Deakin University: Health Equity and Human Rights in the Philippines

This report examines the human rights situation in the Philippines, focusing on the issue of extrajudicial killings under the Duterte administration. It provides an overview of the legal framework, including the Bill of Rights and international human rights documents, and details the impact of these killings on various groups, including suspected drug users, human rights defenders, and journalists. The report highlights the government's anti-drug campaign, the high number of deaths attributed to police and vigilantes, and the lack of accountability. It further explores the advocacy actions taken by international bodies, such as the United States, Australia, and the European Union, to address the human rights violations. These actions include financial support, capacity-building programs, and suspension of military assistance. The report also addresses the responses from the Philippine government, including the president's rhetoric, and concludes by assessing the effectiveness of the implemented solutions.

Running head: HEALTH EQUITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS 1
HEALTH EQUITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course
Instructor
Date

HEALTH EQUITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS 2
Introduction
Philippines, country which is officially referred to as the Republic of the Philippines
is an archipelagic and sovereign country in Southeast region of Asia. The Philippines is
located in the Western region of the Pacific Ocean. It comprises approximately 7, 641 Islands
that are divided into three major geographical locations from South to North: Mindanao,
Visayas, and Luzon. Its capital city is known as Manila and Quezon as the most famous city.
The Philippines is bounded by the South China Sea, Philippine Sea, and the Celebes Sea on
the West, East, and the Southwest regions respectively. The country shares Maritime borders
with Vietnam, Taiwan, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Palau to the West, North, South, and East
respectively. The country is headed by Rodrigo Duterte as the president. The human rights
issue to be addressed in this report is extrajudicial killings.
In the constitution of the Philippines, the rights of Filipinos are articulated in the
Article III which is also known as the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights has 22 major sections
which are always applied in the declaration of the Filipino citizen’s privileges and rights
which must be protected by the constitution in whichever matter. The life to life falls in
section 1 of article III of the Bill of Rights in the Philippines Constitution (Pangilinan, 2011,
pp.56-69).
In addition to other local laws, Philippines’ human rights are guided by the United
Nation’s ‘International Bill of Human Rights (IBHR)’. The UN Bill of Rights consolidates
three major legal documents which include; the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (ICCPR), the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) (Magliocca, 2016, pp.231).
Undoubtedly, Philippines country upholds a lot of sadness of human life and the
protection of right to life for the humans. In accordance with Pope, Frances, right to life is the

HEALTH EQUITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS 3
topmost human right. In Philippines form of jurisdiction, life is not merely a moral but a legal
principle that is well enshrined in the constitution containing a wide range of provisions of
protection of such invaluable human rights. Article III of the Bill of Rights states that no one
should be deprived of his or her life without any due law process. Article II of the Bill of
Rights, in the Declaration of Principles, protection of human life is regarded as essential
being enjoyed by all persons of the democracy blessings. The fundamental law of
government puts a lot of value on human life such that it prohibits the imposition of death
penalties unless there are compelling reasons such as heinous crimes (Magliocca, 2016,
pp.231).
Extrajudicial Killings
The extrajudicial killings impacted the lives of many people and their families. In the
operations of the killing of all suspected drug dealers, pushers and users, children, students,
women, men, and their family members were killed. The defenders of human rights were also
humiliated and tortured following their critic and condemnation of the president’s anti-drug
campaign (Kine, 2017, pp.46-80). The killings also impacted on the journalists who were
threatened not to provide contradictory information and statistical data regarding the number
of deaths which had been caused by the police and other vigilantes. Since president Duterte
took the presidential position of the Philippine country, approximately 118,287 drug
personalities are under arrest while 1,308,078 others have surrendered to the authorities
(Baviera, 2016, pp.202-208).
On an explicit platform, Duterte campaigned and promised to kill all kind of people
who would be making the lives of the Filipinos hard and miserable. In his manifesto, Duterte
also promised to kill all kinds of people who would be encouraging and be involved in
corruption (Thompson, 2016, pp.3-14). In his vow, the president promised to terminate the

HEALTH EQUITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS 4
lives of all criminal suspects as a solution to criminality, drug and substance use, and
corruption the next three to six months after he gets elected as the president of the Republic
of Philippines (Pangalangan, 2011, pp.56-69).
During a campaign by the government on the illegal use of drugs, Duterte publicly
praised and encouraged extrajudicial killings of all suspects drug users and drug dealers. The
human rights groups in Philippine linked the government campaign and the president’s fiery
rhetoric to a surge of killings of people by unidentified gunmen and police since he took the
office of the presidency in the country (Thompson, 2016, pp.3-14). Based on statistics,
approximately 4,800 people were killed in a short period. Police reported that those
individuals who were targeted by the police were shot to death following their refusal for
arrest but there was no clear and tangible evidence to support this information (Baviera, 2016,
pp.202-208).
The killings provide a highlight of the long-standing impunity problem in the country
for abuse and harsh state security forces. On top of extrajudicial killings, other issues that
confront the Philippines include; violations of reproductive health rights, rights of indigenous
people, child labor, and discrimination and stigma related to the crisis of HIV/AIDS (Mapp
and Gabel, 2017, pp.1-2).
The Philippines had seen an unprecedented killing level through the enforcement of
law since Duterte took the presidential seat. According to the statistical data and records by
the police from 01/07/2016 to 03/11/2016, approximately 1,790 suspects of drug users and
drug pushers have been killed by the police (Teehankee, 2017, pp. 69-89). The toll of death
constitutes almost 20-fold jump in comparison to 68 such killings by the police from 1st
January to 15th June of last year but one. The police statistical records attribute to extra

HEALTH EQUITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS 5
3,0001 killings of people who were drug users and dealers to unknown vigilantes from July to
September of last year but one (Thompson, 2016, pp.3-14).
According to the police, these deaths were categorized as “deaths under investigation”
but completely there was no evidence of active probation by the police on the occurrence of
all the circumstances. According to the ‘Philippine National Police Director-General Ronald
Dela Rosa’, it was stated that extrajudicial killings should not be condoned. In the month of
September, the same year, the Internal Affairs Services police sources stated that they were
overwhelmed by the very high scale of police killings since it could probe only a fraction of
the total number of deaths recorded (De Castro, 2017, pp.139-159).
It is so sad to report that Duterte as the president did not respond to all official calls
regarding the official probe into the ever-increasing extrajudicial killings. Instead, Duterte
stated that the ever-increasing number of deaths following the extrajudicial killings was an
indication of success of his own initiated anti-drug campaign (Pangilinan, 2011, pp.811).
The president went ahead and urged all his policemen to seize the momentum. This
view was also endorsed by some of the key senior officials of the Duterte’s governance.
Solicitor-General Jose Calida, the top official to Duterte took an act of defending the police
killings legality and gave an opinion that the so-called “high number of deaths” was not even
enough as per the established targets of the anti-drug campaign (Curato, 2017, pp.142-153).
The “war on drugs” under the administration of Duterte resulted in thousands of
deaths of most of the Filipinos. According to the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency
(PDEA), the number of deaths increased to 3,906 from 1st July of last year but one to 26th
September of the following year based on the police operations that were conducted. The
unidentified gunmen had killed more thousands of drug dealers, pushers and users. This led

HEALTH EQUITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS 6
to a total death toll of more than 12, 000 in accordance with the reports by the credible media
and World Report 2018 (Clark, and Sikkink, 2013, pp.539).
The Philippine government frustrated all the efforts by the media and the independent
observers towards the maintenance of transparent and verifiable tally of the extrajudicial
deaths through issue and provision of contradictory statistics and data. In August last year,
the Human Rights Official Commission indicated that the actual number of killings was
certainly higher in comparison to what had been suggested by the police (Dressel, 2011,
pp.529-545).
According to an investigation carried out by the Human Rights Watch, it was
discovered that the ‘Philippine National Police’ together with its agents had performed
repeated Extrajudicial killings of the drug users and suspects and claimed false self-defense.
The police had spent ammunition, packets of the drugs, planted guns on the bodies of the
victims as their implication in drug operations and activities (Espiritu, 2017, pp.45-60).
The masked gunmen who also took part in the extrajudicial killings were reported to
be working hand-in-hand with the police. All the doubts associated with this were cast on the
claims of the government that most of these killings had been initiated by the rival gangs of
drugs and the vigilantes. No single individual had been meaningfully prosecuted and
investigated for the committed drug killings. Instead, the president pledged to pardon all the
police who were involved in the drug killings (Gonzaga, 2011, pp.45-60).
In October last year, the president responded to the public outcry against the
extrajudicial killings which were notably committed against the children by removing the
police from the anti-drug activities and assigning the duties to the PDEA since it is the main
agency that should be involved in the performance of drug wars. Following increased
criticism of Duterte’s anti-drug campaign, he responded by harassing, threatening and

HEALTH EQUITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS 7
impugning critics of the human rights defenders and the government (Dressel, 2012, pp.65-
84).
Since the beginning of the war against drugs when Duterte got into leadership
position, the president together with his officials have humiliated, reviled, and in some
instances jailed the advocates of human rights. The chief critic of the president, Senator Leila
de Lima has been in detention since February last year. Following the increased killings and
the elevated number of deaths every month, various actions of advocacy were taken to
improve on the issue of extrajudicial killings of the drug dealers, users, and suspects which
was a total violation of human rights to life (Thompson, 2016, pp.3-14).
Advocacy actions taken to improve Extrajudicial killings
The United States intervened in the issue and provided military financial support
under Obama’s administration by allotting a total of $120 million for the last year but one.
The earlier action on military financing by the US was primarily conditioned on improving
the situation of human rights in the Philippines (Espiritu, 2017, pp. 45-59). Conditionally, this
assistance had been listed as “Asia pivot” of the administration of Obama. President Trump
also allotted $180 million for military assistance to the Philippines for last year to improve
human rights. The Philippine president showed dissatisfaction with the relations between the
US and Philippines but he later conceded it because his Philippines needed the US military
assistance due to the dispute between China and South China Sea (Teehankee, and
Thompson, 2016, pp.125-134).
Other countries like Australia, Canada, and the European Union provided support to
the Philippines including programs of capacity-building with the aim of improving situation
of human rights. Spain provided resources and funds to the Philippine Commission of Human

HEALTH EQUITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS 8
Rights (Espiritu, 2017, pp. 45-59). Following human rights issues raised by Philippine’s
president “war on drugs”, the US state department suspended the sale of 26,000 rifles of the
military assault to the Philippine National Police. The European Union transitioned EPJUST
II rule of law involving training of law enforcement agencies and the police into GOJUST
program which was tasked with institution of justice sector reforms (Lum, and Dolven, 2014,
pp.177).
The high escalation of the unlawful human killings and president’s open defiance and
bold disobedience of the international standards of human rights and confrontational stance of
critics roiled the existing relationships between the Philippines and its Western country
friends. Repeatedly, Duterte had threated to seek reliable and stronger connections with other
countries like Russia and China who have not been criticizing the abuses associated with his
anti-drug campaign. Unfortunately, he repeated threats were not successful at all (Holden,
2011, pp.331-350).
Cecilia Malmstrom, the European Trade Commissioner gave a warning that the
Philippine government must address the concerns of the EU about abuses of human rights or
else it would lose tariff-free exports of approximately 6,000 products under human rights
benchmarks of EU in connection with the Generalized Scheme of Preferences Plus trans de
scheme (GSP+) (Sonmez, Apostolopoulos, Tran, and Rentrope, 2011, pp.17-35).
In May last year, the US senators took an act of introducing a bill, known as the
Philippines Human Rights Accountability and Counter Narcotics. The bill was primarily
meant to put restrictions on the arms exports to the Philippines, assist the Philippines in
handling drug issues and problems, and support the groups of human rights. At the time of
writing, the bill was referred to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee of the US (Espiritu,
2017, pp.45-59).

HEALTH EQUITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS 9
On behalf of 32 states, Iceland organized for a joint statement at the Human Rights
Council session of June and the second one on behalf of 39 states during the council’s session
of September condemning and cursing the evil act of extrajudicial killings in the Philippines.
The statement by Iceland was also meant to call and invite every state for credible and
independent investigations of the killings committed in Philippines (Espiritu, 2017, pp.45-
59).
Various pledges were made by various countries to support the Philippines. Australia
promised an extension of military assistance to the Philippines primarily for counterterrorism.
Japan pledged $800 million Overseas Development Assistance package for five years to
promote infrastructure and economic development. Tokyo promised to support Philippines
financially for the establishment of projects of drug rehabilitation. China also pledged to
assist the Philippines with under the One Belt, One Road Beijing program (Holden, 2011,
pp.331-350).
The Philippines underwent a Universal Periodic Review in May. The review was
primarily focused on the records of human rights of every member of the UN state which is
usually conducted on a four-yearly basis (Quimpo, 2015, pp.3335-350). In September, the
Philippines responded by rejecting almost every suggestion and recommendation which had
been made to stop and eradicate extrajudicial killings. The president rejected this with the
aim of ensuring independence in the investigation of the deaths. Human Rights High
Commissioner showed grave concerns at the president’s open support for the policy of
“shoot-to-kill” and the “apparent absence of credible investigations” (Kine, 2017, pp.46-80).

HEALTH EQUITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS 10
Conclusion
Philippines governance is totally poor and dictatorial under president Duterte. Since
he took the presidential seat, there has been an ever-increasing number of deaths following
extrajudicial killings of all drug users, dealers, pushers and suspects by the police,
unidentified gunmen, and vigilantes. President Duterte initiated an anti-drug campaign whose
policy was “shoot and kill” with apparently no evidence and credible investigations.
Duterte’s action of encouraging extrajudicial killings was a total violation of Human Rights
particularly the right to life. Under the constitution of the Philippine government, right to life
is articulated in section 1 of article III which is also known as the Bill of Rights. Termination
of one’s life is a violation of his or her right to life. Various countries and states such as the
UN, UE, Canada, China, Tokyo, Australia, and Japan provided advocacy actions through the
provision of military assistance, financial support and establishment of projects and programs
to support human rights situation.

HEALTH EQUITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS 11
References
Baviera, A., 2016. President Duterte's foreign policy challenges. Contemporary Southeast
Asia: A Journal of International and Strategic Affairs, 38(2), pp.202-208.
Clark, A.M. and Sikkink, K., 2013. Information effects and human rights data: Is the good
news about increased human rights information bad news for human rights measures. Hum.
Rts. Q., 35(6), p.539.
Curato, N., 2017. Flirting with authoritarian fantasies? Rodrigo Duterte and the new terms of
Philippine populism. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 47(1), pp.142-153.
De Castro, R.C., 2017. The Duterte Administration’s foreign policy: Unravelling the Aquino
Administration’s balancing agenda on an emergent China. Journal of Current Southeast
Asian Affairs, 35(3), pp.139-159.
Dressel, B., 2011. The Philippines: how much real democracy? International Political
Science Review, 32(5), pp.529-545.
Dressel, B., 2012. Targeting the public purse: advocacy coalitions and public finance in the
Philippines. Administration & Society, 44(6_suppl), pp.65-84.
Espiritu, B.F., 2017. The Lumad Struggle for Social and Environmental Justice: Alternative
media in a socio-environmental movement in the Philippines. Journal of Alternative and
Community Media, 35(2), pp.45-59.
Gonzaga, F.P., 2011. Rule of Law in the Philippines: The Reproductive Logic of Elite
democracy. Perspectives in the Arts and Humanities Asia, 1(2), pp.45-60

HEALTH EQUITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS 12
Holden, W.N., 2011. Neoliberalism and state terrorism in the Philippines: the fingerprints of
Phoenix. Critical Studies on Terrorism, 4(3), pp.331-350.
Kine, P., 2017. Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte's'war on drugs'. Harvard International
Review, 38(3),pp.46-80
Lum, T. and Dolven, B., 2014. The Republic of the Philippines and US interests–
2014. Current Politics and Economics of South, Southeastern, and Central Asia, 23(2),
p.177.
Magliocca, G.N., 2016. The Bill of Rights as a Term of Art. Notre Dame L. Rev., 92(5),
pp.231.
Mapp, S. and Gabel, S.G., 2017. Government abuses of human rights. Journal of Human
Rights and Social Work, 2(1-2), pp.1-2.
Pangalangan, R.C., 2011. Human Rights Discourse in Post-Marcos Philippines. Human
Rights in Asia, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar, 23(4), pp.56-69.
Pangilinan, C.D., 2011. The Dispute over Extrajudicial Killings: The Need to Define Extra
Judicial Killings as State-Sponsored Acts. Phil. LJ, 86(3), p.811.
Quimpo, N., 2015. Can the Philippines’ wild oligarchy be tamed. Routledge Handbook of
Southeast Asian Democratization, Routledge, New York, NY, 34(5), pp.335-350.
Sonmez, S., Apostolopoulos, Y., Tran, D. and Rentrope, S., 2011. Human rights and health
disparities for migrant workers in the UAE. Health Hum Rights, 13(2), pp.17-35.
Teehankee, J.C., 2017. Duterte’s resurgent nationalism in the Philippines: A discursive
institutionalist analysis. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 35(3), pp.69-89.

HEALTH EQUITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS 13
Teehankee, J.C. and Thompson, M.R., 2016. Electing a strongman. Journal of
Democracy, 27(4), pp.125-134.
Thompson, M.R., 2016. Introduction: The early Duterte presidency in the
Philippines. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 35(3), pp.3-14.