15_Security Bank v RTC Makati, Eusebio

8/13/2019 15_Security Bank v RTC Makati, Eusebio

1/5

Section 6. Freedom from Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment orPunishment, An Absolute Bight. Torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or

!unishment as criminal acts shall a!!l" to all circumstances. A state of #ar or a threat of #ar,internal !olitical instabilit", or an" other !ublic emergenc", or a document or an"determination com!rising an $order of battle$ shall not and can ne%er be in%o&ed as a

'ustification for torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or !unishment.

As emphasized in the preceding provision, all kinds of torture, in whatever form or guise may itbe, is strongly condemned by the Philippine laws. This simply means that no deviation from the rightagainst torture can be tolerated under any circumstance. Further, as discussed in one of the law

journals, under nternational !aw, no e"ceptional circumstances whatsoever and no superior orders,may be invoked as a justification of torture #$autista, %&''(. )ith that, Philippines committed itself tothe principle provided by the nternational *umanitarian !aw #*!( that +o person shall be subjectedto torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment+. Torture, even seen as the lastresort of elucidating truth and information to people, can never be invoked in a state of war or a threatof war, internal political instability or any other public emergency. -ven during the most futile war, thegovernment can never validate the use of violence or coercion in securing beneficial information to its

public enemy.

Section (. Prohibited Detention. Secret detention !laces, solitar" confinement,incommunicado or other similar forms of detention, #here torture ma" be carried out #ithim!unit". Are hereb" !rohibited.

In #hich case, the Phili!!ine )ational Police *P)P+, the Armed Forces of the Phili!!ines *AFP+and other la# enforcement. agencies concerned shall ma&e an u!dated list of all detentioncenters and facilities under their res!ecti%e 'urisdictions #ith the corres!onding data on the

!risoners or detainees incarcerated or detained therein such as, among others, names, date of

arrest and incarceration, and the crime or offense committed. This list shall be made a%ailableto the !ublic at all times, #ith a co!" of the com!lete list a%ailable at the res!ecti%e nationalheaduarters of the P)P and AFP. A co!" of the com!lete list shall li&e#ise be submitted b"the P)P, AFP and all other la# enforcement agencies to the Commission on -uman ights*C-+, such list to be !eriodicall" u!dated, b" the same agencies, #ithin the first fi%e */+ da"sof e%er" month at the minimum. 0%er" regional office of the P)P, AFP and other la#enforcement agencies shall also maintain a similar list far all detainees and detention facilities#ithin their res!ecti%e areas, and shall ma&e the same a%ailable to the !ublic at all times attheir res!ecti%e regional headuarters, and submit a co!". u!dated in the same manner

!ro%ided abo%e, to the res!ecti%e regional offices of the C-.

After %% years of advocacy and lobbying by the concerned sectors of the community, the

Philippines finally enacted the AntiTorture !aw in ovember %&&/. 0et, much has to be done in orderto fully enforced the said law, since it is usually donned or criticized as a mere scrap of paper.

As previously defined, other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment refers to adeliberate and aggravated treatment or punishment not included in the enumeration of acts of tortureinflicted by a person in authority or agent of a person in authority against a person in his custody. t isbut logical that most of the culprit or main offenders are person in authority or agent of a person inauthority for the law specifies that torture is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with consent of suchperson. 1nder the first paragraph of Article '2% of 3evised Penal 4ode, a !erson in authorit"is +anyperson directly vested with jurisdiction, whether as an individual or as a member of some court or


2/5

government owned or controlled corporation, board, or commission. )hile, second paragraph ofArticle '2% of the code states that +A person who by direct provision of law or by election or byappointment by competent authority, is charged with the maintenance of public order, and any personwho comes to the aid of person shall be deemed an agent of a !erson in authorit"". of 1nder5ection '%#%( of Article 6 of the '/78 4onstitution provides that every secret detention places,solitary confinement, incommunicado or other similar forms of detention, where torture may be carriedout with impunity are deemed prohibited. 5ection 8 of 3.A. /892 is an implement and reiteration of this

constitutional mandate. 5ecret detention places has special reference to +safe house+ and, like solitaryand incommunicado detention, where phenomena during the authoritarian regime of President:arcos. :ore so, the Philippine ational Police #PP(, the Armed Forces of the Philippines #AFP( andother law enforcement. agencies concerned shall make an updated list of all detention centers andfacilities under their respective jurisdictions with the corresponding data on the prisoners or detaineesincarcerated or detained therein such as, among others, names, date of arrest and incarceration, andthe crime or offense committed. This list shall be made available to the public at all times and must beperiodically updated within five #2( days of every month. Through this section, preventive measuressuch as securing the list of all detention centers were adopted to further strengthen the enforcement ofsaid law. *ence, failure to perform his;her duty to maintain, submit an updated list of detention centersand facilities with the corresponding data on the prisoners or detainees incarcerated or destinedtherein is also punishable under 5ection 8 in relation to 5ection '9.

Section 11. Assistance in Filing a Com!laint. The C- and the PAO shall render legalassistance in the in%estigation and monitoring and2or filing of the com!laint for a !erson #hosuffers torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or !unishment, or for an"interested !art" thereto.

The %ictim or interested !art" ma" also see& legal assistance from the Baranga" -uman ightsAction Center *BAC+ nearest him2her as #ell as from human rights nongo%ernmentorgani3ations *)4Os+.

It is a factual sight that only few cases regarding the violation of Anti-Torture Act or none at all have

reached the Supreme Court. It may be accounted to the slow-paced and deteriorating process of the system and

its government agencies. In one of the articles published relating to the efficiency of the said law, eight healthworkers who were part of the so-called Morong 43 have decided to test the law. Among the foregoing

administration, the administration of former President Arroyo is being blamed for the unsolved political killings

and enforced disappearance. In May 2012, they filed torture charges against former president Gloria Macapagal-

Arroyo, her top military officials and those involved in the detention and torture of the 43 health workers. One

year after, the first anti-torture case is still under preliminary investigation while some of the suspects in the

military have been promoted.

As stated in Section 11, the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) and PAO shall render legal

assistance in the filing of a complaint of a person who suffers torture and other cruel, inhuman treatment. The

victim or interested party may also seek legal assistance from the Barangay Human Rights Action Center nearest

him/her as well as from human rights nongovernment organizations (NGOs). Also, under the Section 18 of

Implementing Rules and Regulations of Anti-Torture Act of 2009, the BHRAC, through Barangay Human

Rights Action Officers shall render assistance in the following manner, 1) Conduct information educationcampaign on this law, 2) Refer victims of torture to the CHR or other appropriate agency for the conduct of

investigation of legal assistance. The Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) and CHR shall

conduct information dissemination at the grassroots level to ensure that the citizenry will utilize the BHRAC infiling complaints. Yet, even as expressly provided by the above-stated Section, the snail-paced serving of justice

will render the objectives of the law as indubitable and unenforceable. While the passage of R.A. 9745 is seen as

a hope to stop in what seems to be a culture of impunity on human rights violations, still certain provisions of

this law particularly Section 11 need improvement or amendment.


3/5

Section 13. 5ho are Criminall" iable. - Any person who actually participated Or inducedanother in the commission of torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment orpunishment or who cooperated in the execution of the act of torture or other cruel, inhumanand degrading treatment or punishment by previous or simultaneous acts shall be liable asprincipal

Any superior military, police or law enforcement officer or senior government official who

issued an order to any lower raning personnel to commit torture for whatever purpose shallbe held e!ually liable as principals.

"he immediate commanding officer of the unit concerned of the A#$ or the immediate seniorpublic official of the $%$ and other law enforcement agencies shall be held liable as a principalto the crime of torture or other cruel or inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment forany act or omission, or negligence committed by him&her that shall have led, assisted, abettedor allowed, whether directly or indirectly, the commission thereof by his&her subordinates. 'fhe&she has nowledge of or, owing to the circumstances at the time, should have nown thatacts of torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment shall becommitted, is being committed, or has been committed by his&her subordinates or by otherswithin his&her area of responsibility and, despite such nowledge, did not tae preventive or

corrective action either before, during or immediately after its commission, when he&she hasthe authority to prevent or investigate allegations of torture or other cruel, inhuman anddegrading treatment or punishment but failed to prevent or investigate allegations of such act,whether deliberately or due to negligence shall also be liable as principals.

Any public officer or employee shall be liable as an accessory if he&she has nowledge thattorture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment is being committedand without having participated therein, either as principal or accomplice, taes partsubse!uent to its commission in any of the following manner(

)a* +y themselves profiting from or assisting the offender to profit from the effects of the act oftorture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment

)b* +y concealing the act of torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment orpunishment and&or destroying the effects or instruments thereof in order to prevent itsdiscovery or)c* +y harboring, concealing or assisting m the escape of the principal&s in the actof torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment( $rovided, "hat theaccessory acts are done with the abuse of the officials public functions.

5ection '< of 3epublic Act /892 e"pressly provides that any person who actually participatedor induced another in the commission of torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment orpunishment or who cooperated in the e"ecution of the act of torture by previous or simultaneous actsshall be liable asprincipal.

As already aforesaid, the law finds application on cases of torture committed in the course ofarrest, detention and confinement. t is clear that the principal offender is a person in authority or anagent of person in authority. Thus, any superior military, police or law enforcement officer or seniorgovernment official who issued an order to a lower ranking personnel to subject a victim to torture orother cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment for whatever purpose shall be helde=ually liable as principal.


4/5

4ommand responsibility is enshrined in the AntiTorture Act of %&&/. 1nder 5ec. 'neglect of duty? under the doctrine of>4ommand 3esponsibility? if he;she has knowledge of or, owing to the circumstances at the time,should have known that acts of torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishmentshall be committed, is being committed or has been committed by his;her subordinates or by otherswithin his;her area of responsibility and, despite such knowledge, did not take preventive or corrective

action either before, during or immediately after its commission, when he;she has the authority toprevent or investigate allegations of torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment orpunishment but failed to prevent or investigate allegations of such act, whether deliberately or due tonegligence, shall, without prejudice to criminal liability, be held administratively liable under theprinciple of command responsibility.

To summarize, the following are deemed as principal@

'. irect participator, inducer and indispensable cooperatorB

%. 5uperior military, police or law enforcement officer or senior government official who orderedlower ranking to commit torture,


5/5

Section 1.A!!licabilit" of efouler.- %o person shall be expelled, returned or extradited toanother State where there are substantial grounds to believe that such person shall be indanger of being sub/ected to torture. #or the purposes of determining whether such groundsexist, the Secretary of the 0epartment of #oreign Affairs )0#A* and the Secretary of the 0O, incoordination with the 2hairperson of the 24, shall tae into account all relevantconsiderations including, where applicable and not limited to, the existence in the re!uestingState of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.

Section 15.Compensation to Victims of Torture. Any person who has suffered torture shall have theright to claim for compensation as provided for under 3epublic Act o. 8

Documents

15_Security Bank v RTC Makati, Eusebio