A/HRC/13/42*
page 99
Disappearances noted in February 2009 that, in the Central Luzon region of the Philippines,
since 2001, more than 70 people had allegedly been victims of enforced disappearance, a number
of those previously disappeared had surfaced after being detained and tortured by military
officers, and no perpetrators had been punished.382 In its response to a questionnaire for the
present study, the Government of the Philippines stated that facilities and practices of secret
detention contravene the Constitution, which expressly prohibits secret, solitary and
incommunicado detention and torture, and are not used. Specific laws provide penalties for those
who violate requirements in relation to the arrest, interrogation and detention of those suspected
of terrorism.
195. The experts interviewed one victim of secret detention, Raymond Manalo,383 suspected of
supporting the insurgent New People’s Army (NPA), whose case sheds light on the broader
situation. On 14 February 2006, Raymond and his brother Reynaldo were abducted from their
farms in San Ildefonso, Bulacan, by AFP soldiers and men belonging to a militia established by
the AFP to support its counter-terrorism efforts. The brothers were suspected of being supporters
of the NPA. They were kept in unacknowledged detention in military facilities and safe houses
run by the military for 18 months until they managed to escape from detention on 13 August
2007. A decision of the Supreme Court of the Philippines of 8 October 2008 in proceedings for
the writ of amparo brought by Raymond Manalo describes what happened to him according to
his own testimony, which the Supreme Court found highly credible in spite of denials by the
AFP. Other persons suspected of being supporters of left-wing groups, including two female
university students, were secretly detained with them.384 The detainees were tortured during
interrogation to extort confessions regarding their links to the NPA. The female detainees were
raped by soldiers.
196. Throughout his detention, Raymond Manalo was not brought before any judicial authority
and had no contact with a lawyer. His family only learned that he was still alive when he was
brought before them on one occasion in an attempt to persuade his parents to drop a habeas
corpus petition that they had filed on behalf of Raymond and his brother. In the habeas corpus
proceedings, the AFP staunchly denied that they were holding the Manalo brothers. Other
persons held together with the Manalo brothers remain disappeared.385 Raymond Manalo
testified before the Supreme Court that he saw the killing and burning of one of his
382
A/HRC/10/9, para. 323.
383
Interview with Raymond Manalo (annex II, case 17).
384
Supreme Court of the Republic of the Philippines in The Secretary of National Defense and
the Chief of Staff, Armed Forces of the Philippines v. Raymond Manalo and Reynaldo Manalo,
G.R. No. 180906, decision of 7 October 2008. See also the report entitled “Terrorism and human
rights in the Philippines: fighting terror or terrorizing?”, available from
www.fidh.org/IMG/pdf/ph493a.pdf, p. 39.
385
“Terrorism and human rights in the Philippines: fighting terror or terrorizing?”, p. 39.
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents