A/HRC/44/22 In post-operational spot reports, it was claimed that targets had been killed after resisting. The spot reports, however, contained strikingly similar language to describe each victim’s alleged utterance (“putang ina mo pulis ka pala” – which roughly translates as “so you’re a police (officer), son-of-a-bitch”) and actions (“suspect drew his weapon, fired at the lawmen but missed”), raising doubts about whether the reports were only filed pro forma. The reports explicitly referred to the killing of five individuals as “neutralization”. Of the 29 persons killed, 23 were on the drug watch list. 24. OHCHR examined police reports on another 25 operations in which 45 people had been killed in Metro Manila between August 2016 and June 2017. The police had referred to 34 of these killings as “neutralization”. At all the crime scenes, the police claimed to have recovered satchels of methamphetamine and guns allegedly used by the victims to resist police officers. On the basis of these reports, OHCHR found that the police had repeatedly recovered guns bearing the same serial numbers from different victims in different locations. OHCHR identified seven handguns with unique serial numbers. Each handgun appeared in at least two separate crime scenes, while two reappeared in five different crime scenes. The pattern suggests planting of evidence by police officers and casts doubt on the self-defence narrative, implying that the victims were likely unarmed when killed. 25. Although it was experienced nationwide, the impact of the campaign against illegal drugs has been better documented in urban areas. Limited data are available on the profile of those killed. According to one study, most victims were men from urban communities living in poverty.32 Submissions received by OHCHR confirm this pattern. Studies by the Commission on Human Rights, and others, also illustrate psychological and practical difficulties faced by family members – mostly women and children – when losing the male breadwinner.33 2. Obligation to investigate 26. Despite credible allegations of widespread and systematic extrajudicial killings in the context of the campaign against illegal drugs, there has been near-impunity for such violations. The Government states that the Internal Affairs Service of the Philippine National Police automatically investigates deaths that occur during police operations. The Internal Affairs Service reportedly launched 4,583 investigations between July 2016 and May 2019.34 Yet the Government has cited only one case – that of 17-year-old Kian delos Santos – where three police officers were convicted of a drug campaign-related killing. This outcome owes much to the availability of closed-circuit television footage and public outrage following the murder. Although the Government noted that 9,172 police personnel had had administrative cases filed against them,35 it remains unclear how many of these are related to extrajudicial killings. OHCHR notes that administrative sanctions are insufficient where there are serious allegations of violations of the right to life. OHCHR also notes the lack of progress in investigating cases related to the anti-illegal drugs campaign referred to the Office of the Ombudsman. 27. The police have invoked a “presumption of regularity” of operational conduct to justify the lack of prosecutions.36 The Supreme Court, however, has observed that the police cannot claim a presumption of regularity in official functions because deaths are not supposed to occur during any police operations.37 28. The Government also asserts that law enforcement agencies are unable to investigate killings in the absence of private complaints.38 Under international human rights law, the 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 6 PhilRights, “The killing State” (2019), pp. 7–17. Panaghoy: the war on drugs from the perspective of women and children, pp. 27–38. Government submission, 1 May 2020. See www.dilg.gov.ph/news/DILG-Internal-cleansing-in-PNP-on-going-despite-controversies-9172erring-personnel-facing-admin-raps/NC-2019-1272. Meeting with government representatives, 13–14 February 2020. Petitioners v. Dela Rosa et al., notice of resolution, p. 47. Meeting with government representatives, 13–14 February 2020.