1.

Strict observance of the POP

When police officers follow and apply proper procedures, they uphold human rights while doing all that
is possible to ensure that the subsequent case to be filed in court against a suspect would prosper, in
the higher interest of justice.

“For example, when a police officer informs an arrested person about his or her Miranda Rights, that
police officer is following established procedure in making arrests, whether it is done with or without a
warrant.

If the arrested person was not informed of his or her rights, it could later on be used as a defense and a
means to charge the arresting officer with a violation. By not following procedure, a police officer runs
the risk of being charged administratively while opening an opportunity for the arrested person to be
released from detention due to a technicality.” Some policies in the PNP were also issued to uphold
certain rights. For example, the ban on the presentation of suspects before the media is intended to
protect their rights to dignity and presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

2. Adherence to National/Domestic and International Laws

Republic Act No. 7438            

AN ACT DEFINING CERTAIN RIGHTS OF PERSON ARRESTED, DETAINED OR UNDER CUSTODIAL

INVESTIGATION AS WELL AS THE DUTIES OF THE ARRESTING, DETAINING AND INVESTIGATING OFFICERS

REPUBLIC ACT N0. 9745

AN ACT PENALIZING TORTURE AND OTHER CRUEL, INHUMAN AND DEGRADING TREATMENT OR
PUNISHMENT 

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

3. Professional Competence a Courteous Service;

- A Professional exhibits a high standard of work ethics, behavior, and attitude.

- A Professional is a person who possesses expert knowledge and skills in a particular field.

- Aside from good grooming and presentable appearance, a Professional works well under
pressure and consistently delivers quality services or products on time with speed, efficiency,
effectiveness, and attention to detail. He or she also exudes self-confidence, pride of work, and
sets a good example for others to follow

- Upholding human rights is very similar to the Golden Rule which says that we must treat others
in the way we want others to treat us. When we render respect and courtesy to citizens, there is
a greater tendency for them to return that respect and courtesy.

4. Respect for the rule of Law and Civilian Supremacy

From the term law enforcement, it is understood that there can be no enforcement apart from the law.
Any act of enforcement (that is, the use of police powers or any manner of application of force) apart
from the law may be considered criminal, or at the very least, an abuse of authority.

5. Pro-Democracy and Pro-Citizen

Democratic values are best demonstrated by the police when it seeks greater participation by the
community in maintaining peace and order.

PNP and Its Human Rights Obligations

1. To RESPECT human rights means refraining from interfering with the enjoyment of people’s rights;

We as state actors we shall not interfere for as long they are excercing within the ambit of legality,
morality etc.

The moment that they violated the rights of others, that the time we, as law enforcers interfere.

2. To PROTECT human rights means to implement laws that provide equal protection to all persons
from human rights violations by state authorities or by non-state actors; The legislative branch of
government or the congress has the police power to enact laws and the implementation of such was
delegated to the law enforcers.

3. To FULFILL human rights refers to the act of establishing institutions and implementing systems,
mechanisms or procedures that enable people to claim their rights. If the police violates the rights or
freedom of claim-holders, there is the IAS, NAPOLCOM or the DIDM to conduct investigations.

The PANTHER principles of human rights were originally developed by the United Nations Food and
Agriculture Organization (FAO) for application in development planning. It is also incorporated into the
Human Rights-Based Approach Development Toolkit of the National Economic and Development
Authority (NEDA) and the Commission on Human Rights (CHR). The PANTHER principles were first
introduced to the PNP and other National Government Agencies (NGAs) during a training-workshop
entitled “Mainstreaming Human Rights-Based Approach in Political Development and Governance
Sector” in October 2010.

PRINCIPLES OF HUMAN RIGHTS

P - Participation,

A - Accountability

N - Non-Discrimination

T - Transparency

H - Human Dignity

E - Empowerment

R - Rule of Law
The PANTHER principles of human rights were originally developed by the United Nations Food and
Agriculture Organization (FAO) for application in development planning. It is also incorporated into the
Human Rights-Based Approach Development Toolkit of the National Economic and Development
Authority (NEDA) and the Commission on Human Rights (CHR). The PANTHER principles were first
introduced to the PNP and other National Government Agencies (NGAs) during a training-workshop
entitled “Mainstreaming Human Rights-Based Approach in Political Development and Governance
Sector” in October 2010.

PANTHER

Participation, active involvement of the people in public planning and decision-making.

PARTICIPATION-it is about the active involvement of people in public planning and decision-making.
This is applied by the PNP when in conducts consultations, dialogues and other activities that encourage
and enable citizens, NGOs, civil society, and other sectors of society to participate in the process of
policy or action planning and other activity related to public safety, law enforcement, etc.

Accountability, recognition that the purpose for existence of the PNP is to serve and protect the public.

ACCOUNTABILITY-the purpose of existence of the PNP is to serve and protect the public; and, as
declared in the CONSTITUTION, since all power and authority of government emanates from the people,
it is the obligation of the police to remain fully accountable to the people.

Non-Discrimination, providing police service to all persons without any bias or prejudice.

NON-DISCRIMINATION- it is about providing police service to all persons with bias or prejudice. The PNP
must serve all persons with utmost professionalism, competence, courtesy and respect regardless of
age, sex, race or ethnic origin, gender or sexual orientation, social and economic status.

Transparency, allows the public to gain access to policies, plans, documents, rules and regulations, and
other information.

TRANSPARENCY- the PNP, as much as practicable and without rick to national security or public safety,
allows the public to gain access to policies, plans, documents, rules and regulations and other regulation
that affect their safety, security and well-being.

Human Dignity, the PNP values the inherent and immutable dignity of every person at all times, without
exception.

HUMAN DIGNITY-the PNP must values the inherent and immutable dignity of persons at all times
without exceptions.

Empowerment, acknowledgement and full respect for people’s capacity to think and act freely.

EMPOWERMENT-best example are the Community-Based Dialogues on Human Rights, the barangay
pulong-pulong and other police-community relations.

RULE OF LAW-as a law enforcement agency, must continuously and consistently uphold the rule of law.

While the law affirms the individual criminal responsibility of an accused, it also
incriminates a public official on the basis of command responsibility for failure to prevent
one’s subordinates from committing violative actions under RA 9851, or submitting the
matter to competent authorities for investigation and prosecution.

The law states that courts “shall be guided” by relevant international conventions,
treaties, laws, and judicial decisions of international courts and tribunals in interpreting
its provisions.

Under Section 17, local authorities may “dispense” or stop the investigation or
prosecution if another court or international tribunal is already investigating or
prosecuting an individual for a similar offense “in the interest of justice.”

In such cases, local authorities “may surrender or extradite” suspected or accused

persons to the “appropriate international court, if any, or to another State pursuant to the
applicable extradition laws and treaties.”

3. What penalties may be imposed on persons who violate the law?

Persons found guilty of committing crimes against humanity, war crimes, or genocide
face penalties ranging from a fine of P100,000 to P500,000 and imprisonment of at
least 14 years, eight months and a day up to 20 years. The assets, property, and
proceeds directly or indirectly obtained during the commission of the violations will also
be forfeited.

Local courts may impose heavier sanctions, specifically reclusion perpetua (maximum
of 30 years imprisonment) and fine of up to P1 million “when justified by the extreme
gravity of the crime,” especially if the crimes constitute rape, or have resulted in death or
serious physical injury, and depending on the “individual circumstances” of the accused.
Public officials may also face additional accessory penalties under the Revised Penal
Code.

Persons found guilty of inciting others to commit genocide will suffer imprisonment
ranging from six years and one day to 12 years, and a fine of P10,000 up to P20,000.

Under RA 9851, victims are entitled to reparations for the damages or losses incurred
by their perpetrators based on the assessment of the court.

4. Can an incumbent president be held liable under RA 9851?

While Section 9 of RA 9851 indicates the “irrelevance” of position in government of the

accused from prosecution, or reduction of sentence, the sitting president cannot be
prosecuted for violating any provision of the law, including crimes against humanity,
until his or her tenure ends:

“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 suit
of the Philippine President during his/her tenure, shall not bar the court from exercising
its jurisdiction over such a person…”
Source: Official Gazette, Republic Act 9851, Dec. 11, 2009

Although the 1987 Philippine Constitution does not have an explicit provision regarding

presidential immunity, unlike in the 1973 Constitution, various jurisprudence still
recognize the privilege from criminal or civil suits of an incumbent president.

In a 2011 ruling, the SC explained that granting immunity to the president “is important
[so] that he be freed from any form of harassment, hindrance or distraction to enable
him to fully attend to the performance of his official duties and functions.”

The decision, which pertains to three petitions against military and government officials
allegedly involved in the abduction of two missing students of the University of the
Philippines in 2006, added that dragging the president to court litigations “impairs his
usefulness in the discharge” of his constitutional duties. Former president Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo, who was among the personalities named by the petitioners, was
dropped as a respondent owing to her presidential immunity that time.

However, the immunity from suits of a sitting Philippine president does not apply when it
comes to the ICC, which has jurisdiction over international crimes such as crimes
against humanity. Carranza said the Hague-based court does not acknowledge
immunities from suits of a head of state. (See VERA FILES FACT CHECK: ICC can
strip off Duterte's immunity)

Article 27 of the Rome Statute, which Roque, in a 2012 article, recognized as “adopted

verbatim” under Section 9 of RA 9851, provides that immunities or special procedural
rules under national or international law accorded to any government official, including
the heads of state or government, will not bar the ICC from exercising its jurisdiction.

In at least two cases, the ICC wanted to put two sitting heads of states on trial when it
issued arrest warrants against former Sudanese president Omar Al Bashir and the late
Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.

According to the ICC, Al Bashir was the first sitting president to be wanted by the ICC
for various charges, including two counts of crimes against humanity and five counts of
war crimes, that occurred in Darfur, Sudan. However, Al Bashir has yet to be tried
before the ICC because he is still at large despite two arrest warrants issued against
him. Meanwhile, the two crimes against humanity cases against Gaddafi
were terminated following his death in 2011.

Neither Sudan nor Libya became a state party or ratified the Rome Statute. But the
Rome Statute allows the ICC to launch an investigation of erring officials of the two
countries since their cases were referred by the United Nations Security Council.

While the Philippines has left the ICC, Bensouda has maintained that all crimes that
occurred in the country during the period of its membership to the statute from
November 2011 to March 2019, when the country’s withdrawal officially took effect, still
fall under the jurisdiction of the court. (See VERA FILES FACT CHECK: Panelo makes
wrong, misleading claims on ICC jurisdiction, basis of drug war probe)

The ICC’s preliminary examination on Duterte’s anti-drug campaign

At present, Bensouda has yet to come out with a conclusion of the preliminary
examination into the rights violations under Duterte’s drug war since the process began
in 2018. Articles 15 and 53 of the Rome Statute state that in order for the prosecutor to
proceed to an investigation, she must establish first the jurisdiction of the court over
alleged crimes that occurred and assess the gravity, complementarity, and the interests
of justice in the situation.

If Bensouda is able to establish basis, she must secure an authorization from the ICC
Pre-Trial Chamber to launch the investigation and request the issuance of summons or
arrest warrants against suspected Philippine officials to appear before the court.

Here is an updated timeline of events that occurred before and during the preliminary
examination of Bensouda, which she is expected to wrap up before she ends her term
on June 15: