Implications of UN ruling on GMA

The Aquino government is defiant with the United Nations ruling that former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s continued incarceration violates her human rights. As far as it is concerned, “the opinion of a UN body does not count.”

Presidential Communications Secretary Herminio Coloma Jr. said only a Philippine court can “decide on such matters.” So expect a battle royale between the UN Working Group and the Philippine government. The debate will circle around reconciling national law with international law.

The Philippines is a signatory to the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Coloma has said the Aquino government will abide by its international obligations. The world will watch how the debate will develop.

With an ongoing process in Philippine courts, Coloma said neither the government nor any international body can interfere with the proceedings. He insisted that Philippine courts have sole jurisdiction to decide on such matters, forgetting that this contradicts his earlier statement that the Aquino government will abide with the ruling of the UN.

Coloma is obviously ignorant of the obligations and duties of signatories like the Philippines to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The international human rights law requires signatory states to respect, protect, and fulfill human rights. The obligation to respect means states must refrain from interfering with or curtailing the enjoyment of human rights. The obligation to protect requires states to protect individuals and groups against human rights abuses. The obligation to fulfill means that states must take positive action to facilitate the enjoyment of basic human rights.

When domestic legal proceedings fail to address human rights abuses, as in the case of GMA, mechanisms and procedures for individual complaints or communications are available at the regional and international levels to ensure that international human rights are respected, implemented, and enforced at the local levels. Signatory states are bound by the rulings of the UN body.

Cases that touch on the difficult relationship between national and international law is the specialty of Amal’s law firm Doughty Chambers. The firm has dozens of specialists in international law and is often called upon by governments for advice that it had to open an office in Strasbourg.

The continued detention of GMA has been condemned as arbitrary and violates international human rights laws.

Interestingly, the UN body, composed of five independent human rights experts, told GMA’s Filipino lawyers that the former president should also be compensated with damages for having been deprived of her liberty and the suffering and anguish that accompanied it.

Arroyo’s lawyers have urged the Philippine government to comply as a member state of the UN and signatory to the human rights law. In my opinion, the UN ruling is more than persuasive and could well set a precedent in dealing with other human rights cases.

“Lalabas na kahiya-hiya tayo sapagkat hindi tayo nagko-conform doon sa international standards of human rights,” Arroyo’s lawyer Larry Gadon said.

Long before the decision was made, Amal Clooney had carefully studied what might have been the motive for the continuous detention of GMA and arrived at the conclusion it was politically motivated.  It noted that the Sandiganbayan First Division failed to consider Arroyo’s “individual circumstances” as she is not a flight risk due to her poor health. Arroyo suffers from cervical spondylosis, a chronic ailment that affects the joints in the neck.

Arroyo’s repeated petitions to the anti-graft court to grant her temporary freedom have been all denied.

Last April, she filed a bail petition before the Supreme Court, but it remains unresolved.

She is under hospital arrest at the Veterans Memorial Medical Center (VMMC).

* * *

BayanKo adviser Jose Alejandrino raised some interesting questions and points in the social media that I think are worth reproducing here. He said, The 1987 Constitution, Article II – Declaration of Principles and State Policies - Sec. 2 states “The Philippines... adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land...”

The UN working group has declared that the arbitrary detention of GMA is in violation of international law. By violating international law which the 1987 Constitution says is part of the law of the land, does not the arbitrary detention of GMA also violate the law of the land?

Being violative of the law of the land, should not GMA be released immediately?

Should not the legal opinion of the UN be executory?

And if the Philippine government fails to comply, should it not be held accountable in the eyes of world opinion and subject to sanctions as violative of the UN ruling and declaration of human rights being a member of that world body and a signatory to the human rights law?

And if the Philippine government fails to comply, is it also not in violation of its own Constitution?

“There is another angle,” Alejandrino added. “Under the US Foreign Assistance Act, any country found guilty of violating human rights risks the suspension of US aid to that country. Amal (Clooney) has the prestige and expertise to make this happen. She could take this road. I imagine the US Senate controlled by Republicans would be more than happy to kick Aquino’s ass for reasons I won’t go into.”

He continued, “The basic issue arising from the UN statement is, if the Aquino government had concrete proof of GMA’s wrongdoing why did it not bring the case to early closure instead of detaining her arbitrarily all this time? Political vindictiveness? Beijing must be laughing. How can a government that violates international law accuse another of violating the same? When you go to court, you must go with clean hands.”

He concluded, “Instead of making silly statements out of ignorance, Aquino’s legal advisers would do better to consider the implications the UN ruling that could have further negative impact on the country. There is world opinion to consider.”