Dear friends,
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) writes with deep concern about the manner the police conducted its investigation into the case of a 32-year-old farmer who was abducted, tortured and left for dead. The victim survived from his ordeal but the investigation has come to a halt after the police argued that the victim himself could not identify his attackers and that no witnesses have also come to identify them. They, however, ignored the circumstantial evidences that could have help in identifying the perpetrators believed to be soldiers.
UPDATED INFORMATION:
As described in our previous appeal (AHRC-UAC-002-2008), 32-year-old Renante Romagus, a farmer, had survived from his ordeal after having been repeatedly stabbed and left for dead after he was forcibly abducted, tortured and held in captivity on 12 December 2007 in Compostela Valley, Mindanao.
Those who had forcibly taken him were persons wearing uniforms akin to those worn and used by soldiers. Renate was able to see them wearing such attire before being blindfolded and his mouth covered. The whole time he was in their custody he was severely tortured while being questioned for his supposed involvement with rebel groups. He recognized the dialect of those questioning him. They spoke Tagalog, a language that is not common to local villagers living in the area but is spoken by some soldiers deployed there.
In responding to appeals for investigation, the office of the Philippine National Police’ (PNP) Human Rights Affairs Office (HRAO) has suggested that Renate’s inability to identify the perpetrators and the lack of witnesses who could identify them have left the policemen investigating without any lead. They, however, did not provide any explanation for whatever action they have taken on the circumstantial evidences the victim talked about.
Neither allegation, whether the attackers were wearing uniforms akin to those used by the soldiers nor the language, specifically Tagalog, used in questioning the victim were considered in the process of the police’ investigation.
In a recent letter received by the AHRC dated February 20 from Police Senior Superintendent Lina Sarmiento, chief of the HRAO, there was no mention that the policemen investigating the Renante’s case had look into this (To read the full text of her reply). Though Sr. Supt. Lina did give assurance for “the continuous follow-up the case” the police action to halt their investigation and their blaming the victim himself has undermined the progress of the case.
Also, the police have not mentioned taking action to have the soldiers deployed in the area investigated and to answer allegations against them that could have help in determining whether or not they are involved. The senior officials of the soldiers have already created a board of inquiry that could have also helped the police investigators in the process of gathering further information. The result of the inquiry, if there is any, however has not been made public.
ADDITIONAL COMMENT:
The AHRC is deeply concerned about how the police defended its action by implicitly putting blame on the victim’s failure to identify his attackers; and lack of witnesses that prevented them in pursuing their investigation. It is effectively telling anybody, particularly the security forces that they could abduct and kill their victims as long as the victims do not recognize them.
In this case, Renante had to prove his case on his own before the police could take adequate action instead of the latter doing their work. This, however, has since been a common practice by the police in the area. It is also more convenient for the police investigators to take action at an early stage to defend themselves. But whether the investigation or actions they have taken are effective and sufficient in solving the case remains questionable.
In no circumstance do any perpetrators of crimes, particularly the security forces allow themselves to be exposed to their victims. The use of blindfold, as what Renante had experienced following his abduction and while in captivity, was obviously done by his attackers to conceal their identity. The use of the blindfold has also been a practice by police and military in illegal arrests. Such practice has since deprived victims the possibility of seeking legal redress. Once the victim fails to identify perpetrators due to the blindfold, holding those responsible to account would be extremely difficult.
Therefore, unless the police investigating unit involved in following up Renate’s case seriously considers the circumstantial evidence he has put forward as basis for them to take adequate action, identifying those responsible and holding them accountable would remain negligible. The police should not have limited and excused themselves to information the victim could provide; but they should also take further action to exhaust all means in the process of their investigation.
SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write letters to the concerned authorities below requesting their appropriate intervention. The police unit conducting the investigation into this case must exhaust all means instead of excusing themselves from taking further adequate action solely on information the victim provided; and that all the circumstantial evidence surrounding the incident should also be looked into.
The AHRC has also written to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Question of Torture.
To support this case, please click here: SEND APPEAL LETTER
SAMPLE LETTER
Dear __________,
PHILIPPINES: Police halts investigation blaming victim’s failure to identify attackers
Name of tortured victim: Renante Romagus, 32 years old, farmer, married with three children, a resident of Purok 4, Barangay (village) Casoon, Monkayo, Compostela Valley
Name of alleged perpetrators: Unknown number of heavily armed men. It has been suggested that the perpetrators could be soldiers recently deployed in Monkayo, Compostela Valley. They were wearing uniforms and carrying firearms similar to those worn and used by soldiers. They also spoke Tagalog to the victim at the time of questioninga language not native to locals.
Place of incident: Purok 4, Barangay Casoon, Monkayo
Date of incident: 12 December 2007, around 7am
I am writing to express my grave concern regarding the manner by which the police are conducting its investigation into the case of Renante Romagus.
As you are maybe aware, Renante had been abducted, severely tortured and held in captivity for three days. He had been repeatedly stabbed before being thrown for dead by his attackers believed to be soldiers. He, however, had been able to survive from his ordeal after he crawled and walked for hours until he reached a place where he was able to obtain help for medical attention.
I am aware that while Renate was held in captivity, he had been blindfolded; thus, making it extremely difficult for him to identify his perpetrators. Although he was able to recognized the uniform the perpetrators had wornrather similar to those worn and used by soldiersand the language they have spoken was Tagalog as they were questioning him while in captivity, this were not given merit in the police investigation.
I have been informed that Police Senior Superintendent Lina Sarmiento, chief of the Philippine National Police’ (PNP) Human Rights Action Office (HRAO), in her letter sent to the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC), has informed the latter that the policemen investigating the case stopped their investigation due to the victim’s failure to identify those who attacked him. Also, the police had no lead to be able to proceed in pursuing the investigation due to the lack of witnesses.
Although Sarmiento has given assurance the police would continue to follow up in investigating the case, I am deeply concerned by her and the local police actions justifying its inability to pursue the case for lack of lead by blaming the victim himself by having not been able to identify his attackers. I therefore urge the concerned authorities, in particular the police investigators to reconsider its position and instead exhaust all means in order to establish the identity of the perpetrators.
The circumstance the victims has put forward; for instance, the appearance of the perpetrators and the language they have spoken, must be seriously looked into. It is disappointing that in Sr. Supt. Sarmiento’s letter to the AHRC she has not been able to provide sufficient explanations as to why they have failed in looking into these circumstances. The police’ findings, too, that they have no lead in pursuing the investigation have been largely base on the information the victim has provided so far. As he himself was blindfolded during the incident then he expectedly was not able to identify the perpetrators which result to policemen halting its probe instead of them exhausting means to collect further evidence.
Thus, I am deeply concerned that unless this matter is promptly corrected, it effectively gives assurance to anyone, particularly the security forces, that they could abduct, torture, detain and kill their victims; and they could even get away with it arguing that the victim did not recognize them. Thus, this and similar situations have deprived victims from seeking legal remedies at the early stage.
It is common sense that the use of blindfold, as in this case, is deliberately done for the perpetrators to conceal their identities. The police investigators’ inability to deeply comprehend and take appropriate action on this matter has effectively made themselves complicit to these acts. It is the police’s duty is to investigate who were responsible for committing these crimes and violations not the victim himself alone. It is the utmost responsibility of the State to ensure he obtains remedy.
I therefore urge you to ensure that the policemen investigating this case would reconsider their position and that the victim’s version of the story be adequately looked into. The soldiers who are allegedly involved should also be investigated and that they must also provide sufficient explanations on this matter. Both the results of the investigation conducted by the Board of Inquiry and the military must also be made public.
Yours sincerely,
———————-
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTER TO:
1. Mrs. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo
President
Republic of the Philippines
Malacanang Palace
JP Laurel Street, San Miguel
Manila 1005
PHILIPPINES
Fax: +63 2 736 1010
Tel: +63 2 735 6201 / 564 1451 to 80
E-mail: corres@op.gov.ph
2. Mrs. Purificacion Quisumbing
Commissioner
Commission on Human Rights
SAAC Bldg., Commonwealth Avenue
U.P. Complex, Diliman
Quezon City
PHILIPPINES
Fax: +63 2 929 0102
Tel: +63 2 928 5655 / 926 6188
E-mail: drpvq@yahoo.com
3. Deputy Director General Avelino Razon
Chief, Philippine National Police (PNP)
Camp General Rafael Crame
Quezon City
PHILIPPINES
Fax: +63 2724 8763
Tel: +63 2 726 4361/4366/8763
E-mail: bluetree73@gmail.com
4. Mr. Emilio Gonzalez
Deputy Ombudsman
Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for the Military
and Other Law Enforcement Offices
3rd Floor, Ombudsman Bldg., Agham Road, Diliman
1104 Quezon City
PHILIPPINES
Fax: +63 2 926 8747
Tel: +63 2 926 9032
5. Mr. Ronaldo V. Puno
Secretary
Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG)
A. Francisco Gold Condominium II
EDSA cor. Mapagmahal St., Diliman
Quezon City
PHILIPPINES
Fax: +63 2 925 0332
Tel: +63 2 925 0330 / 31
E-mail: rvpuno@dilg.gov.ph
6. Mr. Raul Gonzalez
Secretary
Department of Justice (DoJ)
DOJ Bldg., Padre Faura
1004 Manila
PHILIPPINES
Fax: +63 2 521 1614
E-mail: agnesdeva@yahoo.com
Thank you.
Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrchk.org)
