Human Rights Law

HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
GENERAL NATURE AND DEFINITION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Human Rights
! Those rights, which are inherent in our nature, and without which, we cannot live as
human beings.
! Allow us to develop and use our human qualities, intelligence, talents and conscience,
and to satisfy our spiritual and other needs.
! Supreme, inherent, and inalienable rights to life, dignity, and self-development.
! The essence of these rights makes man human.
Basic Characteristics of Human Rights:
1. Inherent
! Not granted by any person or authority
2. Fundamental
! Without them, the life and dignity of man will be meaningless
3. Inalienable
! Cannot be rightfully taken away from a free individual
! Cannot be given away or be forfeited
4. Imprescriptible
! Cannot be lost even if man fails to use or assert them, even by a long passage of
time
5. Indivisible
! Not capable of being divided
! Cannot be denied even when other rights have already been enjoyed
6. Universal
! Applies irrespective of ones origin, status, or condition or place where one lives
! Rights can be enforced without national border
7. Interdependent
! The fulfillment or exercise of one cannot be had without the realization of the
other
Human Rights Principles:
! The dignity of man and human life is inviolable. From the dignity of man is derived the
right of every person to free development of his personality.
! A legitimate state should exist to assure that in the discharge of the governmental
functions, the dignity that is the birthright of every human being is duly safeguarded.
Abdul&Najib&Pangader& Page&1&
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
Classification of Rights:
According to Source
1. Natural Rights
! God-given rights, acknowledged by everybody to be morally good
! Unwritten, but prevail as norms of the society
2. Constitutional Rights
! Conferred and protected by the Constitution and which cannot be modified or
taken away by the law-making body
3. Statutory Rights
! Those rights which are provided by law promulgated by the law-making body
! May be abolished by the body that created them
According to Recipient
1. Individual Rights
! Accorded to individuals
2. Collective Rights
! Also called peoples rights or solidarity rights
! Rights of the society, those that can be enjoyed only in company with others
According to Aspect of Life
1. Civil Rights
! Rights which the law will enforce at the instance of private individuals for the
purpose of securing to them the enjoyment of their means of happiness
! Partake of the nature of political rights when they are utilized as a means to
participate in the government
2. Political Rights
! Rights which enable us to participate in running the affairs of the government
either directly or indirectly
3. Economic and Social Rights
! Those which the law confers upon the people to enable them to achieve social and
economic development
4. Cultural Rights
! Rights that ensure the well-being of the individual and foster the preservation,
enrichment, and dynamic evolution of national culture based on the principle of
unity in diversity in a climate of free artistic and intellectual expression.
According to Struggle for Recognition
1. First Generation Rights
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
! Civil and political rights which derives primarily from the 17th and 18th centuries
reformist theories
! Conceives of human rights more in negative (freedom from) than positive
(rights to) terms
! Favors the abstention rather the intervention of government in the exercise of
freedoms and in the quest for human dignity
2. Second Generation Rights
! Covers economic, social, and cultural rights which find their origin primarily in
the socialist tradition
! Conceives of human rights more in positive terms
! Fundamental claims to social equality
3. Third Generation Rights
! Covers collective rights
According to Derogability
1. Absolute or Non-Derogable Rights

! Those that cannot be suspended nor taken away nor restricted/limited even in
extreme emergency and even if the government invokes national security
2. Derogable or Can-Be-Limited Rights
! May be suspended or restricted or limited depending on the circumstances which
call for the preservation of social life
! Must satisfy three requirements for it to be valid:
i. It is provided for by law which is made known to every citizen;
ii. There is a state of emergency which necessitates the urgent preservation of
the public good, public safety, and public moral;
iii. It does not exceed what is strictly necessary to achieve the purpose.
Categories of Human Rights
1. Fundamental Freedom in Political Rights

i. Freedom of conscience and religion
ii. Freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression
iii. Freedom of the press and communication
iv. Freedom of association, freedom of peaceful assembly
v. Rights to privacy, reputation, and human dignity
2. Democratic Rights
! Commonly exercised in a democratic state
i. Right to vote and to participate in the electoral process
ii. Right to participate in public or governmental affairs
3. Mobility Rights
! National and international in character
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
i. Right to travel
ii. Right to return to ones country
iii. Freedom of movement within the country
4. Right to Life, Liberty, and Security of the Person
! Represent the core of fundamental rights which relate to the right to physical and
personal integrity, consistent with human dignity
i. Right to protection against political and other extrajudicial killings, the
disappearances of persons, and torture and other cruel inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment
5. Legal Rights
! Constitute due process that can be invoked by persons accused
i. Freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention
ii. Protection against unreasonable search and seizure
iii. Right to counsel
iv. Right to fair and public trial
v. Presumption of innocence
vi. Right against self-incrimination
6. Rights of Equality
! Also known as the right against discrimination
! Everyone is equal before the law and is entitled to equal protection or the equal
benefit of the law
i. Protection against discrimination on the grounds of sex, race, religion,
ethnic origin, age, marital status, and political and social condition
7. Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
! Considered more of standards to be observed by the state
i. Right to social security, social insurance, protection and assistance to the
family
ii. Right to an adequate standard of living, adequate food, clothing and
housing
iii. Right to physical and mental health
iv. Right to education
v. Right to be part of the artistic and scientific life of the country
8. Workers Rights
i. Right to association
ii. Right to organize unions
iii. Right to bargain collectively
iv. Prohibition of forced labor
v. Prohibition of employment of children
vi. Guarantee of minimum wages and other support
9. Aboriginal Rights
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
! Associated with the rights of indigenous cultural tribes or communities
10. Reproductive Rights
i. Right to found a family and bear children
ii. Right to gender sensitivity and the biomedical technology
iii. Right to family planning
11. Protective Rights of Persons in Armed Conflicts
! Provided in the international humanitarian law for the protection of children,
women and non-combatants during internal armed conflicts
12. Right of Self-determination
i. Right of people to be free from colonial rule
ii. Right of people to decide their own destiny
13. Minority Group Rights
i. Protection of ethnic, linguistic and religious minorities.
Why are human rights important?
Human rights are important in the relationships that exist between individuals and the
government that has power over them. The government exercises power over its people.
However, human rights mean that this power is limited. States have to look after the basic needs
of the people and protect some of their freedoms. Some of the most important features of human
rights are the following:
They are for everyone.

They are internationally guaranteed.
They are protected by law.
They focus on the dignity of the human being.
They protect individuals and groups.
They cannot be taken away
Origins of Human Rights

The emergence of rights in political thought is generally regarded as relatively recent, though
any historical study of rights reveals how indeterminate the philosophical charting of the
evolution of rights has been (Renteln, 1988). Human rights are considered the offspring of
natural rights, which themselves evolved from the concept of natural law. Natural law, which has
played a dominant role in Western political theory for centuries, is that standard of higher-order
morality against which all other laws are adjudged. To contest the injustice of human-made law,
one was to appeal to the greater authority of God or natural law.
Eventually this concept of natural law evolved into natural rights; this change reflected a
shift in emphasis from society to the individual. Whereas natural law provided a basis for
curbing excessive state power over society, natural rights gave individuals the ability to
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
press claims against the government (Renteln, 1988).1 The modern conception of rights
can be traced back to Enlightenment political philosophy and the movement, primarily in
England, France, and the United States, to establish limited forms of representative
government that would respect the freedom of individual citizens.
John Locke, in his Second Treatise on Government (1690), described a state of nature
prior to the creation of society in which individuals fended for themselves and looked
after their own interests. In this state, each person possessed a set of natural rights,
including the rights to life, liberty and property. According to Locke, when individuals
came together in social groups, the main purpose of their union was to secure these rights
more effectively. Consequently, they ceded to the governments they established only the
right to enforce these natural rights and not the rights themselves (Human Rights:
Historical Development, n.d.).
Lockes philosophy, known as classical liberalism, helped foster a new way of thinking
about individuals, governments, and the rights that link the two. Previously, heads of
state claimed to rule by divine right, tracing their authority through genealogy to the
ultimate source to some divine being. This was as true for Roman emperors as it was
Chinese and Japanese emperors. The theory of divine right was most forcefully asserted
during the Renaissance by monarchs across Europe, most notoriously James I of England
(1566-1625) and Louis XIV of France (1638-1715).
Lockes principles were adopted by the founding fathers of the United States in the
Declaration of Independence (1776), which stated:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are
endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life,
Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.That to secure these rights, Governments are
instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed2
The echoes of Locke are unmistakable in the language of the Declaration of
Independence. Similarly, the language used both by Locke and by the Founding Fathers
clearly foreshadows the creation of a document like the Universal Declaration. These
principles were further expounded and enshrined in the U.S. Constitution (1787) and Bill
of Rights (1789).
Natural rights theorists have asserted the existence of specific rights most notably the
right to self-preservation (Hobbes) and the right to property (Locke). Because such
theorists take the validity of fundamental rights to be self-evident, there has traditionally
been little tolerance for debate. One scholar notes that natural rights seemed peculiarly
vulnerable to ethical skepticism (Waldron 1984: 3). Nevertheless, natural rights were
not widely contested as they were asserted in a limited universe of shared Western values
(Renteln, 1988).
What, then, is a right, and how are human rights distinct from natural rights? For many
philosophical writers, a right is synonymous with a claim. The Oxford English Dictionary
defines a right as a justifiable claim, on legal or moral grounds, to have or obtain
something, or act in a certain way. The classic definition of a human right is a right
which is universal and held by all persons:
A human right by definition is a universal moral right, something which all men,
everywhere, at all times ought to have, something of which no one may be deprived
without a grave affront to justice, something which is owing to every human being
simply because he is human. (Cranston 1973: 36)
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
One frequently cited definition of human rights posits four necessary requirements:
First, it must be possessed by all human beings, as well as only by human beings. Second,
because it is the same right that all human beings possess, it must be possessed equally by
all human beings. Third, because human rights are possessed by all human beings, we
can rule out as possible candidates any of those rights which one might have in virtue of
occupying any particular status or relationship And fourth, if there are any human
rights, they have the additional characteristic of being assertable, in a manner of
speaking, against the whole world. (Wasserstrom 1979: 50)
The United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights defines humans
rights as:
rights inherent to all human beings, whatever our nationality, place of residence, sex,
national or ethnic origin, color, religion, language, or any other status. We are all equally
entitled to our human rights without discrimination. (What are Human Rights? n.d.)
The primary element recurring throughout each of these definitions is universality
human rights are inalienable and fundamental rights to all persons are inherently entitled
simply by virtue of being human. As we will soon observe, this crucial and existential
element of universality is profoundly controversial and thus quite tenuous.
The innovation of human rights in the twentieth century extended the idea of individual
rights to include all human beings, regardless of citizenship or state affiliation. Human
rights helped reconstitute individual identity and freedom as something transcending
national borders. As the atrocities of the World Wars made clear, there were times when
the state became the citizens greatest enemy and outside protection was his or her best
and only hope. Before examining universality and other ideological conflicts concerning
the idea of human rights, let us turn our attention now to the various kinds of rights that
human rights encompass.
HISTORY, THEORIES OF SOURCES AND DEVELOPMENT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
History
! Human rights were asserted by the citizens against tyrannical governments. They arose
from the struggle of man against injustices of despotic rulers.
! The struggle for the respect of human rights was originally a domestic or national issue.
! The atrocities committed on masses of people during World War II have convinced
international jurists that the protection of human rights should be an international
concern.
o Respect for human rights mainly concerns individuals without distinction as to
nationality or citizenship.
o Violation of human rights are offenses without borders.
Theories of Sources of Rights:
1. Religious/Theological Approach
o A basis of human rights theory stemming from a law higher than the state and
whose source is the Supreme Being.
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
" Human rights are not concessions granted by human institutions or states,
or any international organization as they are God-given rights.
o Central to the doctrines of all religions is the concept of dignity of man as a
consequence of human rights.
o The divine source gives human beings a high value of worth.
o The belief of a universal common creation means a common humanity and
consequently universal, basic and fundamental rights. And since rights come from
a divine source, they are inalienable and cannot be denied by mortal beings.
o Criticism: Some religions impose so many restrictions on individual freedom;
some religions even tolerate slavery, discrimination against women, and
imposition of the death penalty
2. Natural Law Theory
o Originated from the Stoics and elaborated by Greek philosophers and later by
ancient Roman law jurists.
o Perceives that the conduct of men must always conform to the law of nature.
o Natural law embodies those elementary principles of justice which were right
reason, i.e., in accordance with nature, unalterable, eternal.
o Philosophers:
" Thomas Aquinas considered natural law as the law of right reason in
accordance with the law of God, commonly known as the scholastic
natural law
" Hugo Grotius the natural characteristics of human beings are the social
impulse to live peacefully and in harmony with others whatever
conformed to the nature of men as natural human beings was right and
just; whatever is disturbing to social harmony is wrong and unjust
" John Locke envisioned human beings in a state of nature, where they
enjoyed life, liberty and property which are deemed natural rights
o Became the basis of the natural rights of man against oppressive rulers
o Nuremberg Trials rationale for finding the Nazis guilty: the crimes committed
were offenses against humanity and there is no need of a law penalizing the acts
3. Positivist Theory/Legal Positivism
o All rights and authority come from the state and what officials have promulgated.
o The only law is what is commanded by the sovereign.
o The source of human rights is to be found only in the enactment of a law with
sanctions attached.
o A right is enjoyed only if it is recognized and protected by legislation
promulgated by the state.
4. Historical Theory
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
o Advocates that human rights are not deliberate creation or the effort of man but
they have already existed through the common consciousness of the people of
what is right and just.
o Human rights exist through gradual, spontaneous and evolutionary process
without any arbitrary will of any authority.
5. Theory of Marxism
o Emphasizes the interest of society over an individual mans interest. Individual
freedom is recognized only after the interest of society is served.
o Concerned with economic and social rights over civil or political rights of
community.
o Referred to as parental with the political body providing the guidance in value
choice. But the true choice is the government set by the state
6. Functional/Sociological Approach
o Human rights exist as a means of social control, to serve the social interests of
society.
o Lays emphasis of obtaining a just equilibrium of multifarious interests among
prevailing moral sentiments and the social and economic conditions of the time
and place.
7. Utilitarian Theory
o Seeks to define the notion of rights in terms of tendencies to promote specified
ends such as common good.
o Every human decision was motivated by some calculation of pleasure and pain.
The goal is to promote the greatest happiness of the greatest number.
o Everyone is counted equally, but not treated equally.
o Requires the government to maximize the total net sum of citizens.
o An individual cannot be more important than the entire group. A man cannot
simply live alone in disregard of his impulse to society.
o The composite society of which the individual is a unit has on its own wants,
claims and demands. An act is good only when it takes into consideration the
interests of the society and tends to augment the happiness of the entire
community.
8. Theory Based on Dignity of Man/Policy Science Approach
o Human rights means sharing values of all identified policies upon which human
rights depend on.
o The most important values are respect, power, knowledge, health, and security.
o The ultimate goal of this theory is a world community where there is democratic
sharing and distribution of values.
o All available resources are utilized to the maximum and the protection of human
dignity is recognized.
9. Theories of Justice
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
o Each person possesses inviolability founded on justice.
o The rights secured for justice are not subject to political bargaining or to social
interests.
o Each person has equal rights to the whole system of liberties. There is no justice
in a community where there are social and economic inequalities.
o The general conception of justice is one of fairness and those social primary
goods such as opportunity, income and wealth and self-respect are to be
distributed equally.
10. Theory Based on Equality and Respect of Human Dignity
o The recognition of individual rights in the enjoyment of the basic freedoms such
as freedom of speech, religion, assembly, fair trial and access to courts.
o Governments must treat all their citizens equally. For this purpose, the
government must intervene in order to advance general welfare.
The EU and human rights: an unlikely evolution
by Paul Kearns
The author considers the problems associated with the regulation of human rights in EU law and
the desirability or otherwise of a binding EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.
INTRODUCTION
The European Union was not designed to be a human rights organisation and yet, with the
emergence of an EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (hereinafter referred to as the Charter), that
has already acquired some legal effect despite not being binding, the EU has now committed
itself unqualifiedly to being a staunch defender of human rights. One preliminary question is
whether this development is desirable. Why should the EU protect human rights? Why not leave
that to the Member States? A fortiori, why not be content to let a specialist body like the Council
of Europe protect human rights under its specifically-designed European Convention on Human
Rights? Such issues are policy matters and what is lamentable is that in relation to human rights
the EU has never had a constructive, overarching human rights policy. As a result of this, the
regulation of human rights has been an incremental, usually ad hoc process in the EU until very
recent times. What in fact occurred historically is that human rights elements started appearing in
the case law of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and something practical had to be done
about the situation. This incremental judicial development was not conducive to the creation of
an overall EU policy on human rights and partly explains why few questioned the regulation of
human rights in the EU as a matter of principle. However, there are arguments for and against
the EUs belated involvement in human rights.
First, it is important for the ECJ to consider individuals more general concerns as well as purely
economic matters when the court is confronted by such issues in a given case. Moreover, the EU
is a significant political actor in the world and there is an expectation that it will concern itself
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
with human rights. Dealing with human rights also gives the EU a certain ethical foundation, and
a tier of human rights adjudication within the ECJ would emphasise the EUs concern for the
observance of human rights norms. The EU must also keep up with the development of human
rights in its Member States and is in a position to unify and harmonise their separate human
rights policies. The EU
can monitor the Member States human rights records, and such EU vigilance can act as a
catalyst for the remedying of any national lack of initiative or success in this realm.
In addition, it is arguable that the EU is in a more objective position to regulate human rights
than is sometimes found in individual national states with their varying subjective policies. This
EU position is also a usefully superior position, and the EU can act as an instructive and
dominant guide for the Member States in the human rights field. A technical reason for the EUs
necessary involvement in human rights is the presence of criminal justice monitoring under the
Third Pillar which requires the EU to follow a certain human rights course. The enlargement of
the EU has required the EU to survey human rights policies and actions in the new Member
States. If necessary, a state can be refused admission to the Union on account of its poor human
rights performance, and the EU can punish Member States for any national human rights
violations by, inter alia, ceasing to trade with them. Some commentators opine that having the
EU in charge of human rights is undemocratic because in the Member States the type of voting is
preferable in being more democratic, but others contend that such an appeal for subsidiarity is
misjudged because the EU can protect minorities better than under a national majority-dictating
voting mechanism, and human rights tend to involve minorities.
HISTORY AND IMPROVEMENT
In view of the above considerations, we might wonder why human rights protection was not a
goal of the EU from its very start. As is well known, the EU began as a totally economically-
oriented body of six states concerned with primarily coal and steel, and the enhancement of their
trade in these areas. It was only very gradually that the EU moved towards political initiatives as
well as economic ones, having made changes from the EEC to the EC to the EU. At its inception,
therefore, the organisation did not have reason to believe that it would need to involve itself with
human rights issues. Moreover, the Council of Europe in Strasbourg was specifically developed
to regulate human rights in the contracting states of the European Convention on Human Rights
(hereinafter referred to as the Convention) so it was not self-evident that the EU would begin
replicating this remit itself (all the EU states are now party to the Convention). The debate
continues as to whether we really need two parallel human rights jurisdictions in Europe.
Another reason why human rights did not feature as an EU concern at its beginning is that the
founding states were disorientated after World War II and did not wish to give up significant
power to an international body such as the EU. Human rights, moreover, are now a highly topical
concern, but that was not the case in 1945, when the Universal Declaration of Human Rights had
not even been born.
Nevertheless, there began to appear foundations for the development of an EU human rights
involvement. The EU became concerned about discrimination, with the establishment, for
example, of equal pay for equal work, so its anti-discrimination initiatives were, in principle,
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
close subject-wise to the notion of human rights. The EU, moreover, was relatively quick to
develop a human rights aspect to its external policy, and this had a knock-on effect for its
internal policy. The EU institutions, such as the European Parliament, developed human rights
roles; together with the European Council, the Parliament still monitors contemporar y human
rights issues. One drawback for the founding of an EU human rights approach was the lack of an
holistic policy on human rights, and the lack of a doctrine of precedent in the ECJ led to
contradictory decisions on human rights. On a practical level, the ECJs judges were ill-equipped
to adjudicate human rights cases, not least from a lack of expertise in this field. The Commission
was also too bureaucratic and ponderous to monitor human rights matters quickly and efficiently.
The EU also took its time in regulating its own institutions human rights-wise.
So, the lack of an overall human rights policy accepted, what could the EU do in other respects
to enhance its human rights profile? A body to hone and better co- ordinate the beginnings of
such a human rights policy would improve the situation. Some also suggest accession to the
Convention but this is still a controversial matter to do with EU competence or power. The
judges of the ECJ could be trained to deal with human rights law more efficiently. The ECJ
could also benefit from a specific document to guide it, together with an initiative to process
human rights as a higher plateau of judicial concern. Doctrines could be built up in the court
more meticulously by instituting a doctrine of binding precedent, thus avoiding contradictory
human rights judgments and obiter pronouncements. Member States could become more co-
operative and more answerable to the EU for their human rights infringements; they could also
increase EU funds for human rights developments. Greater support could be given to the EU
Charter, to either separate it from other
constitutional documentation that could founder, or to make all or some of such documentation
that includes it binding. A step could be taken to open up for further discussion the disjunction
between the Convention jurisdiction based exclusively on human rights and the EU parameters
of human rights protection. How the Charter affects such a problematic should also be clearly
and cogently ascertained. At the moment, the suspension of the EUs constitutional plans
radically inhibits the evolution of a human rights plan or timetable for human rights development
by the EU.
THE CHARTER
The Charter is now incorporated in the Lisbon Treaty following the demise of the original draft
constitutional treaty so the EU appears to be continuing to galvanise and extend its human rights
interests. Contrary to popular belief, the concept of such a charter in EU law is not new. In the
1950s, a charter to replicate the Convention was envisaged but no treaty development occurred
because of the EUs preoccupation with its economic targets. It was only after the case of
Stauder, Case 29/69 Stauder v City of Ulm [1969] ECR 419, that human rights formally became
recognised as part of EU law. In that case, it was judicially stated that fundamental human rights
were enshrined in the general principles of EC/EU law. The implication was that this was where
human rights had always been lodged as a legal category. Subsequently, a human rights doctrine
of sorts was constructed by the ECJ following a series of relevant cases but this was a hazy
theme full of contradictions and complexities reflective of the ECJs lack of knowledge when
dealing with human rights law. It is arguable that this relative ineptitude was another spur for the
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
development of a clear and coherent statement of the rights protected by EU law in the form of a
charter.
There are various theories as to why the Stauder development took place: one idea is that the
notion of human rights was forged in the ECJs case law as part of a remit to counteract
Germanys questioning of the supremacy of EC/EU law. It has also even been suggested that
human rights were artificially designed into the EU legal order as an attempt to weaken
democracy, which is rather far-fetched. A creditable observation, though, is that, even when the
EU was habituating itself to its political ambitions, it nevertheless retained a bias towards the
protection of market rights, indicating perhaps that the espousal of human rights ideals was
simply camouflage beneath which to further strengthen its commercial goals, with which it is
more centrally associated. This argument is undermined, though, by the presence of the Charter
now in the second part of the extant but unratified constitutional Lisbon treaty, as the
commitment to such a charter indicates human rights priorities in general as an EU concern. One
interpretation of the presence of this Charter in a constitutionally-relevant document is that a
covert EU intention is extremely political, and futuristic
Amicus Curiae Issue 79 Autumn 2009
i.e. that the Charter become a bill of rights in a new federal state of Europe founded on the EU.
This notion is one mainly adhered to by radical Eurosceptics but it is certainly true that the EU
has developed in leaps and bounds regarding its political, as opposed to merely economic,
ambitions, and further EU political cohesion is virtually inevitable.
THE CHARTER AND THE CONVENTION
If the Charter becomes binding following the proposed but unlikely ratification of the Lisbon
Treaty, it will establish a human rights legal order that will parallel that of the Convention. This
raises a number of interesting questions. First, since a common opinion is that the Convention
has been an extremely successful regional international human rights instrument, can the Charter
really compete with it or will it be practically redundant? How will decisions be made by
solicitors advising their clients about both human rights routes to justice? If the clients problem
is economic, will he/she be advised to take the Charter route? Moreover, if similar litigation
results in involvement with both the European Court of Justice and the European Court of
Human Rights, which decision/precedent should prevail? It is commonly assumed that the EU
court will always defer to the authority of the Strasbourg court but can this be guaranteed, and
what could be the consequences if not? A confusion and contradiction of rights priorities and
values across Europe? It is true that the Strasbourg court is a victim of its own success in that it is
vastly over-burdened by cases, so the presence of another European human rights court might
alleviate such a burden, but what if that other court is lamentably substantially less specialised,
and therefore ineluctably less adept at human rights regulation? What if that other court itself is
over-burdened as the EU court indubitably is? Would European citizens experience great delays
and, more importantly, great variance in the quality of legal process afforded them? The EU
court has often been criticised for exaggerating its jurisdiction and imposing uniform rules on
Member States: should this be extended further to the realm of human rights? What will become
of subsidiarity in the EU and the margin of appreciation in the Convention system? Will the
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
presence of two substantial human rights courts in Europe render local decision-making more
subsidiary, and negotiated more dismissively and expediently, in the legal knowledge that, given
the increase in appeals, the important decision- making will ultimately lie in one or other
international court? The EU court is, moreover, composed of a judiciary that is unelected and
unaccountable. That state of affairs rests uncomfortably with the Strasbourg position which
ensures that each judicial candidate is evaluated thoroughly.
There are also more questions to be asked of the EU if it embarks on adopting a more cardinal
human rights profile. Unlike most other human rights regimes, it will
retain at least an aspect of its economic focus, even though some commentators think its
economic activity is virtually exhausted, a view with which this author disagrees. The EU will
still be a hybrid body because of its economic origins and, for a human rights institution, this is
unusual, and could be debilitating as far as resources are concerned. Moreover, under the
Strasbourg system, a right-holder is seen as an individual per se, and this idea is clearly divorced
from the notion of citizenship. The EU model is very different. Freedom of movement, and other
EU-based freedoms, are firmly attached to the idea of EU citizenship, and Member States breach
citizens rights, which are binding on those states, only when implementing or acting upon EU
law. This point emphasises again the unforeseen human rights position of the EU, which fits
uneasily with more traditional human rights approaches in more mono- dimensional institutions
such as the Council of Europe. The EU human rights mandate, moreover, cannot expand the
substantive content of human rights in the EU because the EU has limited competence to enact
rules on human rights and were there not such a limitation leading Member States might refuse
to ratify the Lisbon Treaty.
Member States of the EU have a tendency to enjoy all the economic benefits the EU provides but
to resist, or even resent, significant political consequences of their EU membership, whether or
not they are connected with economic advantages. This prevailing attitude is probably why the
Charter originally, at the draft stage in Nice in 2000, did not include the rights of minorities,
which is a substantial and surprising omission for a comprehensive human rights instrument.
Finally, in the Charter there is an accession clause facilitating accession to the Convention.
Should such accession take place, the institutions of the EU would be subject to review by the
Strasbourg court and, as a direct consequence, the EU would be unable to be the final arbiter on
the legality of EU law. This would make the enforcement of the Charters provisions subject to
the approval of the Strasbourg court. A hierarchy would then be established that would involve
much repetition of rights enforcement. Apart from Strasbourg adjudication on a few innovative
provisions in the Charter, the review of Charter rights by the Strasbourg court would be a
mundane, repetitive, and resource-wasting operation. A realist or cynic might say that such
lamentable circumstances would not have arisen had the EU not embarked on an impromptu
dealing with human rights in the first place.
Contact Us
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
The IACHR is a principal and autonomous organ of the Organization of American States
(OAS) whose mission is to promote and protect human rights in the American hemisphere. It
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
is composed of seven independent members who serve in a personal capacity. Created by the
OAS in 1959, the Commission has its headquarters in Washington, D.C. Together with the Inter-
American Court of Human Rights (the Court or the I/A Court H.R.), installed in 1979, the
Commission is one of the institutions within the inter-American system for the protection of
human rights (IAHRS).
The formal beginning of the IAHRS was approval of the American Declaration of the Rights and
Duties of Man at the Ninth International Conference of American States held in Bogota in 1948.
There the OAS Charter (hereinafter the Charter) was adopted, which declares that one of the
principles upon which the Organization is founded is the fundamental rights of the individual.
Full respect for human rights appears in several sections of the Charter, underscoring the
importance that the Member States attach to it. In the words of the Charter, the true significance
of American solidarity and good neighborliness can only mean the consolidation on this
continent, within the framework of democratic institutions, of a system of individual liberty and
social justice based on respect for the essential rights of man. The Charter establishes the Inter-
American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) as one of the principal organs of the OAS
whose function is to promote the observance and protection of human rights and to serve as a
consultative organ of the Organization in these matters.
The work of the IACHR rests on three main pillars:
the individual petition system;
monitoring of the human rights situation in the Member States, and
the attention devoted to priority thematic areas.
Operating within this framework, the Commission considers that inasmuch as the rights of all
persons subject to the jurisdiction of the Member States are to be protected, special attention
must be devoted to those populations, communities and groups that have historically been the
targets of discrimination. However, the Commissions work is also informed by other principles,
among them the following: the pro homine principle, whereby a law must be interpreted in the
manner most advantageous to the human being; the necessity of access to justice, and the
inclusion of the gender perspective in all Commission activities.
Brief History of the Inter-American Human Rights System
The inter-American human rights system was born with the adoption of the American
Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man in Bogot, Colombia in April of 1948. The
American Declaration was the first international human rights instrument of a general nature.
The IACHR was created in 1959 and held its first session in 1960. Since that time and until
2009, the Commission has held 134 sessions, some of them at its headquarters, others in different
countries of the Americas.
By 1961, the IACHR had begun to carry out on-site visits to observe the general human rights
situation in a country or to investigate specific situations. Since that time, the IACHR has carried
out 69 visits to 23 member States. In relation to its visits for the observation of the general
human rights situation of a country, the IACHR has published 44 special country reports to date.
In 1965, the IACHR was expressly authorized to examine complaints or petitions regarding
specific cases of human rights violations. Up until 1997, the IACHR has received thousands of
petitions, which have resulted in 12,000 cases which have been processed or are currently being
processed. (The procedure for the processing of individual cases is described below). The final
published reports of the IACHR regarding these individual cases may be found in the Annual
Reports of the Commission or independently by country.
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
In 1969, the American Convention on Human Rightswas adopted. The Convention entered into
force in 1978. As of August of 1997, it has been ratified by 25 countries: Argentina, Barbados,
Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El
Salvador, Grenada, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama,
Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, Uruguay and Venezuela. The Convention
defines the human rights which the ratifying States have agreed to respect and ensure. The
Convention also creates the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and defines the functions
and procedures of both the Commission and the Court. The IACHR also possesses additional
faculties which pre-date and are not derived directly from the Convention, such as the processing
of cases involving countries which are still not parties to the Convention.
AFRICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES RIGHTS
History
This Information Sheet is published by the Secretariat of the Commission on Human and
Peoples' Rights. Its purpose is to inform The African people and the ever-growing human rights
audience about the existence of the Commission and its relevance to them, and to disseminate
vital information on the activities of the Commission. This document is distributed free of charge
and has been written in clear and simple language for easy comprehension. It deals with a brief
history of the establishment of the Commission and the mandate conferred on the Commission in
the Charter. It is also available in French.
Its production in languages other than the original language is encouraged so long as no changes
are made to its content and provided that the African Commission is mentioned as the source.
The production and distribution of this document has been made possible through funding from
the European Community.
Introduction
For almost two decades after the creation of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) in May
1963, the focus of the Organisation remained almost entirely on the decolonisation of the
continent and the eradication of apartheid. In spite of the Organisations endorsement of the
principles of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights of 1948 in the preamble of the OAU
Charter, the promotion and protection of human rights within OAU members states was not a
major priority. As such, it concentrated its efforts on political and economic independence, non-
discrimination and the liberation of Africa, the eradication of colonialism on the continent and
apartheid in Southern Africa, at the expense of individual liberty.
In the early days of its existence, different groups which included the Media, the Church, inter-
governmental and non-government organisations (NGOs) mounted pressure on the OAU by
exposing some of the most gruesome human rights abuses on the continent.
They accused the Organisation of abandoning its primary goal of restoring dignity to the
humiliated African peoples. It was accused of double standards for condemning apartheid in
South Africa while failing to condemn the massive human rights violations committed by some
of its own members. At the same time, the said pressure groups were encouraging the
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
establishment of a human rights protection mechanism on the continent. Thus, starting from the
1961 Lagos conference organised by the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) to the 1979
UN sponsored Monrovia Seminar on the Establishment of Regional Commissions on Human
Rights with Special Reference to Africa, pressure and assistance were simultaneous to ensure
that OAU and its leaders uphold the spirit that motivated the struggle for political independence
to restore to the African peoples their dignity lost during slave trade and colonial eras- a cause
for which they won international sympathy and support.
In July 1979, the OAU Assembly of Heads of State and Government met in Monrovia, Liberia
and decided to place its members under international obligations through a positivist approach.
Accordingly at this summit, a resolution was adopted calling on the OAU Secretary General to
form a committee of experts which would draft an African Charter on Human and Peoples
Rights, providing among other things, for mechanisms to promote and protect the rights
embodied in the Charter.
The group of experts began work on a draft Charter in 1979 and produced a draft which was
unanimously adopted at a 1981 meeting of the OAU Heads of States and Government in Nairobi
Kenya. The Charter provides for a Human Rights Commission to ensure implementation of the
rights enshrined therein.
This acceptance of a limitation on sovereign national authority (at least on human rights related
matters), albeit minimal, was hailed as a significant step by African States. The move was
generally viewed as ushering in a new era of recognition of individuals rights as enshrined in the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
On 21 October 1986, the Charter came into force. This date has been declared, and is being
celebrated as an African Human Rights Day.
Establishment, Composition and Functioning of the Commission
By virtue of article 30 of the African Charter an African Commission on Human and Peoples
Rights ..shall be established within the Organisation of African Unity to promote human and
peoples rights and ensure their protection in Africa. The Commission is composed of eleven
members serving in their personal and independent capacity and not as representatives of their
countries. Article 31 (1) of Charter provides that the commissioners shall be chosen from
amongst African personalities of the highest reputation, known for their high morality, integrity
impartiality and competence in matters of human and peoples rights....' They are nominated by
State parties to the Charter, which may nominate up to two candidates for election. The members
of the Commission serve a six year term and are eligible for re-election indefinitely. At the
beginning of their mandates, they solemnly declare to discharge their duties impartially and
faithfully.
The Commission was officially inaugurated on 2 nd November 1987 in Addis Ababa, Ethopia,
after its members had been elected in July of the same year by the OAU 23 rd Assembly of Heads
of State and Government. The Commission did not have a permanent Secretariat after its
inauguration and thus, for its first five sessions, its activities were co-ordinated from the OAU
General Secretariat in Addis Ababa. The Secretariat which is also the Headquarters of the
Commission, is located in Banjul, The Gambia, and was officially inaugurated by His
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
Excellency, Sir Dawda Kairaba Jawara, former Head of State of the Gambia, on Monday 12 June
1989. The Commission elects its Chairman and Vice-Chairman. It meets twice a year usually
in March or April and in October or November. The sessions usually last for ten days, but are
likely to increase as the workload of the Commission increases.
Mandate of the Commission
Article 30 of the African Charter, proscribes two principal functions for which the Commission
was established : Promotion and protection of human and peoples rights in Africa.
Article 45 of the Charter enumerates the functions of the Commission to be :
the promotion of human and peoples rights;
the protection of human and peoples rights;
interpretation of the provisions of the Charter; and
any other task assigned to it by the OAU Assembly.
(a) Promotion of Human and Peoples Rights

The promotional function of the Commission is explained in article 45 (1) of the Charter. The
main essence of this function is to sensitise the population and disseminate information on
human and peoples rights in Africa
To achieve this, the Commission is mandated under article 45 (1) to collect document,
undertake studies and researches on African problems in the field of human and peoples rights,
organise seminars, symposia and conferences, disseminate information, encourage national and
local institutions concerned with human and peoples rights and, should the case arise, give its
views or make recommendations to governments.
The Commission , in collaboration with NGOs and inter-governmental organisations has been
able to establish a documentation centre used for human rights studies and research, and has also
organised several seminars, symposia and conferences aimed at promoting human and peoples
rights within the continent.
The Commission has also been co-operating with other human rights institutions (inter-
governmental or non-governmental) in many areas relating to the promotion and protection of
human rights.
Since 1988, in a bid to strengthen co-operation, the Commission has been granting observer
status to NGOs. As at its 22 nd ordinary session (Tenth Anniversary), over 200 NGOs had
received such status. It is also considering granting a special status to National Human Rights
Institutions which the Commission sees as invaluable partners in the promotion of human and
peoples rights on the continent.
The Commission has also produced and circulated several human rights documents, including
the Review of the African Commission, its Annual Activity Reports, the African Charter and the
Commissions Rules of Procedure. These documents have gone a long way to disseminate vital
information about the Commission. They can be obtained free of charge at the Secretariat of the
Commission.
Members of the Commission have also been allocated states on the continent for promotional
activities. The members are expected to visit these states and organise lectures with various
institutions to discuss the African Charter and the Commission. At each session of the
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
Commission, they report on their intersession activities.
The Commission has also appointed Special Rapporteurs on Prisons and other places of
Detention in Africa, on Arbitrary, Summary and Extra-judicial Executions, and on the Human
Rights of Women in Africa. These rapporteurs play a very significant role by researching,
gathering and documenting information on these areas of human rights. This information could
be used by the Commission to formulate advice to African States.
Article 45 (1) (b) of the Charter also requires the Commission to formulate and lay down
principles and rules aimed at solving legal problems relating to human and peoples rights and
fundamental freedoms upon which African governments may base their legislation. It is also
mandated under article 45 (1) (c) to co-operate with other African and international institutions
concerned with the promotion and protection of human and peoples rights.
Co-operation has also been sought with other regional and international institutions, such as the
European Court on Human Right, the Inter-American Commission and Court on Human Rights
bodies.
(b) Protection of Human and Peoples Rights

The second principal functions assigned to the Commission by the African Charter is stipulated
in article 45 (2) as: to ensure the protection of human and peoples rights under conditions laid
down in the present Charter.
The protective mandate, requires the Commission to take measure to ensure that the citizens
enjoy the rights contained in the Charter. This entails ensuring that the States do not violate these
rights and if they do, that the victims are reinstated in their rights.
To achieve this, the Charter provides for the communication procedure. This procedure is a
complaint system through which an individual, NGO or group of individuals who feel that their
right or those of others have been or are being violated, can petition (complain) to the
Commission about these violations.
A communication can also be made by a State party to the Charter which reasonably believes
that another State party has violated any of the provisions in the Charter. The Communication
will be studied by the Commission and if it meets the criteria set out in article 56 of the Charter,
it will be formally accepted for consideration. The state concerned will then be informed of the
allegations and invited to submit its comments on the same. Where more information is required
from the complainant, the latter will be informed.
After carefully studying the arguments advanced by both parties, the Commission will decide
whether there has been violation, it will make recommendations to the State and to the OAU
Assembly on what the State should do including how to remedy the victim.
The Commission can also, and has on various occasions, initiated friendly settlements, where the
complainant and the accused state enter into negotiations to settle the dispute amicably.
It has also sent missions to several State parties to investigate allegations of massive and serious
human rights violations. At the end of such a mission, the Commission makes recommendations
to the States concerned on how to improve the human rights situation.
In emergency situations that is, where the life of the victim is in imminent danger the
Commission might invoke provisional measures under Rule 111 of its Rules of Procedure
requesting the state to delay any action pending its final decision on the matter.
As part of its protective mandate, the Commission also receives and considers periodic reports
submitted by State parties in conformity with article 62 of the Charter. State parties are required
to submit reports to the Commission after every two years, on the legislative or other measures
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
they have taken to give effect to the rights and freedoms recognised in the Charter.
The Commission studies these reports and at the session engages in dialogue with representatives
from the States, and make recommendation; if necessary.
NGOs and ordinary citizens are also permitted to request copies of these reports from the
Secretariat of the Commission and study them. They can prepare counter-reports or recommend
to the Commission questions that could be asked to the State representatives.
(c) Interpretation
Article 45 (3) of the Charter also mandates the Commission to interpret the provisions of the
Charter at the request of a state party, an institution of the OAU or an African Organisation
recognised by the OAU. To date, neither the OAU nor a state party to the Charter has
approached the Commission for an interpretation of any of the provisions of the Charter.
However, some NGOs have sought and obtained through draft resolutions, the interpretation of
some of the provisions in the Charter. Through this method, the Commission has adopted many
resolutions which give clarity and a broader interpretation to some of the ambiguous provisions
in the Charter.
(d) Other tasks

Under article 45 (4), the Commission can perform any other task which may be entrusted to it by
the Assembly of Heads of State and Government. The OAU Assembly has also not entrusted the
Commission with any other task apart from those specifically conferred to it in the Charter.
Conclusion
The workload of the Commission increases gradually every year. In spite of the financial and
other constraints facing the Commission, it is an institution capable of responding to the present
day challenges in Africa. For it to do this however, people should make use of it.
The more it is used as a regional mechanism, the stronger and more useful it becomes in
safeguarding human rights on the continent. NGOs, human rights advocates and lawyers should
make use of the Commission and assist people to submit cases to the latter.
Arab Organization for Human Rights
The Arab Organization for Human Rights (Arabic: ) is a Non-"#$%#&' "()*+&' ,-,.& !&
Governmental Organization (NGO) that works on human rights issues in the Arab World. It was
founded with a resolution agreed on in Hammamet, Tunisia, in 1983. Among its founders was
Burhan Ghalioun.[1]
Its general Assembly is held every three years, while the Board of Trustees meets annually, and
consists of 25 members. 20 of the members are elected, while the remaining 5 are appointed by
the AOHR. Its current headquarters is in Cairo, Egypt.
The organization aims to make life easier for Arab citizens, and to defend their rights, and defend
them against any form of torture or persecution. The AOHR carries out continuous missions to
free political prisoners in the Arab World.
The organization aims to "call for respect of human rights and fundamental freedoms of all
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
citizens and residents of the Arab world; defends any individual whose human rights are
subjected to violations which are contrary to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights; endeavour, regardless of political considerations, to obtain release
of detained or imprisoned persons, and seak relief and assistance for persons whose freedom is
restricted in any way or who are subject to coercion of any kind because of their beliefs and
political convictions, or for reasons of race, sex, colour or language; protest in cases where a fair
trial is not guaranteed; provide legal assistance where necessary and possible; call for
improvements in conditions of prisoners of conscience; work for amnesty of persons sentenced
for political reasons."[2] The AOHRs goals include educating, training and documenting in the
field of human rights.[3]
The AOHR carries out field missions in an effort to release political prisoners, in some cases as
an observer and in others as a member of the defence panel. It receives complaints from
individuals, groups and organizations and contacts the relevant authorities. In addition to offering
legal assistance in several cases, the organization provides financial assistance to families of
victims.[3] In coordination with the Arab Lawyers Union, it launched a campaign for Freedom for
Prisoners of Conscience in the Arab World. It also arranges conferences and seminars.
According to UNESCO it was instrumental in setting up the Arab Institute for Human Rights in
Tunisia in 1989, in association with the Arab Lawyers Union, the Tunisian League for the
Defence of Human Rights and with the support of the Centre for Human Rights in the United
Nations.[3]
Origin of Human Rights in the Philippines
20 June 1899 Malolos Constitution: contained several provisions on civil and political rights
1902 Philippine Bill of 1902
1916 Philippine Autonomy Act of 1916/Jones Law
1934 Philippine Independence Act of 1934/Tydings-McDuffee Law
1935 First Philippine Constitution: contained Bill of Rights
1973 Second Philippine Constitution
1983 Present Philippine Constitution
! From 1942 to 1944, the Filipinos were temporarily deprived of the enjoyment of the civil
and political rights during the military rule of Japan. But these were immediately restored
in 1945.
! The Filipinos were again subjected to violation of human rights during the authoritarian
rule of President Marcos, which was terminated during the February 1986 revolution.
Human Rights Instruments to which The Philippines is a Signatory:
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
1. International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (7 June 1974)
2. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (23 October 1986)
3. Optional Protocol International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (22 August 1989)
4. International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (15
September 1976)
5. International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid
(27 July 1987)
6. International Convention against Apartheid (27 July 1987)
7. International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against
Women (5 August 1981)
8. Convention on the Political Rights of Women (12 September 1957)
9. Convention on the Rights of the Child (21 August 1990)
10. Slavery Convention of 1926 (12 July 1955)
11. Protocol Amending the Slavery Convention (17 November 1965)
12. Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade and Institutions
and Practices (17 November 1965)
13. Convention on the Suppression of the Trafficking of Persons and the Exploitation of
Others (19 September 1952)
14. Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment (18 June 1986)
15. The Convention on the Consent to Marriage, Minimum Age for Marriage and
Registration of Marriage (21 January 1965)
16. International Convention on the Protection of All Migrant Workers and Members of their
Families (13 November 1993)
17. Convention on the Nationality of Married Women
18. Convention on the Status of Stateless Persons (22 June 1955)
19. Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (22 July 1981)
20. Convention on the Prevention and the Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (7 July
1950)
21. Convention on Non-applicability of Statutory Limitation on War Crimes and Crimes
Against Humanity (15 May 1973)
22. Protocol Additional to the Geneva Convention of 12 August 1949, Relating to the
Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts (Protocol II) (11 July 1987)
CONSTITUTION DEFINED
(1) The body of rules and maxims in accordance with which the powers of sovereignty are
habitually exercised.[COOLEY, THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF LAW IN THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA]
(2) It is the document which serves as the fundamental law of the state; that written
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
instrument enacted by the direct action of the people by which the fundamental powers of the
government are established, limited and defined, and by which those powers are
distributeamong the several departments for their safe and useful exercise, for the benefit of
the body politic. [MALCOLM, PHIL. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW]
(3) "A law for the government, safeguarding individual rights, set down in writing.
[HAMILTON]
(4) According to Schwartz, "a constitution is seen as an organic instrument, under which
governmental powers are both conferred and circumscribed. Such stress
upon both grant and limitation of authority is fundamental in American theory. 'The office
and purpose of the constitution is to shape and fix the limits of governmental activity.'"
[FERNANDO, THE CONSTITUTION OF THE PHILIPPINES 20-21 (2nd ed., 1977)]
EVOLUTION OF THE PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION
The Philippines has had a total of six constitutions since the Proclamation of Independence on
June 12, 1898. In 1899, the Malolos Constitution, the first Philippine Constitutionthe first
republican constitution in Asiawas drafted and adopted by the First Philippine Republic,
which lasted from 1899 to 1901.
During the American Occupation, the Philippines was governed by the laws of the United States
of America. Organic Acts were passed by the United States Congress for the administration of
the Government of the Philippine Islands. The first was the Philippine Organic Act of 1902,
which provided for a Philippine Assembly composed of Filipino citizens. The second was the
Philippine Autonomy Act of 1916, which included the first pledge of Philippine independence.
These laws served as constitutions of the Philippines from 1902 to 1935.
In 1934, the United States Congress passed the Philippine Independence Act, which set the
parameters for the creation of a constitution for the Philippines. The Act mandated the Philippine
Legislature to call for an election of delegates to a Constitutional Convention to draft a
Constitution for the Philippines. The 1934 Constitutional Convention finished its work on
February 8, 1935. The Constitution was submitted to the President of the United States for
certification on March 25, 1935. It was in accordance with the Philippine Independence Act of
1934. The 1935 Constitution was ratified by the Filipino people through a national plebiscite, on
May 14, 1935 and came into full force and effect on November 15, 1935 with the inauguration of
the Commonwealth of the Philippines. Among its provisions was that it would remain the
constitution of the Republic of the Philippines once independence was granted on July 4, 1946.
In 1940, the 1935 Constitution was amended by the National Assembly of the Philippines. The
legislature was changed from a unicameral assembly to a bicameral congress. The amendment
also changed the term limit of the President of the Philippines from six years with no reelection
to four years with a possibility of being reelected for a second term.
During World War II the Japanese-sponsored government nullified the 1935 Constitution and
appointed Preparatory Committee on Philippine Independence to replace it. The 1943
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
Constitution was used by the Second Republic with Jose P. Laurel as President.
Upon the liberation of the Philippines in 1945, the 1935 Constitution came back into effect. The
Constitution remained unaltered until 1947 when the Philippine Congress called for its
amendment through Commonwealth Act No. 733. On March 11, 1947 the Parity amendment
gave United States citizens equal rights with Filipino citizens to develop natural resources in the
country and operate public utilities. The Constitution, thereafter, remained the same until the
declaration of martial law on September 23, 1972.
Before President Marcos declared Martial Law, a Constitutional Convention was already in the
process of deliberating on amending or revising the 1935 Constitution. They finished their work
and submitted it to President Marcos on December 1, 1972. President Marcos submitted it for
ratification in early January of 1973. Foreseeing that a direct ratification of the constitution was
bound to fail, Marcos issued Presidential Decree No. 86, s. 1972, creating citizens assemblies to
ratify the newly drafted constitution by means of a Viva Voce vote in place of secret ballots.
Marcos announced that it had been ratified and in full force and effect on January 17, 1973.
Although the 1973 Constitution had been ratified in this manner, opposition against it
continued. Chief Justice Roberto V. Concepcion in his dissenting opinion in the case of Javellana
v. Executive Secretary, exposed the fraud that happened during the citizens assembly
ratification of the 1973 Constitution on January, 10 15, 1973. However, the final decision of
this case was that the ratification of the 1973 Constitution was valid and was in force.
When democracy was restored in 1986, President Corazon C. Aquino issued Proclamation No. 3,
suspending certain provisions of the 1973 Constitution and promulgating in its stead a transitory
constitution. A month later, President Aquino issued Proclamation No. 9, s. 1986, which created
a Constitutional Commission tasked with writing a new charter to replace the 1973 Constitution.
The commission finished its work at 12:28 a.m. of October 16, 1986. National Plebiscite was
held on February 2, 1987, ratifying the new constitution. On February 11, 1987, by virtue of
Proclamation No. 58, President Aquino announced the official canvassing of results and the
ratification of the draft constitution. The 1987 Constitution finally came into full force and effect
that same day with the President, other civilian officials, and members of the Armed Forces
swearing allegiance to the new charter.
The Philippine Commission on Human Rights
Creation: Mandated by the 1987 Constitution; formally constituted by President Aquinos

Executive Order No. 163
Composition and Qualifications: One Chairman and four Members, who must be natural-born
citizens of the Philippines and a majority of whom shall be members of the Bar (Section 17, Art.
XIII, 1987 Constitution)
Powers and Functions: (Section 18, Art. XIII, 1987 Constitution)
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
(1) Investigate, on its own or on complaint by any party, all forms of human rights violations
involving civil and political rights;
(2) Adopt its operational guidelines and rules of procedure, and cite for contempt for
violations thereof in accordance with the Rules of Court;
(3) Provide appropriate legal measures for the protection of human rights of all persons
within the Philippines, as well as Filipinos residing abroad, and provide for preventive
measures and legal aid services to the under-privileged whose human rights have been
violated or need protection;
(4) Exercise visitorial powers over jails, prisons, or detention facilities;
(5) Establish a continuing program of research, education, and information to enhance
respect for the primacy of human rights;
(6) Recommend to Congress effective measures to promote human rights and to provide for
compensation to victims of violations of human rights, or their families;
(7) Monitor the Philippine Governments compliance with international treaty obligations on
human rights;
(8) Grant immunity from prosecution to any person whose testimony or whose possession of
documents or other evidence is necessary or convenient to determine the truth in any
investigation conducted by it or under its authority;
(9) Request the assistance of any department, bureau, office, or agency in the performance of
its functions;
(10) Appoint its officers and employees in accordance with law; and
(11) Perform such other duties and functions as may be provided by law.
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
THE INTERNATIONAL BILL OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Main objective of the United Nations: the recognition and respect of human rights
Purpose of the UN: the promotion and encouragement of respect for human rights and for
fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion
The UN Charter contains at least seven articles on human rights:
1. Article 13, which directs the General Assembly the task of initiating studies and
recommendations for the purpose of assisting in the realization of human rights and
fundamental freedom
2. Article 55(c), which commits the UN to promote universal respect for an observance of
human rights and fundamental freedoms
3. Article 56, which provides for the clear legal obligation of all members to pledge
themselves and take joint and separate actions in cooperation with the UN for the
advancement of the purposes set forth in Article 55(c)
4. Article 62(2), which states that the Economic and Social Council may make
recommendations for the purpose of promoting respect for an observance for human
rights and fundamental freedom for all
5. Article 76, which mandates the Trusteeship System to encourage respect for the human
rights and for fundamental freedom for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or
religion and to encourage recognition of the interdependence of the peoples of the world
6. Article 10, which suggests to the General Assembly to discuss any matter within the
scope of the Charter which may concern human rights
7. Article 69(2), which provides that the Economic and Social Council, with the approval of
the General Assembly, may perform services at the request of any member state
! Basis for the advisory services program on human rights such as providing
experts or granting fellowships or organizing seminars
NOTE: In fine, every article in the UN Charter which refers to the purposes of the UN is deemed
to include the promotion of human rights.
UN Commission on Human Rights
! Formally established by the Economic and Social Council to assist in all matters relating
in human rights
! Composed of 43 members
! Deals with all aspects of human rights issues involving the participation of all sectors of
the international committee
! Undertakes special tasks assigned to it by the General Council, including the
investigation of all allegations of human rights violations
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
! Coordinates activities relating to human rights through the UN System
! Sub-commissions of independent experts are elected and empowered to undertake studies
and to make recommendations to prevent discrimination, protect minority rights and
fundamental freedoms
! Special rapporteurs or working groups are appointed to deal with special topics
o Discrimination in education, religion and the administration of justice
o The adverse consequences for human rights caused by political, military,
economic and other forms of assistance to colonial and racist regimes
o The rights of ethnic, religious, and linguistic minorities
o Issues related to self-determination
o The realization of economic, social and cultural rights
o The rights of indigenous populations
o The new international economic order and the promotion of human rights
o The right to adequate food as a human right
o The exploitation of child labor
The Declaration of Human Rights
! A mere declaration of norms to serve as a common standard of achievement for all

nations
! UN did not direct its members to enforce them; no sanctions or enforcement machinery
was set up
! Article 55 of the UN Charter directs members to pledge themselves to the joint and
separate action in cooperation with the UN to achieve universal respect for an observance
of human rights and fundamental freedoms
! Although it is not a legally binding document, most nations have recognized the
principles of the Declaration which have gained moral weight and persuasion in the
domestic offices
! Its principles have been adopted in most state constitutions
1. Freedom and Equality
! First eight articles emphasize that all human beings, without distinction, are born
free and equal in dignity and 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, color, 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.
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
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.
2. Liberty, Security, and Recognition of Persons
Article 4, supra.
Article 5, supra.
Article 6, supra.
Article 7, supra.
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 offense 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 defense.
(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offense on account of any act or omission which
did not constitute a penal offense, 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 offense was committed.
Article 12. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or
correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honor and reputation. Everyone has the right to the
protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
Article 14.
(1) Everyone has the right to seek and 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.
3. Right to Privacy
Article 12, supra.
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.
4. Nationality and the Family
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 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.
5. Right to Own Property

! Ownership of external goods assures a person a highly necessary sphere for the
exercise of his personal and family autonomy and ought to be considered as an
extension of human freedom.
Article 17.
(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
6. Freedom of Thought, Conscience, and Religion
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.
7. Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights
Article 22. Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to
realization, through national effort and international cooperation 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 favorable
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 favorable 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 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 a 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.
8. Rights to Education and Cultural Development
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
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.
9. Development of Personality
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.
10. Other Rights
Article 20.
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
(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.
The International Bill of Human Rights
! Composed of
1. The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
(ICESCR)
2. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
3. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
! The ICESCR and the ICCPR are legally binding on the States that ratify them.
! Mechanisms through which the ICESCR and the ICCPR are enforced:
o ICESCR Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights reviews the
States Parties programs
o ICCPR Human Rights Committee, an independent body of experts
Hindrances in the Implementation of Human Rights Instruments
1. Authoritarian regimes headed by dictators and ruthless leaders

2. Article 2, par. 7 of the UN Charter, which states that:
Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the

United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within
the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members
to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but
this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement
measures under Chapter VII.
3. Provisions in international treaties that are not self-executing

! They cannot be applied unless implementing local legislations are enacted
4. Economic, social and cultural rights have no fixed and well-defined forum to redress
violations
5. Human rights violations are rarely reported
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9851
AN ACT DEFINING AND PENALIZING CRIMES AGAINST INTERNATIONAL

HUMANITARIAN LAW, GENOCIDE AND OTHER CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY,
ORGANIZING JURISDICTION, DESIGNATING SPECIAL COURTS, AND FOR
RELATED PURPOSES
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress

assembled:
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTORY PROVISIONS
Section 1. Short Title. - This Act shall be known as the "Philippine Act on Crimes Against
International Humanitarian Law, Genocide, and Other Crimes Against Humanity".
Section 2. Declaration of Principles and State Policies. -
(a) The Philippines renounces war as an instrument of national policy, adopts the
generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land and
adheres to a policy of peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation and amity with all
nations.
(b) The state values the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for
human rights, including the rights of indigenous cultural communities and other
vulnerable groups, such as women and children;
(c) It shall be the responsibility of the State and all other sectors concerned to resolved
armed conflict in order to promote the goal of "Children as Zones of Peace";
(d) The state adopts the generally accepted principles of international law, including the
Hague Conventions of 1907, the Geneva Conventions on the protection of victims of war
and international humanitarian law, as part of the law our nation;
(e) The most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole must
not go unpunished and their effective prosecution must be ensured by taking measures at
the national level, in order to put an end to impunity for the perpetrators of these crimes
and thus contribute to the prevention of such crimes, it being the duty of every State to
exercise its criminal jurisdiction over those responsible for international crimes;
(f) The State shall guarantee persons suspected or accused of having committed grave
crimes under international law all rights necessary to ensure that their trial will be fair
and prompt in strict accordance with national and international law and standards for fair
trial, It shall also protect victims, witnesses and their families, and provide appropriate
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
redress to victims and their families, It shall ensure that the legal systems in place provide
accessible and gender-sensitive avenues of redress for victims of armed conflict, and
(g)The State recognizes that the application of the provisions of this Act shall not affect
the legal status of the parties to a conflict, nor give an implied recognition of the status of
belligerency
CHAPTER II
DEFINITION OF TERMS
Section 3. For purposes of this Act, the term:
(a) "Apartheid' means inhumane acts committed in the context of an institutionalized

regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group or groups and
committed with the intention of maintaining that regime
(b) "Arbitrary deportation or forcible transfer of population" means forced displacement

of the persons concerned by expultion by expulsion or other coercive acts from the area
in which they are lawfully present, without grounds permitted under domestic or
international law.
(c) "Armed conflict" means any use of force or armed violence between States or a
protracted armed violence between governmental authorities and organized armed groups
or between such groups within that State: Provided, That such force or armed violence
gives rise, or may give rise, to a situation to which the Geneva Conventions of 12 August
1949, including their common Article 3, apply. Armed conflict may be international, that
is, between two (2) or more States, including belligerent occupation; or non-international,
that is, between governmental authorities and organized armed groups or between such
groups within a state. It does not cover internal disturbances or tensions such as riots,
isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature.
(d) "Armed forces" means all organized armed forces, groups and units that belong to a
party to an armed conflict which are under a command responsible to that party for the
conduct of its subordinates. Such armed forces shall be subject to an internal disciplinary
system which enforces compliance with International Humanitarian Law
(e) "Attack directed against any civilian population" means a course of conduct involving
the multiple commission of acts referred to in Section 6 of this Act against any civilian
population, pursuant to or in furtherance of a State or organizational policy to commit
such attack.
(f) "Effective command and control" or " effective authority and control" means having
the material ability to prevent and punish the commission of offenses by subordinates.
(g) "Enforced or involuntary disappearance of persons" means the arrest, detention, or

abduction of persons by, or with the authorization support or acquiescence of, a State or a
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
political organization followed by a refusal to acknowledge that deprivation of freedom
or to give information on the fate or whereabouts of those persons, with the intention of
removing from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time
(h) "Enslavement" means the exercise of any or all of the powers attaching to the right of
ownership over a person and includes the exercise of such power in the course of
trafficking in persons, in particular women and children.
(i) "Extermination" means the international infliction of conditions of life, inter alia, the
deprivation of access to food and medicine, calculated to bring about the destruction of a
part of a population.
(j) " Forced pregnancy" means the unlawful confinement of a women to be forcibly made
pregnant, with the intent of affecting the ethnic composition of any population carrying
out other grave violations of international law.
(k) "Hors de Combat" means a person who:
(1) is in the power of an adverse party;
(2) has clearly expressed an intention to surrender; or
(3) has been rendered unconscious or otherwise incapacitated by wounds or

sickness and therefore is incapable of defending himself: Provided, that in any of
these cases, the person form any hostile act and does not attempt to escape.
(l) "Military necessity" means the necessity of employing measures which are
indispensable to achieve a legitimate aim of the conflict and are not otherwise prohibited
by International Humanitarian Law
(m) "Non-defended locality" means a locality that fulfills the following conditions:
(1) all combatants, as well as mobile weapons and mobile military equipment,
must have been evacuated;
(2) no hostile use of fixed military installations or establishments must have been
made;
(3) no acts of hostility must have been committed by the authorities or by the
population; and
(4) no activities in support of military operations, must have been undertaken.
(n) "No quarter will be given' means refusing to spare the life of anybody, even of
persons manifestly unable to defend themselves or who clearly express their intention to
surrender.
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
(o) "Perfidy" means acts which invite the confidence of an adversary to lead him/her to
believe he/she is entitled to, or is obliged to accord, protection under the rules of
International Humanitarian Law, with the intent to betray that confidence, including but
not limited to:
(1) feigning an intent to negotiate under a flag of truce;
(2) feigning surrender;
(3) feigning incapacitation by wounds or sickness;
(4) feigning civilian or noncombatant status; and
(5) feigning protective status by use of signs, emblems or uniforms of the United
Nations or of a neutral or other State not party to the conflict.
(p) "Persecution" means the international and severe deprivation of fundamental rights
contrary to international law by reason of identity of the group or collectivity.
(q) "Protect person" in an armed conflict means:
(1) a person wounded, sick or shipwrecked, whether civilian or military;
(2) a prisoner of war or any person deprived of liberty for reasons related to an
armed conflict;
(3) a civilian or any person not taking a direct part or having ceased to take part in
the hostilities in the power of the adverse party;
(4) a person who, before the beginning of hostilities, was considered a stateless
person or refugee under the relevant international instruments accepted by the
parties to the conflict concerned or under the national legislation of the state of
refuge or state of residence;
(5) a member of the medical personnel assigned exclusively to medical purposes

or to the administration of medical units or to the operation of or administration of
medical transports; or
(6) a member of the religious personnel who is exclusively engaged in the work of
their ministry and attached to the armed forces of a party to the conflict, its
medical units or medical transports, or non-denominational, noncombatant
military personnel carrying out functions similar to religious personnel.
(r) " Superior" means:
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
(1) a military commander or a person effectively acting as a military commander;
or
(2) any other superior, in as much as the crimes arose from activities within the
effective authority and control of that superior.
(s) "Torture" means the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether
physical, mental, or psychological, upon a person in the custody or under the control of
the accused; except that torture shall not include pain or suffering arising only from,
inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions.
(t) "Works and installations containing dangerous forces" means works and installations
the attack of which may cause the release of dangerous forces and consequent severe
losses among the civilian population, namely: dams, dikes, and nuclear, electrical
generation stations.
CHAPTER III
CRIMES AGAINST INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW,
GENOCIDE AND OTHER CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY
Section 4. War Crimes. - For the purpose of this Act, "war crimes" or "crimes against
Interntional Human Humanitarian Law" means:
(a) In case of an international armed conflict , grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions
of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property
protected under provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention:
(1) Willful killing;
(2) Torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments;
(3) Willfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health;
(4) Extensive destruction and appropriation of property not justified by military

necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly;
(5) Willfully depriving a prisoner of war or other protected person of the rights of
fair and regular trial;
(6) Arbitrary deportation or forcible transfer of population or unlawful

confinement;
(7) Taking of hostages;
(8) Compelling a prisoner a prisoner of war or other protected person to serve in

the forces of a hostile power; and
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
(9) Unjustifiable delay in the repatriation of prisoners of war or other protected
persons.
(b) In case of a non-international armed conflict, serious violations of common Article 3

to the four (4) Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely , any of the following
acts committed against persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including member
of the armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by
sickness, wounds, detention or any other cause;
(1) Violence to life and person, in particular, willful killings, mutilation, cruel
treatment and torture;
(2) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and

degrading treatment;
(3) Taking of hostages; and
(4) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous
judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all judicial
guarantees which are generally recognized as indispensable.
(c) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in armed conflict, within
the established framework of international law, namely:
(1) Internationally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or

against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities;
(2) Intentionally directing attacks against civilian objects, that is, object which are
not military objectives;
(3) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and
transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions
or Additional Protocol III in conformity with intentional law;
(4) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units

or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in
accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as ling as they are entitled to
the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of
armed conflict;
(5) Launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental
loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-
term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be excessive in
relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated;
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
(6) Launching an attack against works or installations containing dangerous forces
in the knowledge that such attack will cause excessive loss of life, injury to
civilians or damage to civilian objects, and causing death or serious injury to body
or health .
(7) Attacking or bombarding, by whatever means, towns, villages, dwellings or

buildings which are undefended and which are not military objectives, or making
non-defended localities or demilitarized zones the object of attack;
(8) Killing or wounding a person in the knowledge that he/she is hors de

combat, including a combatant who, having laid down his/her arms or no longer
having means of defense, has surrendered at discretion;
(9) Making improper use of a flag of truce, of the flag or the military insignia and
uniform of the enemy or of the United Nations, as well as of the distinctive
emblems of the Geneva Conventions or other protective signs under International
Humanitarian Law, resulting in death, serious personal injury or capture;
(10) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion,

education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and
places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military
objectives. In case of doubt whether such building or place has been used to make
an effective contribution to military action, it shall be presumed not to be so used;
(11) Subjecting persons who are in the power of an adverse party to physical
mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind, or to removal of
tissue or organs for transplantation, which are neither justified by the medical,
dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his/her
interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person
or persons;
(12) Killing, wounding or capturing an adversary by resort to perfidy;
(13) Declaring that no quarter will be given;
(14) Destroying or seizing the enemy's property unless such destruction or seizure
is imperatively demanded by the necessities of war;
(15) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault;
(16) Ordering the displacements of the civilian population for reasons related to
the conflict, unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military
reasons so demand;
(17) Transferring, directly or indirectly, by the occupying power of parts of its

own civilian population into the territory it occupies, or the deportation or transfer
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside this
territory;
(18) Commiting outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and

degrading treatments;
(19) Commiting rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy,

enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence also constituting a
grave breach of the Geneva Conventions or a serious violation of common Article
3 to the Geneva Convensions;
(20) Utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain
points, areas or military forces immune from military operations;
(21) Intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by

depriving them of objects indespensable to their survival, including willfully
impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions and their
Additional Protocols;
(22) In an international armed conflict, compelling the nationals of the hostile

party to take part in the operations of war directed against their own country, even
if they were in the belligerent's service before the commencement of the war;
(23) In an international armed conflict, declaring abolished, suspended or

inadmissible in a court of law the rights and actions of the nationals of the hostile
party;
(24) Commiting any of the following acts:
(i) Conscripting, enlisting or recruiting children under the age of fifteen

(15) years into the national armed forces;
(ii) Conscripting, enlisting or recruiting children under the age of eighteen

(18) years into an armed force or group other than the national armed
forces; and
(iii) Using children under the age of eighteen (18) years to participate
actively in hostilities; and
(25) Employing means of warfare which are prohibited under international law,
such as:
(i) Poison or poisoned weapons;
(ii) Asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids,

materials or devices;
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
(iii) Bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as
bullets with hard envelopes which do not entirely cover the core or are
pierced with incisions; and
(iv) Weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare which are
of the nature to cause superfluous injury or unecessary suffering or which
are inherently indiscriminate in violation of the international law of armed
conflict.
Any person found guilty of commiting any of the acts specified herein shall suffer the
penalty provided under Section 7 of this Act.
Section 5. Genocide - (a) For the purpose of this Act, "genocide" means any of the following
acts with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, religious, social or any
other similar stable and permanent group as such:
(1) Killing members of the group;
(2) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(3) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about
its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(4) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; and
(5) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
(b) It shall be unlawful for any person to directly and publicly incite others to commit
genocide.
Any person found guilty of committing any of the acts specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this
section shall suffer the penalty provided under Section 7 of this Act.
Section 6. Other Crimes Against Humanity. - For the purpose of this act, "other crimes against
humanity" means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or
systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack:
(a) Willful killing;
(b) Extermination;
(c) Enslavement;
(d) Arbitrary deportation or forcible transfer of population;
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
(e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of
fundamental rules of international law;
(f) Torture;
(g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization,
or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity;
(h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national,
ethnic, cultural, religious, gender, sexual orientation or other grounds that are universally
recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred
to in this paragraph or any crime defined in this Act;
(i) Enforced or involuntary disappearance of persons;
(j) Apartheid; and
(k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or
serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.
Any person found guilty of committing any of the acts specified herein shall suffer the penalty
provided under Section 7 of this Act.
CHAPTER IV
PENAL PROVISIONS
Section 7. Penalties. - Any person found guilty of committing any of the acts provided under
Sections 4, 5 and 6 of this Act shall suffer the penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium to
maximum period and a fine ranging from One hundred thousand pesos (Php 100,000.00) to Five
hundred thousand pesos (Php 500,000.00).
When justified by the extreme gravity of the crime, especially where the commision of any of the
crimes specified herein results in death or serious physical injury, or constitutes rape, and
considering the individual circumstances of the accused, the penalty of reclusion perpetua and a
fine ranging from Five hundred thousand pesos (Php 500,000.00) to One million pesos (Php
1,000,000.00) shall be imposed.
Any person found guilty of inciting others to commit genocide referred to in Section 5(b) of this
Act shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period and a fine ranging from Ten
thousand pesos (Php 10,000.00) to Twenty thousand pesos (Php 20,000.00).
In addition, the court shall order the forfeiture of proceeds, property and assets derived, directly
or indirectly, from that crime, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third (3rd) parties. The
court shall also impose the corresponding accessory penalties under the Revised Penal Code,
especially where the offender is a public officer.
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
CHAPTER V
SOME PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
Section 8. Individual Criminal Responsibilities. - (a) In addition to existing provisions in

Philippine law on principles of criminal responsibility, a person shall be criminally liable as
principal for a crime defined and penalized in this Act if he/she:
(1) Commits such a crime, whether as an individual, jointly with another or

through another person, regardless of whether that other person is criminally
responsible;
(2) Orders, solicits or induces the commission of such a crime which in fact
occurs or is attempted;
(3) In any other way contributes to the commission or attempted commission of

such a crime by a group of person acting with a common purpose. Such
contribution shall be intentional and shall either:
(i) be made with the aim of furthering the criminal activity or criminal
purpose of the group, where such activity or purpose involves the
commission of a crime defined in this Act; or
(ii) be made in the knowledge of the intention of the group to commit the
crime.
(b) A person shall be criminally liable as accomplice for facilitating the commission of a
crime defined and penalized in this Act if he/she aids, abets or otherwise assists in its
commission or attempted commission, including providing the means for its commission.
(c) A person shall be criminally liable for a crime defined and penalized in this Act if
he/she attempts to commit such a crime by taking action that commences its execution by
means of a substantial step, but the crime does not occur because of circumstances
independent of the person's intention. However, a person who abandons the effort to
commit the crime or otherwise prevents the completion of the crime shall not be liable for
punishment under this Act for the attempt to commit the same if he/she completely and
voluntarily gave up the criminal purpose.
Section 9. Irrelevance of Official Capacity. - This Act shall apply equally to all persons without
any distinction based on official capacity. In particular, official capacity as a head of state or
government, a member of a government or parliament, an elected representative or a government
official shall in no case exempt a person from criminal responsibility under this Act, nor shall it,
in and of itself, constitute a ground for reduction of sentence. However:
(a) Immunities or special procedural rules that may be attached to the official capacity of
a person under Philippine law other than the established constitutional immunity from
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
suit of the Philippine President during his/her tenure, shall not bar the court from
exercising jurisdiction over such a person; and
(b) Immunities that may be attached to the official capacity of a person under
international law may limit the application of this Act, nut only within the bounds
established under international law.
Section 10. Responsibility of Superiors. - In addition to other grounds of criminal responsibility

for crimes defined and penalized under this Act, a superior shall be criminally responsible as a
principal for such crimes committed by subordinates under his/her effective command and
control, or effective authority and control as the case may be, as a result of his/her failure to
properly exercise control over such subordinates, where:
(a) That superior either knew or, owing to the circumstances at the time, should have
known that the subordinates were committing or about to commit such crimes;
(b) That superior failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his/her
power to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent
authorities for investigation and prosecution.
Section 11. Non-prescription. - The crimes defined and penalized under this Act, their
prosecution, and the execution of sentences imposed on their account, shall not be subject to any
prescription.
Section 12. Orders from a Superior. - The fact that a crime defined and penalized under this Act
has been committed by a person pursuant to an order of a government or a superior, whether
military or civilian, shall not relieve that person of criminal responsibility unless all of the
following elements occur:
(a) The person was under a legal obligation to obey orders of the government or the
superior in question;
(b) The person did not know that the order was unlawful; and
(c) The order was not manifestly unlawful.
For the purposes of this section, orders to commit genocide or other crimes against humanity are
manifestly unlawful.
CHAPTER VI
Protection of Victims and Witnesses
Section 13. Protection of Victims and Witnesses. - In addition to existing provisions in Philippine
law for the protection of victims and witnesses, the following measures shall be undertaken:
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
(a) The Philippine court shall take appropriate measures to protect the safety, physical
and physiological well-being, dignity and privacy of victims and witnesses. In so doing,
the court shall have regard of all relevant factors, including age, gender and health, and
the nature of the crime, in particular, but not limited to, where the crime involves sexual
or gender violence or violence against children. The prosecutor shall take such measures
particularly during the investigation and prosecution of such crimes. These measures
shall not be prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and to a fair and
impartial trial;
(b) As an exception to the general principle of public hearings, the court may, to protect
the victims and witnesses or an accused, conduct any part of the proceedings in camera or
allow the presentation of evidence by electronic or other special means. In particular,
such measures shall be implemented in the case of the victim of sexual violence or a child
who is a victim or is a witness, unless otherwise ordered by the court, having regard to all
the circumstances, particularly the views of the victim or witness;
(c) Where the personal interests of the victims are affected, the court shall permit their
views and concerns to be presented and considered at stages of the proceedings
determined to be appropriate by the court in manner which is not prejudicial to or
inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. Such views and
concerns may be presented by the legal representatives of the victims where the court
considers it appropriate in accordance with the established rules of procedure and
evidence; and
(d) Where the disclosure of evidence or information pursuant to this Act may lead to the
grave endangerment of the security of a witness for his/her family, the prosecution may,
for the purposes of any proceedings conducted prior to the commencement of the trial,
withhold such evidence or information and instead submit a summary thereof. Such
measures shall be exercised in a manner which is not prejudicial to or inconsistent with
the rights of the accused and to a fair and impartial trial.
Section 14. Reparations to Victims. - In addition to existing provisions in Philippine law and
procedural rules for reparations to victims, the following measures shall be undertaken:
(a) The court shall follow the principles relating to the reparations to, or in respect of,
victims,including restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. On this basis, in its
decision, the court may, wither upon request or on its own motion in exceptional
circumstances, determine the scope and extent of any damage, loss and injury to, or in
respect of, victims and state the principles on which it is acting;1avvphi1
(b) The court may make an order directly against a convicted person specifying
appropriate reparations to, or in respect of, victims, including restitution, compensation
and rehabilitation; and
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
(c) Before making an order under this section, the court may invite and shall take account
of representations from or on behalf of the convicted person, victims or other interested
persons.
Nothing in this section shall be interpreted as prejudicing the rights of victims under national or
international law.
CHAPTER VII
Applicability of International Law and Other Laws
Section 15. Applicability of International Law.- In the application and interpretation of this Act,
Philippine courts shall be guided by the following sources:
(a) The 1948 Genocide Convention;
(b) The 1949 Genava Conventions I-IV, their 1977 Additional Protocols I and II and their
2005 Additional Protocol III;
(c) The 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of
Armed Conflict, its First Protocol and its 1999 Second Protocol;
(d) The 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child and its 2000 Optional Protocol on the
Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict;
(e) The rules and principles of customary international law;
(f) The judicial decisions of international courts and tribunals;
(g) Relevant and applicable international human rights instruments;
(h) Other relevant international treaties and conventions ratified or acceded to by the
Republic of the Philippines; and
(i) Teachings of the most highly qualified publicists and authoritative commentaries on
the foregoing sources as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of international
law.
Section 16. Suppletory Application of the Revised Penal Code and Other General or Special
Laws. - The provisions of the Revised Penal Code and other general or special laws shall have a
suppletory application to the provisions of this Act.
CHAPTER VII
JURISDICTION
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
Section 17. Jurisdiction.- The State shall exercise jurisdiction over persons, whether military or
civilian, suspected or accused of a crime defined and penalized in this Act, regardless of where
the crime is committed, provided, any one of the following conditions is met:
(a) The accused is a Filipino citizen;
(b) The accused, regardless of citizenship or residence, is present in the Philippines; or
(c) The accused has committed the said crime against a Filipino citizen.
In the interest of justice, the relevant Philippine authorities may dispense with the investigation
or prosecution of a crime punishable under this Act if another court or international tribunal is
already conducting the investigation or undertaking the prosecution of such crime. Instead, the
authorities may surrender or extradite suspected or accused persons in the Philippines to the
appropriate international court, if any, or to another State pursuant to the applicable extradition
laws and treaties.
No criminal proceedings shall be initiated against foreign nationals suspected or accused of

having committed the crimes defined and penalized in this Act if they have been tried by a
competent court outside the Philippines in respect of the same offense and acquitted, or having
been convicted, already served their sentence.
Section 18. Philippine Court, Prosecutors and Investigators. - The Regional Trial Court of the
Philippines shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction over the crimes punishable under this
Act. Their judgments may be appealed or elevated to the Court of Appeals and to the Supreme
Court as provided by law.
The Supreme Court shall designate special courts to try cases involving crimes punishable under
this Act. For these cases, the Commission on Human Rights, the Department of Justice, the
Philippine National Police or other concerned law enforcement agencies shall designate
prosecutors or investigators as the case may be.
The State shall ensure that judges, prosecutors and investigators, especially those designated for
purposes of this Act, receive effective training in human rights, International Humanitarian Law
and International Criminal Law.
CHAPTER IX
FINAL PROVISIONS
Section 19. Separability Clause. - If, for any reason or reasons, any part or provision of this
Statute shall be held to be unconstitutional or invalid, other parts or provisions hereof which are
not affected thereby shall continue to be in full force and effect.
Section 20. Repealing Clause. - All laws, presidential decrees and issuances, executive orders,
rules and regulations or parts thereof inconsistent with the provisions of this Statute are hereby
repealed or modified accordingly.
!
HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&
!
Section 21. Effectivity. - This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its complete publication
in the Official Gazette or in two (2) newspapers general circulation.
!

Human Rights Law

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Human Rights Law

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

HUMAN&RIGHTS&LAW&

Basic Characteristics of Human Rights:

Human Rights Principles:

According to Aspect of Life

According to Struggle for Recognition

1. First Generation Rights

1. Absolute or Non-Derogable Rights

Categories of Human Rights

1. Fundamental Freedom in Political Rights

Why are human rights important?

They are for everyone.

Origins of Human Rights

HISTORY, THEORIES OF SOURCES AND DEVELOPMENT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

Theories of Sources of Rights:

The EU and human rights: an unlikely evolution

HISTORY AND IMPROVEMENT

Amicus Curiae Issue 79 Autumn 2009

THE CHARTER AND THE CONVENTION

AFRICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES RIGHTS

Establishment, Composition and Functioning of the Commission

(a) Promotion of Human and Peoples Rights

(b) Protection of Human and Peoples Rights

(d) Other tasks

Arab Organization for Human Rights

Origin of Human Rights in the Philippines

1902 Philippine Bill of 1902

1916 Philippine Autonomy Act of 1916/Jones Law

1934 Philippine Independence Act of 1934/Tydings-McDuffee Law

1935 First Philippine Constitution: contained Bill of Rights

1973 Second Philippine Constitution

1983 Present Philippine Constitution

Human Rights Instruments to which The Philippines is a Signatory:

EVOLUTION OF THE PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION

The Philippine Commission on Human Rights

Creation: Mandated by the 1987 Constitution; formally constituted by President Aquinos

Powers and Functions: (Section 18, Art. XIII, 1987 Constitution)

THE INTERNATIONAL BILL OF HUMAN RIGHTS

The UN Charter contains at least seven articles on human rights:

UN Commission on Human Rights

The Declaration of Human Rights

! A mere declaration of norms to serve as a common standard of achievement for all

Article 5. No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or

2. Liberty, Security, and Recognition of Persons

Article 9. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Article 12, supra.

4. Nationality and the Family

(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.

5. Right to Own Property

6. Freedom of Thought, Conscience, and Religion

7. Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights

8. Rights to Education and Cultural Development

10. Other Rights

The International Bill of Human Rights

Hindrances in the Implementation of Human Rights Instruments

1. Authoritarian regimes headed by dictators and ruthless leaders

Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the

3. Provisions in international treaties that are not self-executing

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9851

AN ACT DEFINING AND PENALIZING CRIMES AGAINST INTERNATIONAL

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress

Section 2. Declaration of Principles and State Policies. -

Section 3. For purposes of this Act, the term:

(a) "Apartheid' means inhumane acts committed in the context of an institutionalized

(b) "Arbitrary deportation or forcible transfer of population" means forced displacement