I AM wondering if many of those who attacked the resolution passed by the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) ever read the entire document filed by Iceland on behalf of co-authors Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Montenegro, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Poland, Portugal, Romania, San Marino, Slovenia, Sweden, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, or a total of 28 member states of the United Nations. The resolution was approved by 18 members of the UNHRC.
A dispassionate reading of the UNHRC resolution would reveal that it is not calling for a formal investigation but a mere inquiry and assessment. In fact, in the rationale of the resolution, it is recognized that the Philippines has taken positive steps in pursuing its commitments to the furtherance of human rights. The resolution welcomed the statements made by our government expressing its willingness to welcome independent experts from the United Nations to conduct an objective assessment of the situation of human rights in the country. It also noted with appreciation the adoption in June 2019 by the House of Representatives of the Philippines of the Human Rights Defenders Protection Act.
Far from being judgmental and accusing, the resolution also uses the word “allegations” every time an adverse claim is made against the Philippines, to emphasize that judgment is not being rendered, and that no guilt is being directly imputed on us. And these are mere recognition not of the truth of the claims being made, but simply that such claims do exist. Indeed, allegations of human rights violations in the Philippines have been made. There have also been allegations of the killing of thousands of people allegedly involved in the drug trade and drug use. In fact, while it is a fact that the President has on many occasions actually spoken ill of UN human rights officials, the resolution simply stated that it was “deeply concerned about allegations of threats, intimidation and personal attacks directed against special procedure mandate holders.”
The resolution is merely asking for, and not ordering, concrete actions to inquire into those allegations.
It urged the “Government of the Philippines to take all necessary measures to prevent extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances, to carry out impartial investigations and to hold perpetrators accountable, in accordance with international norms and standards, including on due process and the rule of law.”
It also called upon the Government of the Philippines to “cooperate with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the mechanisms of the Human Rights Council, including by facilitating country visits and preventing and refraining from all acts of intimidation or retaliation.”
Finally, it also requested the High Commissioner “to prepare a comprehensive written report on the situation of human rights in the Philippines, and to present it to the Human Rights Council at its forty-fourth session, to be followed by an enhanced interactive dialogue.”
Urged. Called upon. Requested.
These are verbs of plea, and not of an authoritative command. These do not embody an arrogant exercise of superior authority. There is even no attempt to unilaterally initiate an “investigation.” All it resolves is to have a process where a dialogue, and a sharing of notes, and where our country will be given the opportunity to clarify, with a gentle plea for the Philippines to cooperate, will be done.
This is not a resolution that deserves the kind of rage and hatred that we saw.
And if only people would further clearly study the nature of the resolution, it is not just Iceland that is behind it, but 27 other countries. Iceland was the only one that filed it. Hence, it is terribly unwarranted that we should train our guns on Iceland, and heap upon it the vitriol and ridicule, with even the President at the forefront of attacking it. Senate President Tito Sotto even called out Iceland as having no moral ascendancy to initiate the resolution on human rights, simply because of its liberal-progressive policy on abortion. Sen. Imee Marcos seconded Sotto, and even went for the extreme retaliatory move of cutting off our diplomatic ties with Iceland.
But Senators Sotto and Marcos may have failed to take note that while abortion is legal in Iceland, it cannot be used as a blanket argument against human rights simply because in countries where abortion is legalized, the warrant for the policy is even expressed as a women’s rights issue, particularly in terms of their control over their own bodies and reproduction. The issues that are being raised as relevant in the UNHRC resolution are allegations of unwarranted killing of drug suspects in violation of the rules of engagement, and of police brutality and violence in excess of what is allowed by law. Abortion may be illegal in the Philippines, and so is executing drug suspects. And while we may object to abortion on moral grounds, it is legally allowed not only in Iceland, but in many other countries, including China. Senator Marcos condemned abortion in Iceland as state-sponsored. She should be reminded that abortion in China is state-sponsored, and is a perfectly legal population control option.
Foreign Affairs Secretary Teddy Boy Locsin threatened that we should pull out of the UNHRC. The President is considering Marcos’ suggestion for us to cut our diplomatic ties with Iceland. Sotto even entertains the option of totally leaving the UN.
When matched against the wording of the resolution, these musings, and the words that we have so far inflicted on Iceland, unfairly targeting it for a resolution which it co-authored with 27 other member countries of the UN, and which was approved by 17 other members of the UNHRC, are simply unwarranted, disproportionate, emotional outbursts. To an unbiased mind, they even give the impression that we are hiding something.
https://www.manilatimes.net/unwarranted-reactions/585745/
https://www.manilatimes.net/unwarranted-reactions/585745/
No comments:
Post a Comment