"Will a Country's Human Rights
be regained from a regime's soiled hands?"
(Or "Notes after people chose to assert Human Rights
amidst Duterte's claim of 'upholding' it with obviously, bloodied hands")
At first, this person, of behalf of the concerned, expresses sympathies to the people, especially those who are victims of conflicts and atrocities this International Human Rights day. For amidst this creeping terrorism orchestrated by this present order, many people are increasingly aware that the country's call for human rights, social justice and peace hath been resonated throughout; outshadowing the order's claim of "change".
For knowing that the country is in a state of de-facto Martial Rule if not an obvious state of siege, the order mobilises its police, military, and paramilitary forces on the pretense of drug war as well as those of anti-insurgency operations; and from these operations these rather sow terror by making victims out of innocents, unjustly accusing those who voiced out grievances, or worse, turning communities into warzones which displaced people from their respective homes, leaving to an uncertain fate.
However, these situations didn't stop people from getting concerned, for by seeing innocents either unjustly arrested or killed, what more on seeing a leader and his fanatics claiming these as collateral damages and necessary moves if keeping on harping on the alleged threats of terrorism and destabilization plots to justify their actions, this sorry state of human rights has made the folk feel the need for asserting genuine social change, which includes their rights for Life, Liberty and its Pursuit of Happiness.
For in these situations, be it drug war or land rights, people from all walks of life felt how that order, which supposed to be "upholding human rights" actually unfortunately targets those who have less in life and have fewer rights under the law. Truly it is a war against the poor, who suffer the destructive impact of violence.
And in speaking of that order, Malacanang stubbornly clings to their impression, that by stating the administration is "protecting human rights", even elaborated it that while remains unrelenting in its "crusade against criminality, corruption, terrorism, and insurgency", also tries to be “resolute in uplifting the dignity of every Filipino” through "effectively implementing responsive programs that broaden people’s access to education, healthcare, employment, shelter, food, and basic utilities and services, the government fulfills its aspiration of a respectable standard of living that benefits the most vulnerable and marginalized groups in Philippine society."
Sounds like a snare to some, for knowing that with its controversial campaign guised as "imposing law and order", it failed to address justice to the victims, especially those who are wrongfully accused of various crimes; it did even failed to cleanse the police and the military of its scalawags and hoodlums despite issuing press releases and showing accursed men in uniform facing their charges, what more that despite "implementing responsive programs", it failed to reach many- if not been treated as a politically-motivated ruse than a social duty of the state.
And to think that the Philippines was one of the first signatories of the Universal Declaration back in 1948, having it "incorporated in domestic laws and policies, part of statecraft and the likes", not all officials, even the president would dare to observe the declaration-let alone a sentence meant to claim they're observing it. If the government truly adheres to human rights, then how come schools for indigenous masses be closed by paramilitary groups on the pretext of anticommunist hysteria? Or how come human rights lawyers, union leaders, and even churchpeople are being threatened and killed with the same formula? What a mockery of human rights then!
Also to know that with supporters of the present administration disregards human rights altogether as hindrance to the imposition of its "brand of justice", they will also claim that the administration rather emphasises more on "human lives" even at the expense of its own rights; worse, to see themselves favouring a revision in the constitution deleting a section with the state guaranteeing its citizens full respect for human rights while at the same time proposing a "flawed" "bill of duties" that may meant unconditional loyalty to the order pretending it as loyalty to the country.
If that's the case, then come to think of this: 70 years after the community of nations including the Philippines adopted the declaration, 27,000 people have been killed in a span of just over two years as a result of measures including President Rodrigo Duterte's war on drugs.
Also to know that with supporters of the present administration disregards human rights altogether as hindrance to the imposition of its "brand of justice", they will also claim that the administration rather emphasises more on "human lives" even at the expense of its own rights; worse, to see themselves favouring a revision in the constitution deleting a section with the state guaranteeing its citizens full respect for human rights while at the same time proposing a "flawed" "bill of duties" that may meant unconditional loyalty to the order pretending it as loyalty to the country.
If that's the case, then come to think of this: 70 years after the community of nations including the Philippines adopted the declaration, 27,000 people have been killed in a span of just over two years as a result of measures including President Rodrigo Duterte's war on drugs.
"These are not "cold" statistics. The victims were people with names and families. Hundreds of undocumented enforced disappearances have occurred, not to mention the more than 2,000 unresolved cases that dates back almost 50 years." as what Mary Eileen Bacalso saidth in her writeup.
