ye A iy Cyne nim We IN DISPLACEMENT COMPLAINT OF RESIDENTS OF DIDIPIO,; _KASIBU,—_NwuKVA VIZCAYA. '{CHR-H-2008-ou55 (SPL?REPOR®) | me . wESOLUTION CHR (IV} No. A2011-004 ‘The ultima’ ¥oal of economic development is to raise life of all people. ‘To this end, the State promotes the full and its human and natural resources by encouraging private ent Key [Industries and business enterprises. However, when private entitieh violate the fundamental rights and entitlements of the peopie in the natn of economic development, they n'v cnly lose their moral ley!imacy — the) also defeat the very purpose for which they were given authority to conducl business. The present case is a classic and lamentable example of hos economic aggression denigrates the most basic of human rigats. ‘This case is about the alarming human rights situation in Barangay Didipio, Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya. At the center of the controversy are the mining operations of Oceana Gold Philippines, Inc, (OGPD), a toreigs) owned corporation, with which the national government of the Philippines has entered into a Financial and Technical Assistance Agreement (ITAA). Several residents ¢f Didipio object to the large-scale mining in their area oft account of percvived adverse economic and environmental impact that sud activity would ciuse to their community, Majority of the residents in Didipio are indigenous peoples aithough they are originally from oth} places and thus cannot directly claiin ancestral domain over Didipiv. Reports and ecmplaints reached, the Commission on Human Riplls (Commission for’ brevity) allegin:. widespread and systematic violations of human rights co;umitted by OGPLand the security sector against resident opposed to large-scale mining. The tense situation in the area has nol abated and seemis to be only getting worse. ene erm ssh evar 17 In furthernce of its commitment to protect and promote humaty rights, and purstwnt to its mandate to investigate violations thereof as well Liles Sa Ain, elulin Matintho: gathered, the Ces revi, nitted agouti view, i committed against the too finds; ek eo the informa, _ ¥ 'dlgenous people sey numer tightewiclee eee les inhabiting Didipin eons Were 'dipio. case. After 9 On 24 June Arimco Mining 9294 President ri, utilization eee ee tion, (ont Fidel Vi Ram, 4 oration losentered i inerals located + into a FTAA with ted developme: lin about apoootecar eaaan a ¥ | Nugra Vine Included in this area (y 4 Ramos signed into law Republic Act Nb, suilibpine Mining Act of 1995. Some of tie ee t? most relevant to this case aye the followin: pro Easement Rights. Wildh mi ‘ for purposes of mec ets WHER mining areas are so situsfed that to build, wo2.of tore ciuvdadh minty sents eae occupied lor feet Of tnstall on the mining areas or landsicwean, : fi ae Ue" persons, such infrastractre as rons, \¥ pied waste dump sites, tallings ponds, warehouses, SHBBICE or storage areas and port fects, banmaye: weve, and thefe qn’ tansmission, telephone or telegraph lines, dais ditches one flood and catchment areas, sites for water wells, q tunnak, “Mas. new river beds, pipelines, fumes, cuts, shafts, eae eo the contractor, upon payment of. just seenbensition, shall be entitled to enter and occupy said mining Sec. 76 Entry into Private Lands and Concession Areas. Subject to prior notification, holders of mining rights shall not be prevented from entry’ into private lands and concession areas by’ surface owners, o¢cupants, or 'concessionaires when conducting ‘mining operations#therein: Provided, That any damage” donet,to the property ‘of the surface owner, occupant, or concessionzire as 2 consequesce of such operatiéns,shall be properly compensated as may be ptovided for in the'ts:ylementing rules and regulations: Provided, further, That to guarantee such compensation, the person. authorized to ini post. bond witli the regional director based on the type of properties, the prevailing, prices in and around the area where the mining Gperations are to be conducted, with surety or sureties satisfactory to the regional director. Department of Environment and Natur: eed Fotmienerti Rules and Eee i) ent Administrative Order (D . 24, SLA Noes rom epi A cs eae te this case are the following provisions of sai a y Sh Section 106/ Voluntary Agreement ane On 15 August Resources (DENK) issued th¢ ¥ Syfaatbe me pan or ce nntng igacr Sram on deg tla to enter the partie, Gent Oc. The sshd agrecment segeerey eesti ageonen eee z gE £ F 8 g ge 8 i H g a i J st cre ‘een the holder of mininj ey eet ccna gma ese D512. Tn ease of disagreen Rec nual oa a ‘be brought before the Panel of agreement, tors for p ____Imlate 1995, a singe company sean g nsolidated with Climax Mining:Limited to form | December 1996, CAMC als -Arimco Mining Corporation (CAMC). i) | Philippine Mining, MmSRSieeae ae rie nents tothe FTAAto Australasialy | fe DENR nine yee ce transfer was approved by | | On 11 October 200; t i ‘i 5, the DENR issued an Ord ‘ng the Parti D ete ni jer approving the Partia| eclaration of Mining Project Feasibility for the Didipib ee j Project. Said project is covered by the FTAA held by APMI. In December 4 ition” (SRA), the same year, APMI launched(a,-‘ i 7 eC ‘Surface Rights Ac Program to enter the lands within eee a _On 30 Marth 2006, the Supreme Court issued a decision on the case of Didipio Earth Savers’ Multi-Purpose Association (DESAMA), et al vb, Gozun et al. upholding the constitutionality of the “taking” provisions 0 BLA. No. 7942 and its corresponding rules and regulatjons. The dispositiv! portion of the decision reads: “WHEREFORE, the instant petition for probibition and mandamus is hereby DISMISSED. Section 76 of Republic Act No. ‘7942 and Section 107 of DAO 96-40; Republic Act No. 7942 and its : {mplemedting Rules and Regulations contained in DAO 96-40 - ( sige ad they relate to financial and technical assistaes \ agreements, reterred to in paragraph 4 of Section 2 of article Xil ot the Constitution are NOT ‘UNCONSTITUTIONAL. ; g0 ORDERED.” ha ame to OGPI. i i CHI 4 complaints were filed with 008 Hegally id “iolently demolished some 187 ca despite failing to secure writs OF spec Mi On 1 June 3007 APMI changed its 1 In June 2) F ing that OG?I had illegally an aie ‘This was allegedly done mm = EE Ee Meso ee eee eeeA. Justi¢9 Garey, resisted and tri topes Pelghbours whb Kelped ye,ttet Fonte wot “S| further anemb eens and Pathways whi eet Past 30 years to tran also reported that OGPT ac’ eported that Op S around the Barangiy. Suit geil and comme aut str ibe uo a wath eeoRel Mobile Group ctes: Moreover, it we ‘with their officeis being statiocey While the Aa reports about at te Silently investigating and monitoring the matter, who strongly oppose qr assments and incidents of violence against those y Oppose the ee operations kept persisting. The situation October 2009 when, during an attempt ‘al, houses;-more-than-one-hundred ‘memibers-of the PNP elds and tear gas to disperse protestiig houses of their neighbors. Reports said, the ay Chairperson of Didipio were included {h those Who were violently dispersed ‘This. incident prompted, Sa to give priority to the settlement of human rights issues {h idipio. es as a “private security fore le the facilities of the latter On 05 November 2009, the Commission, led by no less than Chairperson Leila M. de Lima, together with Commissioner Jose Manuel §. Mamauag, Attorneys Robert Alcantara and Gemma Parojinog, and otlwt officers from CHR Region 2 Office, conducted an ocular inspection of Didipio to see for themselves the condition in the area. Accompauied by the Mayor of Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya, and other lovalsoficils of Barangiy Dilpio) the Compassion tok thre hat oe au Solano, NB) 4 i . Upon arrival to Didipio, th ei seat by spoil Tt can be gleaned from the aforem entioned Genert Comments that the Right to Adequate. Housing contains several freedoms and entitlements. ‘These freedoms include: protection against forced evictions and the arbitrary Mestruction and demolition of one’s home; the want to be free from arbitrary Tterference with one’s home, PINAY ani ily, On the otter band, the entitlements include: sect fty of tenure) housing, Jand and property restitution, equal and non ai access to adequat serch and participation n.honsins slat tional and Sommunity levels.* the other hand, is well entrenched in out , Section 1 of the 1987 ‘Constitution unequivocally \ all be dey rived of his life, Yiberty or properth, ie ike Cemphasis added). Likewise, the ah " ‘gee aicle 25 (1) of he Universal Declaration cy Haran RED sernation, aie rare nA din CESCR Gee Cr No, dy See nation of AN Fons of acl DI Vs indented io CT eraatonl Conve \ rot Me el A jer Rasen, ie 27 0) of sre aye Elimination of or porn, of DESTINATION saint ta wi 27 eh ot fon on te Rights of ‘Child, ticle 10,00 the enn Socal Progr ai @ of the Vancouver ‘Dectaration on Huraeh ents 19 Ln yah ae — Housing, 1961 8 lopment ectartion on tve RSEht t° Devel 115). i + ebscr General Comme ‘ ‘ ral Cometh NP. aye Right to Ase 4=_ eo ee Code of the Phili legal fra pPines and work that yunrn Rulon of Ck oMulon of Court provide for othe | puavide for other important OGPI violate Gratit protae et regulations, aliny te Haining 19 several of Didiplo ntraventiv ira aa How Sf oxtetog lars, rutes HA the demolition : ion of atl jndigenous residents in’ Did CM es Mur ate eto ea lor adequate relocatic cate at) on, ab required law. This was ria Jw. This was rhadily and categorically admit reer Conte reites ae Nae oe sxternal Affairs, Evidence of e obtained by y the Commission indicate that OGL A OGPE ha ¢ si In defen: 4 + OGPL ‘ii right of immediate ims that its condu Sgt of ime ia Ae duct ig lawful, It interposes its ()) Pelee acer on 76 on Entry into Private Li jer Sexton 75 on Section 108 £1995, in telation to Set v4 Bec SR te ior ail See 3 304, Section 105, Seton 107 aii Sepreie Court DESAMA Lear eae! claims, was recognized by ae AMA et al vs, Gozun et al, the Supreme Coutt “taking 4 ee in DI assified Section'y5 and Sect in closrions, just a a Section 76 of the Philippine Mining Acts at ees and y State's Dower of ennnent dosnain. As sch powbk may be Contracts such as OGP!), i cised by private parties G. holder of spining corr expropuntion De the State, the ame order. OGPI may,not demolis! nod “take” thet eae Brno Bret complying with the requirement ot Sy nO cash gainsaid that under our lave, ‘demolitions must be done ee aia i Bder, There belng, none, OO7Ns onduet is, patently unlawful alu violation of the residents’ right to property ‘and due process. ' A closer examination of the DESAMA Decision will rev ‘al thal indeed, expropriation proceedings are the proper remedy in case a Te ident} refuses to enter into a voluntary agreement ‘with a mining contractor. ThE Supreme Court said: visions gives no indication of an examiption of the foregoing pro that the sbourts are excluded from taking cognizaryce expropriation cases under The, mining Tew. ‘The disageeenent referred to In Section to7'does Hot involve the exercise of eminent domain, rather it contemplates of situation wherein the ipermit holders ate allowed by the surface OWneTS entry into the latters Jands and disagreement ensues a regarding the proper compensation for the ‘lowed entry and use ‘of the private lands. Noticeably, the provision points to 8 voluntary sale oF transaction, ut not to €t involuntary sale”: Be ieeethe tuprime ¢ 0 fection 76 applies when Ue ~seface 972A with the permit holder, tye eme™® just compensation, {1 docs % > % were demolished withou will ~ are now forced t. = = their homes and theis eer a ne : 2 accepting OGPI's offer ang succumbing a number of residents were never oon Even in those instances where eviction international human right norms require compliance with the relevant and in accordance with genefal- principles of Proportionality."¢ “Evictions should not result i rendered homeless or vulnerable to the violation of other As this Coimmission bas advised Previously, demolitions mast be So b nly, § Seschaarane demolitions may be legally justified. However, in Ro tatame, leeails | otherwise, can the deprivation of one's shelter be done in « manne ae Tobs a person of his dignity. 3 FTAAs unto its holder the State's lesing to undewahe mining Billie: crtracive ventures, and al ts wee tee ee ae mmo. ). Paragraph Mt % Human Rigs, Advisory on the Condsct of Foreed wictions and Hues ‘Demmiltions (at Meee 38 °os ae an “~~ co re, om see . is ; oo AT Tite Ricees wy Fann op meme amma a freshen f Veowttas’ i opementiones tifa ze the Right ty ie 2 OE ty Bais aye tits Rese zeit PKC Ereryoae @ fs the right to tie geneiom of tee ew Pee 2105s ‘otter hocenae Peyore Fartdhe 13 cd dewdrad 0 Seefom of meee aed cxerteree ‘hate bowdocs nade cee ERE OM Rew wae: f i f e f t |— internal displaceinent. = - It also preciu persons in a defined part of the bree pubjected to Arbitrary Ittemane Comment No. a6. Accondine te wee guaranteed against all unlawful and arte: Surtaste from State autieice ct Furthermore, the HRC stated that the probib is intended to guarantee that even interferen be in agcfdance with the provisions, aims = and should be, in any event, reasonable in U “The bundle of i lle of property rights seers Helo rome rigs guarai necessarily includes, amon, jus utend jus fruendi (right to enjorthe Spe) and dispose of the property in whichever way the woer have dominion over their bouses which they have 2 as they please, even to spoil or destroy it as far as the law permi ___OGPI violated these rights of the people in Didipio introduced perimeter fences around the Project Area and checkpoints at their chosen entry and ext points. These perime! blocked off the roads which have been customarily used by pathways for their easy ingress and'egress to the community. F fhe checkpoints cause arbitrary interference to the full use and en of the houses by the residents. In defense, OGPI claims to Fave introduced the perimeter merely to protect -its Project Area from unlawful elements and illeg lers. It further asserts that itphas been authorized bythe Barangay Counci! of Didipio as well as by {He'DENR to establish the checkpoints to guard against contrabands. given to OGPI by the Barangay Couneil of Didipio Pn. On the otber hand, the authority coming from The authorization only relates to the liquor other 3 y fr f arresting illegal logging, and illegal mining. the Dae en! risstions to justify its arbitrary interference to the, enj should have devise to the residence at the illegal activities. these autho! its a rights of the residents of Didipio. OGPI that avoids unnecessary inconvenience the purpose of prohibiting a joyment of the a mechanism tat same time that it serves= - Fas strode Sommission also observes. th Roser serves that the per louse ny deg he the perimeter fences were Nov geuulne’contlation "tye ehts of the residents of Didipi consbsiion aid feels aut eefldents was, ever had toh fave observed the basic principles of partic asic principles of partic transparency if It really i transparency if It Feally intended to respect the rights of @ rights of the f TI, OGPI v1 [. OGPI ViotareD THE PEOPLE IN oe See coer ca cece re ‘The security ity checkpoit i = Bremmalthe pedi points situated along Didipio's main roa perimeter of the Project Area Berane by ourrs p vat ~~ security personnel , o the community. ‘openly carrying arms, thereby threatening mem! ; Members lip of the Philippine National Police-Regional Mobile Group (PNP-RMG) of N i Oapeeeeitionts fuera Vice and Quirino were also detailed in Didipto pio, however, report that instead of fulfilling its acti mandate £0 maintain peace and ordet in the communi id. members of P-RMG ai if they were the private secu! ity, for OGPI abrogation of their sworn duty to Pere ee cmoople in trust alle Likewise, the unlawful iti i 1 ce gg eons en cnt Marsh 2008, local resident Emilio Pamibie was shot when Tre aged to Stop the ‘demolition crew from dismantling the house of his neighbor Manual Bidang. Bidang was then taking a nap inside said house. Accounts froth neighbors who ‘witnessed the shooting incident state that Emilio Pumibic drag restrained by two (2) of OGPI's security ‘personnel,.while a third — later jdentified as Whitney Dongiahon — shot Pumibic at close range while Pimeelf, The bullet pierced bis upper night 274 right part of bis back. The shooting incident occurred in plain view of members of the Philippine National Police. Despite this, said, Whitney Dongiahon was not apprehended. These facts were attested to by ic himself, and several otbers ‘who witnesse! Mr. Pumibic the incident. Pumihic was trying to free and exited through the upper Other menibers of the community who strongly oppose large~ mining operation are constantly threatened by violent demolition. & Meanwhile, leaders of the opposibionists were criminally, charged with violations of the Forestry Code. \ ffairs in Didipio constitutes a continuing threat to ui security of person: of the people in Didipio. eres hem ee i i ing untowar appet uncertainty ~ to ® inicessant ing ae fear that some! nae to them, their family or their properties. Rightly so, the local 8! ‘This state of @EEE Emnmwnnerer rrr eee units in the area e: units in the xpresséd aa of peace and order in the pe OGPI is largel: e concerns that the situation would lead { ‘ovince, ly responsible for wuing threats t the continuing threats to se: jawful demolitions were conducted at its at its behest persons, given tha forces, and that the un} ity Of ity me IV. OGPI Vv: 3 101, 1 LATED THE INDIGENOUS CommuNrTY’s Ruci Manwusrr ANIFEST THEIR CULTURE AND IDENTITY. ™ Since Deeémbey hundred and efinber-2007-OGPL hax causes tbe demolition ofa cast oe 2 illegality of such 17) houses in Didipio. Over and above the legality Of Suck, conde, this. demolition resuled Altes > consider these houses ae hundred eighty-seven (187) families whb Didipio for good, and ears Majority of whom were forced to leave Be eee eerie coandon (thelr indigenous community, customs, Uy Certainly, th , eveical ismanil ve isaac leat demolitions is irreducible to tha : Pe tacrment fn a of the residents’ houses. Demolition and the attendall Ser Padigenous peoples effectively deny said peoples the rigl}} ‘ BEY P00 peau est their Ifugao culture in community witb thet aero cir indigenous group. It means the dislocation at centr vonen. tien ‘and children, It means the destruction of Iie and a ee of life intimately connected with the land they nurtured, with # Siew to leaving z legacy for their children and theit kin that will come after’ ____ Thus, the Commission finds that OGPY’s demolition contravenes THe rights of indigendus peoples under Article 27 of the Covenant on Civil ani Political Rights, which guarantees indigenous peoples the right to manifes} and enjoy their ghlture, both individually and in community with other members of their, group. ‘Article 1 of the United Nations Deglaration on whe Rights of Indigeyous Peoples CUNDRIP”) further guarantees indigenolg ne right to the full enjoy=tent ofall human ghts and fundamentll ef and as a collective: The corollary pbligation thug al and continued development of te \s, thus enriching tHe peoples th freedoms, as individu: consists in ensuring the surviv cultural, religious and social jdentity of minority group: fabric of society 25 4 whole.s risiling the houses of indigenous peoples in Didipio, OCP! S Sipe a them of the right to enjoys manifest and celebrat 3s i with their indigenous yup. It jrreparabll i in community Bet ee the cond ch the Ifugaos of Dicipio, iM ed Ifugao culture, tradition’ impaired the conditions by whict their land and each other, previously practic and way oflife. pretense ore (pee (v wb een a aane Deg IER Comm General eee Nea Ge oS ae Pa a NN A A A A SNE EE OGPI Nusr rican ounar Cav ONT TO ACCESS CARING TAL COMMUNN the Right to Pe pdcwly eoveailsin cat oi, Qater entitles everyone to su Ne and aftocanole water tor p SER eeeNe ersonal and corvoutie Use Awe emphasiztt) ~~ in the 1CESR, thy, \ ‘The CESCR Gene: defined the right RNS eee that while there is aa right to water'is,indispei Iiving (Artic! ispensably linked to the right to adequa nd the right to the highest Teanacle Tee (Article 12). Furtherm Eeeeanthal ore, the Committee explai + is essential in the fulfillment of Roareae kee a on menteipaley ‘ © life and human dignity. AN 1g Is the fir the Comn ight to water sweater. locum ho explicit mention of a \) while there is no explicit : TCCPR and IC eee of the Right to Water in the UDH, Res cawoedaravon he Grae ae already been recognized in many oth and international documents. For instance ai 24(2) of the Conventi , acta Bee craccon cate Reena of the Child requires States parties tb Beet ce cs malnutvition "through the provision of adequale (@) of the Conv and clean drinking-water." On the other hand, Article onvention on the Elimination of All Forms of Di seriminatiol against W en states aa ssieinan states that women shall have the right to ann adequate ons, particularly in relation to... water supply.” The Genet}, Conventions on international Hi i i re iS 0 ‘ational Humanitarian Law require combatants (9 Brace Renee water to POWs, and vilians stranded) in the armed] conflict (GC III Atticles 20, 26, 29.46) ‘AP II Article § (2)), and even malo the destruction of drinking water inscallations and irrigations punishable as war crimes (AP I Article 54 (2), API Article 14). ‘ : ’ ‘All doubts hs to the legal existence of the Right to Water were finally settled when the ‘UN General ‘Assembly adopted Resolution 64/L.63 On a July 2010 declating “the right to Ye end lean drinking water antl ‘at deat ig essential for the full enjoyment of ie Sanitation as @ human rig Sfd all human rights.” Thus, the ‘Right to Water is now identified as & distinct human right. « aa = Paragraph (jt of. 15 -emphasizk t proad scope of the; Right to Water and puts in place & general standard by ®. which to measure.the Fulfillment of such a right: ; A y x ter must be adequate for'urnan i fents of the right 103" \ se ete and ee raemtdance with Articles 1202) gud 2 5 are J CESCR General Comment NO 15. 1 Other documents that refer (0 the right 0 it ree : si er i it conomic Cor een Be aiden Whe Rights of Women (8 AGE Usted Naa Ew ene Ca (UNECE) Hs ot TL, adopted ate United A Protocol on Wate and Het on an Pr of Action of te Inertion nviom on the Rights of Persons to the African Chater of rnission for Earop Environment a ‘al Conferene od by tHE ser include the following the Fone at and Welfare of the CHIE: We Protocol= an CESCR General lh wensce enn" ine aaequac, {une agequa,.__ rater should ee eae not be interpreted Deemed a ema eae ae Saye te Urented no ceil ant ultra good, sod sek psa a an Scononeyod: tanner of te fentan oe Hee a Sorry yey sar imme peed realized fut that are suid to apply univers: ‘circumstances: ply universally in all circumstances: availability, quiffit y Paragraph 4 graph 12 further identifies the three common elements or { nts oF fatbors NS. and accessibility. Th ‘ 9 ‘The absence or diminution y elements translates into a violation of the PR as a Availability mea culficient Cat ene ete Pa a is bea pou She people cal) get includes wal a ersonal and domestic use. ‘This ane See ee personal hygiene, food preparation Bnd there be enough. ae ee Se sanitation. Not only shold Se euconsor peat ee Sr eialy needs, but the supply should bso : “pe x Quality: means that wi i , at water must be safe — it must not threaten the pa it ee ‘who use it. Thus, water must be free from mmicroorganiBins, pe stances and radiological hazards that cave tmuman disebes ‘er, the water's color, odor and taste have to ‘pe acceptable. Accessitility means that water and water focilities and serylees should be available or accessible to anyone, without discrimination of Any kind. It has four aspects: 1) Physical Accessibility; 2) Econviic ‘Accessibility; 3) Non-discrimination; and 4) ) Information Access ibility. ‘As for domestic law, PD 1067 also known as the Water Code of the Philippines gives priority to ensuring water security for domestic purpbses. iarticle 22 of said law provides: : 1 Art 22: Between two or sore’ appropriators of water from the same Sources of supply, priority ¢ Eine of appropriation shell give the better right, except hat in times of emergency the use of water for i ‘cipal purposes shall have better right over all other uses; Provided, that ‘where water cee jg recurrent and ue es; Pfor municipal use has © Ens priority in time o} ‘of supply in acco! lance with conditions prescribed by the Council (emphiisis added). f these norms establishes two key points: wa i Kt to water as 2 distinct human right; and, a an the State's obligation to ensure the security 8b clean water supply for domestic purposes: ™ ~~ + - ‘ e : id oe| Paes Water cee, reat to ter resoumou Caveat to the quantity and quality of the In terms of quanti process mineral Sreg, tere yon tmmense volar process mumeral ores, there ts no certainty that an ¢ Seen ee Saabs Teme Tae eet atic lty-to day {hat an amount surticent eee ess Ae aes agricultural uses, especially soln Gente eC ae Ferme ae See ce ne oeverennd Lees A oadt ere) te Bec anee has recently suffered from and is predicted to sully Free naae Cee a eats ot cimate henge: The Comptes the Department. of Agric He Nueva Vizcaya was specifically identified by \ Greens cate oat ee Seas | much scarcer, =sce itis—ishound'to get | In terms F Breeescing Be eacrenes contaminated discharges from the mite Peeeene cienicoal ah tailingg ponds could seep into the river systems th ‘would eal nes uaa animal and environmental hazards that A he ie. water un fee peiaally wean used for nfit for any and all uses it Hus OGPI is thus advised to’ exercise fe i jaa thus adi prudence and extraordinal diligence shoud it utilize the Didipio's water resources, lest it “folate Didipio’s indigenous community’s human right to water. VI. THE PNP VIOLATED TIS OWN OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES DURING THE OCTOBER 2 LNCIDENT BY CARRYING HIGH-POWERED FIREARMS AND BY APPLYING UNNECESSARY AND ‘UNREASONABLE FORCE. the PNP Manual on Police Operational Froeedars provides Sf rd. rational conduct for the police in general, and msl pee ae he guumdara procedure in Demolish procedures. Rulé,t9 thereof treats «that of El itty to, ut indi wvth, certain adver impacts (|. cg susceptibility to, But ibility "0 ore th, certain a epi ts rtal Pane} on Climate Change), ; Palay Sector (article ont} 3° To be “vulnerable” implies Fr a Nino) [Fourth Quarterly Report of ihe DE ElINiod m Measures i Ni Tro ce DA Sts Alle PSO ACLS ign erted2_2010a¥ ae rerhnp/ frm da gov pt/newnde 1 ES ere mate Change (IPCC). Cri Bcecording to the 4 Quorterly Report are -gnerametel PEM oo ey growth ant oT i eae < Dmgtiatet mr ey poween ryan. Regional WHR? impacts on multiple sectors, fncluding agriculture, Wat ges are projected. * iaecae Eee ond a ea ofa zee ile ot Mini increases in irrigation : BT gavironmental and», Socal Impeets BER BEB BB w ww ww we - No iS_— i Orders, Injunctions, thereof are directly cues other ‘Simi e fier Similar Order, The relevent pi Sec. 1, Role of the PNP in the Enfi forcement of a Demolition Ree injunetion order s © sue cteathe Shere ge be sranted on accompanted by a-valld order isaued byt someeeee an ‘A. competent court and or swith sit Gives BRR Permission from the Presidential Co and cleared with the canon Police assistance shall Rae aca concerned mayor before its enforcenment b. The duties en of PNP personnel in Tinted i te re nspeeronnel in any demolition avy shall be ty, enforcement of laws, apd legal orders of duly constituted auth nt Sreaetibed by gutborties "amd to perform "specific functions c. PNP personnel as proper aiforn a pa te provide police assistance shall be in ee asgeston nd wil be fe by an oficer during the actual and Ears They shall be limited only to occupying the pieetlins of Jaw enforeement and evi disturbance control; shall Fee eee ie ae q reff m unnecessary and unreasonable force aha Bee er Rule 21 of the Operational.Procedures deals with Civil Die q Management (CDM) Operations. Provisions applicable to this case are following: -Sec. 2, Specific Guidelines — » xxx is 5 o, The miémbers of the PNP CDM contingent shall not carry “Oy Kind of firearms but may be equipped with baton oF riot sticks, ray helinets with visor, gas vrasks, boots or ankle- igh siioes with shin guayils (emphasis added). ‘ _ Tear as, smoke grevades, water cannons OF 30 similar onti- Z Z fess the public assembly is attended r shall not be used unl riot device c by actual violence or serious eats of violence, or deliberate destructidn of property. XXX \ Sec. 6. CDM persticnslapereschte % Xxx disturbance ‘ie Fi PT doting, an_ operational approach to a cl oe 2, fo ee mand and his staf must adhere scrupulously ree the “minimum necess077! ree” nrinrinie for :a em ee we cc em eee ee be used i (emphasis ad ves deted) | area with manpowee On Oct i to assist OGPT Hh heey at least 365 pote Panel of Arbittatoens “plementation of the wilt of reso ved to Didi anel of Arbitrators against the Heirs of he Writ of execution issued by tye a deatified incre moraing; the eget tet ya , i men, some of 7, e of Elmer Lawagan, was b nr Wel was burned sesuly Hutte Lacan vas ano bk ons Gouge eT ee id. | the residents is y a hard wood ffihm GGErs demolition wer eo later in the morning of that day we complete with a muttitude opie {oat down Lawagan’s other houds, Secorting them, the rence ees en carving high-powered Greats PEN NeE Ro ane diately formed a human barricads (o Brovent them from doing so. The police tried to break the baricade aya that is when the situation became chaotic. The police then used ear eas Hh water canon to disperse the baricading people. The situation calmed Sf Be ainine the te ts rial Court issued a Temporary Restraining Order ition of Lawagan’s properties a few hours later . Regardle of who started the violence between the police men aya protesting people.on October 02,,2009, it appears quite clearly that the police violated jts own operational procedures in approaching demolitton. and CDM operations. It is expressly stated in the Police, Manual that he police should tiot carry any firearm during a CDM operation, whicl! is practically the role the PNP should take during an execution of a demolitjon Frder. Likewise, the police should have exercised maximum tolerance ahd Used minimum and reasonable force in dealing with the protesters. Tt \s quite obvious that the deployment of 165 police men — most of whom Uyried high-powered firearms to support the Sherriff in executing an apparent demolition from the POA ~ is but way beyond what is reasonably called for under, the circumstances. Simply put, it was an overkill, lice argues that only 45 police officers were directly engaged a ea ch d that the 120 police officers who carried ‘ - CDM operations, that day ani officer 2 : there to respond _to_intelligence reports tat / powered firearms were “10 TT’ sow violence on, the same ty, (\ ‘owever, the} ice did not furnish the Commission a copy of any offidyi |, However the Pee i di cas ae of a CT attack in Diplo on October | itelgen ee Te il hah such intelligence reports, WHY 2, 2009. But eye assuming, thakithere were s iger Saieatt Gea it that, according to PNP Brovinelal Direct Supt Hipio. reportedly se areas In only 60 police, oscars eS meployes lice officers who were 130 frequented by CTs? Where were oe 2 ee pets ievany reasonal|e i tigh- red firearms? 10 wot ee ee teat ene ae police officers were deployed in oi isis ae explanation why 105 Pet is that they were deployed to assis! © ‘ the inescapable conclust Lawagan's propertics: and OGPI in carry} g out the demolition ofi lon crew from dismantling {he n taking a nap, ch E personnel, while a ue was restrai om a third = Tao Testained by two at close ran; later identified @) of ocpr'’s ‘ a ‘ ic a secuitty rearued Bis upe ange,ile Pumihic was ee ete Dongiahon ~ sit exited through the cee Bee i i or ts it Despite this, the, poli Rac p Police di Gneidentia tember or hone oe rd iber of PNP-| prehend Whitne 5; i Councilor Eduardo -Ahas ej ao Publicly Se re ee meno after the demolition, Seni yo.’In the evening of 23 M: Sibnraneny officléi, Councilor Ananayo, accusiay Weyer SPO") fare 2008, the fy Fretheirgunsat nicht te oem ee eens poeivelder slapane inti «2 OGPI's staff. On top of all eee \ are allegations that th AC Pees © PNP-RMG deployed in Didipio is Keeping station at The Com i r RMG in Di amarat & eanOa the security sector, particularly the PNP- Benemaiieipowerful. protector of all people, not solely of ‘CONCLUSION the Commission RESOLVES In light of the foregoing, UNANIMOUSLY to: yh , 1. Recommend to the government under the new administration to Jook into, the issues presented herein and consider the probable fed to the foreign company in view of te withdrawal of the FTAA gi gross violations ‘of buman rights it has committed; “ 2, Require all concerned agencies, particularly the NCIP, the DEN. MGB, the PNP and the AFP, to submit reports to the Commission Human Rights regarding concrete actions they have taken to ae protect and. fulfill the rights of the affected community in Didipld, within go days from receipt of this resolution; n rights nies to continue monitoring the human ng jolatiofis Request the same age! tinue a Fegion in Didipio witb the view in mind that all reports of Vi be verified and acted upon; conduct a polity AL i i findings above an! ta pol 4. Advise the'OGPI to consider the gS % ee ie reorientation 0D the conduct of mining poe iB, ee + sayin eeconscious ac involved; tount the observance of huinan rights of the commun|ty the CHR Region II offi ice to actively advocate for the hi ie the affected community and to take every step possible to ‘Qécurrence of further violence and oppression. SO RESOLVED. Done this 19 day of January 2011, Quezon City, Philippines. | 1 i I ' i ' leah Gg Fao i | , LORETTA ANN P. ROSAL Tal Chairperson —. UA Ae, MA, VICTORIA V.CARDONA (ON LEAVE) CECILIA RACHEL V. QUISUMBING Commissioner 4 ol VILLA MARIJCASUNCION I. |ANO-MARA ee eton Secretary : R i 5 * . it so