to receive family allowances on equal terms with men.
2. In order to prevent discrimination against women on account of marriage or maternity and to ensure their effective right to work, measures shall be taken to prevent their dismissal in the event of marriage or maternity and to provide paid maternity leave, with the guarantee of returning to former employment, and to provide the necessary social services, including child-care facilities.
3. Measures taken to protect women in certain types of work, for reasons inherent in their physical nature, shall not be regarded as discriminatory.
Article 11
1. The principle of equality of rights of men and women demands implementation in all States in accordance with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
2. Governments, non-governmental organizations and individuals are urged, therefore, to do all in their power to promote the implementation of the principles contained in this Declaration.
1954 Convention on the Political Rights of Women
Article I
Women shall be entitled to vote in all elections on equal terms with men, without any discrimination.
Article II
Women shall be eligible for election to all publicly elected bodies, established by national law, on equal terms with men, without any discrimination.
Article III
Women shall be entitled to hold public office and to exercise all public functions, established by national law, on equal terms with men, without any discrimination.
Article IV
1. This Convention shall be open for signature on behalf of any Member of the United Nations and also on behalf of any other State to which an invitation has been addressed by the General Assembly.
2. This Convention shall be ratified and the instruments of ratification shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
Article V
1. This Convention shall be open for accession to all States referred to in paragraph 1 of article IV.
2. Accession shall be effected by the deposit of an instrument of accession with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
Article VI
1. This Convention shall come into force on the ninetieth day following the date of deposit of the sixth instrument of ratification or accession.
2. For each State ratifying or acceding to the Convention after the deposit of the sixth instrument of ratification or accession the Convention shall enter into force on the ninetieth day after deposit by such State of its instrument of ratification or accession.
Article VII
In the event that any State submits a reservation to any of the articles of this Convention at the time of signature, ratification or accession, the Secretary-General shall communicate the text of the reservation to all States which are or may become Parties to this Convention. Any State which objects to the reservation may, within a period of ninety days from the date of the said communication (or upon the date of its becoming a Party to the Convention), notify the Secretary-General that it does not accept it. In such case, the Convention shall not enter into force as between such State and the State making the reservation.
Article VIII
1. Any State may denounce this Convention by written notification to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Denunciation shall take effect one year after the date of receipt of the notification by the Secretary-General.
2. This Convention shall cease to be in force as from the date when the denunciation which reduces the number of Parties to less than six becomes effective.
Article IX
Any dispute which may arise between any two or more Contracting States concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention, which is not settled by negotiation, shall at the request of any one of the parties to the dispute be referred to the International Court of Justice for decision, unless they agree to another mode of settlement.
Article X
The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall notify all Members of the United Nations and the non-member States contemplated in paragraph 1 of article IV of this Convention of the following:
(a) Signatures and instruments of ratification received in accordance with article IV;
(b) Instruments of accession received in accordance with article V;
(c) The date upon which this Convention enters into force in accordance with article VI;
(d) Communications and notifications received in accordance with article VII;
(e) Notifications of denunciation received in accordance with paragraph 1 of article VIII;
(f) Abrogation in accordance with paragraph 2 of article VIII.
Article XI
1. This Convention, of which the Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts shall be equally authentic, shall be deposited in the archives of the United Nations.
2. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall transmit a certified copy to all Members of the United Nations and to the non-member States contemplated in paragraph 1 of article IV.
1974 Declaration on the Protection of Women and Children
in Emergency and Armed Conflict
X x x.
Solemnly proclaims this Declaration on the Protection of Women and Children in Emergency and Armed Conflict and calls for the strict observance of the Declaration by all Member States:
1. Attacks and bombings on the civilian population, inflicting incalculable suffering, especially on women and children, who are the most vulnerable members of the population, shall be prohibited, and such acts shall be condemned.
2. The use of chemical and bacteriological weapons in the course of military operations constitutes one of the most flagrant violations of the Geneva Protocol of 1925, the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the principles of international humanitarian law and inflicts heavy losses on civilian populations, including defenceless women and children, and shall be severely condemned.
3. All States shall abide fully by their obligations under the Geneva Protocol of 1925 and the Geneva Conventions of 1949, as well as other instruments of international law relative to respect for human rights in armed conflicts, which offer important guarantees for the protection of women and children.
4. All efforts shall be made by States involved in armed conflicts, military operations in foreign territories or military operations in territories still under colonial domination to spare women and children from the ravages of war. All the necessary steps shall be taken to ensure the prohibition of measures such as persecution, torture, punitive measures, degrading treatment and violence, particularly against that part of the civilian population that consists of women and children.
5. All forms of repression and cruel and inhuman treatment of women and children, including imprisonment, torture, shooting, mass arrests, collective punishment, destruction of dwellings and forcible eviction, committed by belligerents in the course of military operations or in occupied territories shall be considered criminal.
6. Women and children belonging to the civilian population and finding themselves in circumstances of emergency and armed conflict in the struggle for peace, self-determination, national liberation and independence, or who live in occupied territories, shall not be deprived of shelter, food, medical aid or other inalienable rights, in accordance with the provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Declaration of the Rights of the Child or other instruments of international law.
1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
PART I
Article 1
1. All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.
2. All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence.
3. The States Parties to the present Covenant, including those having responsibility for the administration of Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territories, shall promote the realization of the right of self-determination, and shall respect that right, in conformity with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.
PART II
Article 2
1. Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to take steps, individually and through international assistance and co-operation, especially economic and technical, to the maximum of its available resources, with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of the rights recognized in the present Covenant by all appropriate means, including particularly the adoption of legislative measures.
2. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to guarantee that the rights enunciated in the present Covenant will be exercised without discrimination of any kind as to race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
3. Developing countries, with due regard to human rights and their national economy, may determine to what extent they would guarantee the economic rights recognized in the present Covenant to non-nationals.
Article 3
The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to ensure the equal right of men and women to the enjoyment of all economic, social and cultural rights set forth in the present Covenant.
Article 4
The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize that, in the enjoyment of those rights provided by the State in conformity with the present Covenant, the State may subject such rights only to such limitations as are determined by law only in so far as this may be compatible with the nature of these rights and solely for the purpose of promoting the general welfare in a democratic society.
Article 5
1. Nothing in the present Covenant may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights or freedoms recognized herein, or at their limitation to a greater extent than is provided for in the present Covenant.
2. No restriction upon or derogation from any of the fundamental human rights recognized or existing in any country in virtue of law, conventions, regulations or custom shall be admitted on the pretext that the present Covenant does not recognize such rights or that it recognizes them to a lesser extent.
PART III
Article 6
1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right to work, which includes the right of everyone to the opportunity to gain his living by work which he freely chooses or accepts, and will take appropriate steps to safeguard this right.
2. The steps to be taken by a State Party to the present Covenant to achieve the full realization of this right shall include technical and vocational guidance and training programmes, policies and techniques to achieve steady economic, social and cultural development and full and productive employment under conditions safeguarding fundamental political and economic freedoms to the individual.
Article 7
The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to the enjoyment of just and favourable conditions of work which ensure, in particular:
(a) Remuneration which provides all workers, as a minimum, with:
(i) Fair wages and equal remuneration for work of equal value without distinction of any kind, in particular women being guaranteed conditions of work not inferior to those enjoyed by men, with equal pay for equal work;
(ii) A decent living for themselves and their families in accordance with the provisions of the present Covenant;
(b) Safe and healthy working conditions;
(c) Equal opportunity for everyone to be promoted in his employment to an appropriate higher level, subject to no considerations other than those of seniority and competence;
(d ) Rest, leisure and reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay, as well as remuneration for public holidays
Article 8
1. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to ensure:
(a) The right of everyone to form trade unions and join the trade union of his choice,
subject only to the rules of the organization concerned, for the promotion and protection of his economic and social interests. No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right other than those prescribed by law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public order or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others;
(b) The right of trade unions to establish national federations or confederations and the right of the latter to form or join international trade-union organizations;
(c) The right of trade unions to function freely subject to no limitations other than those prescribed by law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public order or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others;
(d) The right to strike, provided that it is exercised in conformity with the laws of the particular country.
2. This article shall not prevent the imposition of lawful restrictions on the exercise of these rights by members of the armed forces or of the police or of the administration of the State.
3. Nothing in this article shall authorize States Parties to the International Labour Organisation Convention of 1948 concerning Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize to take legislative measures which would prejudice, or apply the law in such a manner as would prejudice, the guarantees provided for in that Convention.
Article 9
The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to social security, including social insurance.
Article 10
The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize that:
1. The widest possible protection and assistance should be accorded to the family, which is the natural and fundamental group unit of society, particularly for its establishment and while it is responsible for the care and education of dependent children. Marriage must be entered into with the free consent of the intending spouses.
2. Special protection should be accorded to mothers during a reasonable period before and after childbirth. During such period working mothers should be accorded
paid leave or leave with adequate social security benefits.
3. Special measures of protection and assistance should be taken on behalf of all children and young persons without any discrimination for reasons of parentage or other conditions. Children and young persons should be protected from economic and social exploitation. Their employment in work harmful to their morals or health or dangerous to life or likely to hamper their normal development should be punishable by law. States should also set age limits below which the paid employment of child labour should be prohibited and punishable by law.
Article 11
1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions. The States Parties will take appropriate steps to ensure the realization of this right, recognizing to this effect the essential importance of international co-operation based on free consent.
2. The States Parties to the present Covenant, recognizing the fundamental right of everyone to be free from hunger, shall take, individually and through international co-operation, the measures, including specific programmes, which are needed:
(a) To improve methods of production, conservation and distribution of food by making full use of technical and scientific knowledge, by disseminating knowledge of the principles of nutrition and by developing or reforming agrarian systems in such a way as to achieve the most efficient development and utilization of natural resources;
(b) Taking into account the problems of both food-importing and food-exporting countries, to ensure an equitable distribution of world food supplies in relation to need.
Article 12
1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health.
2. The steps to be taken by the States Parties to the present Covenant to achieve the full realization of this right shall include those necessary for:
(a) The provision for the reduction of the stillbirth-rate and of infant mortality and for the healthy development of the child;
(b) The improvement of all aspects of environmental and industrial hygiene;
(c) The prevention, treatment and control of epidemic, endemic, occupational and other diseases;
(d) The creation of conditions which would assure to all medical service and medical attention in the event of sickness.
Article 13
1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to education. They agree that education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and the sense of its dignity, and shall strengthen the respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. They further agree that education shall enable all persons to participate effectively in a free society, promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations and all racial, ethnic or religious groups, and further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
2. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize that, with a view to achieving the full realization of this right:
(a) Primary education shall be compulsory and available free to all;
(b) Secondary education in its different forms, including technical and vocational
secondary education, shall be made generally available and accessible to all by every appropriate means, and in particular by the progressive introduction of free education;
(c) Higher education shall be made equally accessible to all, on the basis of capacity, by every appropriate means, and in particular by the progressive introduction of free education;
(d) Fundamental education shall be encouraged or intensified as far as possible for those persons who have not received or completed the whole period of their primary
education;
(e) The development of a system of schools at all levels shall be actively pursued, an adequate fellowship system shall be established, and the material conditions of teaching staff shall be continuously improved.
3. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to choose for their children schools, other than those established by the public authorities, which conform to such minimum educational standards as may be laid down or approved by the State and to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions.
4. No part of this article shall be construed so as to interfere with the liberty of individuals and bodies to establish and direct educational institutions, subject always to the observance of the principles set forth in paragraph I of this article and to the requirement that the education given in such institutions shall conform to such minimum standards as may be laid down by the State.
Article 14
Each State Party to the present Covenant which, at the time of becoming a Party, has not been able to secure in its metropolitan territory or other territories under its jurisdiction compulsory primary education, free of charge, undertakes, within two years, to work out and adopt a detailed plan of action for the progressive implementation, within a reasonable number of years, to be fixed in the plan, of the principle of compulsory education free of charge for all.
Article 15
1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone:
(a) To take part in cultural life;
(b) To enjoy the benefits of scientific progress and its applications;
(c) To benefit from the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.
2. The steps to be taken by the States Parties to the present Covenant to achieve the full realization of this right shall include those necessary for the conservation, the development and the diffusion of science and culture.
3. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to respect the freedom indispensable for scientific research and creative activity.
4. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the benefits to be derived from the encouragement and development of international contacts and co-operation in the scientific and cultural fields.
PART IV
Article 16
1. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to submit in conformity with this part of the Covenant reports on the measures which they have adopted and the progress made in achieving the observance of the rights recognized herein.
2. (a) All reports shall be submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall transmit copies to the Economic and Social Council for consideration in accordance with the provisions of the present Covenant;
(b) The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall also transmit to the specialized agencies copies of the reports, or any relevant parts therefrom, from States Parties to the present Covenant which are also members of these specialized agencies in so far as these reports, or parts therefrom, relate to any matters which fall within the responsibilities of the said agencies in accordance with their constitutional instruments.
Article 17
1. The States Parties to the present Covenant shall furnish their reports in stages, in accordance with a programme to be established by the Economic and Social Council within one year of the entry into force of the present Covenant after consultation with the States Parties and the specialized agencies concerned.
2. Reports may indicate factors and difficulties affecting the degree of fulfilment of obligations under the present Covenant.
3. Where relevant information has previously been furnished to the United Nations or to any specialized agency by any State Party to the present Covenant, it will not be necessary to reproduce that information, but a precise reference to the information so furnished will suffice.
Article 18
Pursuant to its responsibilities under the Charter of the United Nations in the field of human rights and fundamental freedoms, the Economic and Social Council may make arrangements with the specialized agencies in respect of their reporting to it on the progress made in achieving the observance of the provisions of the present Covenant falling within the scope of their activities. These reports may include particulars of decisions and recommendations on such implementation adopted by their competent organs.
Article 19
The Economic and Social Council may transmit to the Commission on Human Rights for study and general recommendation or, as appropriate, for information the reports concerning human rights submitted by States in accordance with articles 16 and 17, and those concerning human rights submitted by the specialized agencies in accordance with article 18.
Article 20
The States Parties to the present Covenant and the specialized agencies concerned may submit comments to the Economic and Social Council on any general recommendation under article 19 or reference to such general recommendation in any report of the Commission on Human Rights or any documentation referred to therein.
Article 21
The Economic and Social Council may submit from time to time to the General Assembly reports with recommendations of a general nature and a summary of the information received from the States Parties to the present Covenant and the specialized agencies on the measures taken and the progress made in achieving general observance of the rights recognized in the present Covenant.
Article 22
The Economic and Social Council may bring to the attention of other organs of the United Nations, their subsidiary organs and specialized agencies concerned with furnishing technical assistance any matters arising out of the reports referred to in this part of the present Covenant which may assist such bodies in deciding, each within its field of competence, on the advisability of international measures likely to contribute to the effective progressive implementation of the present Covenant.
Article 23
The States Parties to the present Covenant agree that international
action for the achievement of the rights recognized in the present Covenant includes such methods as the conclusion of conventions, the adoption of recommendations, the furnishing of technical assistance and the holding of regional meetings and technical meetings for the purpose of consultation and study organized in conjunction with the Governments concerned.
Article 24
Nothing in the present Covenant shall be interpreted as impairing the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations and of the constitutions of the specialized agencies which define the respective responsibilities of the various organs of the United Nations and of the specialized agencies in regard to the matters dealt with in the present Covenant.
Article 25
Nothing in the present Covenant shall be interpreted as impairing the inherent right of all peoples to enjoy and utilize fully and freely their natural wealth and resources.
PART V
Article 26
1. The present Covenant is open for signature by any State Member of the United Nations or member of any of its specialized agencies, by any State Party to the Statute of the International Court of Justice, and by any other State which has been invited by the General Assembly of the United Nations to become a party to the present Covenant.
2. The present Covenant is subject to ratification. Instruments of ratification shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
3. The present Covenant shall be open to accession by any State referred to in paragraph 1 of this article.
4. Accession shall be effected by the deposit of an instrument of accession with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
5. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall inform all States which have signed the present Covenant or acceded to it of the deposit of each instrument of ratification or accession.
Article 27
1. The present Covenant shall enter into force three months after the date of the deposit with the Secretary-General of the United Nations of the thirty-fifth instrument of ratification or instrument of accession.
2. For each State ratifying the present Covenant or acceding to it after the deposit of the thirty-fifth instrument of ratification or instrument of accession, the present Covenant shall enter into force three months after the date of the deposit of its own instrument of ratification or instrument of accession.
Article 28
The provisions of the present Covenant shall extend to all parts of federal States without any limitations or exceptions.
Article 29
1. Any State Party to the present Covenant may propose an amendment and file it with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. The Secretary-General shall thereupon communicate any proposed amendments to the States Parties to the present Covenant with a request that they notify him whether they favour a conference of States Parties for the purpose of considering and voting upon the proposals. In the event that at least one third of the States Parties favours such a conference, the Secretary-General shall convene the conference under the auspices of the United Nations. Any amendment adopted by a majority of the States Parties present and voting at the conference shall be submitted to the General Assembly of the United Nations for approval.
2. Amendments shall come into force when they have been approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations and accepted by a two-thirds majority of the States Parties to the present Covenant in accordance with their respective constitutional processes.
3. When amendments come into force they shall be binding on those States Parties which have accepted them, other States Parties still being bound by the provisions of the present Covenant and any earlier amendment which they have accepted.
Article 30
Irrespective of the notifications made under article 26, paragraph 5, the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall inform all States referred to in paragraph I of the same article of the following particulars:
(a) Signatures, ratifications and accessions under article 26;
(b) The date of the entry into force of the present Covenant under article 27 and the date of the entry into force of any amendments under article 29.
Article 31
1. The present Covenant, of which the Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited in the archives of the United Nations.
2. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall transmit certified copies of the present Covenant to all States referred to in article 26.
1948 UNIVERSAL DXECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Article 1.
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Article 2.
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
Article 3.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Article 4.
No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.
Article 5.
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Article 6.
Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.
Article 7.
All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.
Article 8.
Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.
Article 9.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
Article 10.
Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.
Article 11.
(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.
Article 12.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
Article 13.
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.
Article 14.
(1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
(2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Article 15.
(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.
Article 16.
(1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
(2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
Article 17.
(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
Article 19.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
Article 20.
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.
Article 21.
(1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
(2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.
(3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.
Article 22.
Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.
Article 23.
(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
(3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.
Article 24.
Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.
Article 25.
(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.
Article 26.
(1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
(2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
(3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.
Article 27.
(1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
(2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.
Article 28.
Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.
Article 29.
(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Article 30.
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.