Philippine Human Rights Act

Bill: 118-hr-1433
Sponsor: full_name: Rep. Wild, Susan [D-PA-7]
Introduced: 2023-03-07
Policy area: International Affairs
Latest action: action_date: 2023-03-07
text: Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.

Summaries:
action_date: 2023-03-07
action_desc: Introduced in House
text: <p><b>Philippine Human Rights Act</b></p> <p>This bill imposes limitations on providing assistance to the police or military of the Philippines. </p> <p>No federal funds may be used to provide such assistance until the Philippines government has taken certain actions, including (1) investigating and successfully prosecuting members of its military and police forces who have violated human rights; (2) withdrawing the military from domestic policing activities; and (3) establishing that it effectively protects the rights of journalists, civil society activists, and certain other groups. </p> <p>The President shall also direct U.S. representatives at multilateral development banks to vote against providing loans to the police or military of the Philippines. </p>

tv_txt: I 118th CONGRESS 1st Session H. R. 1433 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES March 7, 2023 Ms. Wild (for herself, Ms. Schakowsky , Mr. García of Illinois , Mr. McGovern , Mr. Pocan , Mr. Raskin , Ms. Omar , Mr. Gomez , Mr. Grijalva , and Ms. Norton ) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs , and in addition to the Committee on Financial Services , for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned A BILL To suspend the provision of security assistance to the Philippines until the Government of the Philippines has made certain reforms to the military and police forces, and for other purposes.

1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Philippine Human Rights Act . 2. Findings Congress finds the following: (1) The United States State Department’s 2021 Human Rights Report on the Philippines found significant human rights issues in the country, including extrajudicial killings, by and on behalf of the government and nonstate actors; reports of forced disappearance by and on behalf of the government and nonstate actors; torture by and on behalf of the government and nonstate actors; harsh and life-threatening prison conditions; arbitrary detention by and on behalf of the government and nonstate actors; serious problems with the independence of the judiciary. The Report also notes, serious restrictions on free expression and media, including violence, threats of violence, and unjustified arrests or prosecutions of journalists, censorship, and the use of criminal libel laws to punish journalists; high-level and widespread government corruption; serious government restrictions on or harassment of domestic human rights organizations; and threats and violence against labor activists . (2) The United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), reported in September 2022, that major human rights issues persist in the Philippines, including, harassment, threats, arrests, attacks, red-tagging against civil society actors, as well as the continued drug related killings by police, and, access to justice for victims of human rights violations and abuses remained very limited . (3) A 2021 international independent investigation, Investigate Philippines, found that since 2020, the perpetuation of human rights violations by State forces has become more institutionalized, streamlined, and entrenched, and domestic remedies for such violations are insufficient, ineffective at providing redress and halting continued abuses . Said investigation further found: police and military forces are perpetuating violations and obstructing justice; investigations are not impartial; mechanisms for civilians to hold police and military accountable are failing; court protections are inaccessible, slow and discriminatory; government forces are orchestrating political repression and militarizing governance; counterinsurgency activities are targeting lawyers and denying victims access to counsel; efforts to challenge unjust laws through legal channels are being dismissed; public institutions and bodies which should provide checks and balances or oversight have been eviscerated or lack clout. (4) In a 2023 report, Human Rights Watch reports there has been no letup in the War on drugs in the Philippines under the Ferdinand Marcos Jr. administration, which leading human rights organizations estimate took up to 30,000 lives under former President Rodrigo Duterte. (5) According to the Joint Report of Trade Unions to the International Labor Organization, from 2019 to the beginning of 2023, there have been 16 killing of trade unionists, two cases of forced disappearances, 68 cases of arrests and detention, 90 cases of forced disaffiliation, 58 cases of red-tagging, and 127 cases of intimidation of union leaders and members. Additionally, the Report notes that the Government of the Philippines has failed to act on any previous recommendations by the International Labor Organization to protect workers’ rights, and responded directly to recommendations that, it requires further clarification as to what constitutes effective measures to prevent violence against workers; what constitutes immediate and effective investigation . (6) In 2022, the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) listed the Philippines as one of the 10 worst countries in the world for working people for the sixth consecutive year. In its 2022 report, the ITUC stated: Workers and their representatives in the Philippines remained particularly vulnerable to violent attacks, intimidation and arbitrary arrests. Trade unionists, maliciously red-tagged by President Duterte, remained under immediate threat from the police and the army, which conducted targeted raids against them. Over 50 trade unionists have been killed since President Duterte came to power in 2016 . (7) In the first six months of the Marcos administration alone, the Alliance for Advancement of People’s Rights (Karapatan) has documented 17 extrajudicial killings, 165 illegal arrests, 9,159 forced evacuations, and 357,726 cases of harassment and intimidation. (8) In 2021, the international NGO Global Witness declared the Philippines to be the deadliest country in Asia for environmental activists for the ninth consecutive year. Since President Duterte took office in 2016, 30 environmentalists, 54 indigenous people, and 207 farmers and peasants have been extrajudicially killed. Included in the targeting of environmental activists during this timeframe, was United States citizen, Brandon Lee, who was subjected to an assassination attempt on August 6, 2019. Brandon Lee has been subjected to repeated threats and harassment by the Philippine military due to his advocacy relating to the land and rights of indigenous people in Ifugao province and the surrounding Cordillera region of the Philippines. While Brandon Lee survived the attack, he has been left paralyzed and his assailants have not been brought to justice. (9) Philippine State actors have targeted lawyers, judges, and politicians for repression. According to the National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers, 133 Filipino lawyers have been murdered over the past 40 years, with 59 being murdered during Duterte’s 6-year term as President. (10) Since February 2017, Senator Leila de Lima, vocal critic of the Government of the Philippines’ human rights violations, has been jailed on spurious charges. Amnesty International, other leading human rights organizations, and the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention in the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights have documented the fabricated charges, coerced testimonies, and other violations of Senator de Lima's rights that have occurred. This case reflects a broader pattern, with authorities in the Philippines consistently targeting political opposition leaders through politically motivated, spurious charges. (11) It is widely recognized that the Government of the Philippines silences dissent and the press. In May 2020, ABS-CBN, one of the Philippines’ two major sources of news, and an occasional critic of Duterte’s policies, was forced off air due to the denial of a franchise license by the Congress of the Philippines, at the behest of the Duterte administration. Similarly, Maria Ressa, a vocal critic of the repressive practices of State security forces, recipient of the 2021 Nobel Peace Prize, and founder of the digital news site Rappler was convicted of cyber libel in June 2020. Multiple journalists critical of the Government, including Percy Lapid—a radio broadcaster and critic of the Marcos administration who was killed in October 2022—have been murdered since the beginning of the Marcos administration. And according to Freedom House’s 2022 report on the Philippines, impunity remains the norm for violent crimes against activists and journalists . (12) On March 7, 2021, nine activists were killed in a joint operation conducted by the Philippine National Police and the Armed Forces of the Philippines in an event widely referred to as Bloody Sunday in the Philippines. Included in those who were killed by State security forces was labor leader Emmanuel Manny Asuncion. The Philippines’ Department of Justice has declined to prosecute individuals implicated in the murder of Manny Asuncion, as well as in the murders of other activists. This failure to bring perpetrators to justice reflects the systemic lack of accountability within Philippine State security forces and prosecutorial agencies. (13) On July 3, 2020, the Anti-Terrorism Act of the Philippines was passed into law. While purporting to counter terrorism, the bill rolls back many civil liberties by lessening requirements for judicial warrants, allows for extended pre-trial detention, and allows for the prosecution of conduct that is considered protected political speech. The Anti-Terrorism Act is viewed by many as a threat to Freedom of Speech in the Philippines. Representative Jan Schakowsky, along with 49 other members of the United States Congress, urged the Government of the Philippines to repeal this repressive legislation . (14) The practice of red-tagging , wherein the Government labels activists, critics, and non-governmental organizations as terrorists, has been growing in the Philippines, including the red-tagging of overseas Filipinos, United States citizens, and Philippine election observers. This tactic is used to isolate individuals or groups and chill political speech, and in many cases, mark them for harassment or assassination by Philippines security or paramilitary forces. (15) The Government of the Philippines fails to cooperate in matters of international law, including the International Criminal Court investigation into alleged crimes committed in the Philippines between November 1, 2011, and March 16, 2019, in the context of the so-called war on drugs campaign. (16) The Armed Forces of the Philippines uses tactics of strafing and aerial bombings in military operations that have killed dozens and displaced thousands of civilians. In 2017, Armed Forces conducted a widespread bombing campaign on Marawi City, displacing 400,000 people and destroying the city. In 2019, AFP bombings in Mindanao displaced 300 Indigenous People. In November 2021, peace advocates called for a stop to ongoing aerial bombings in Bukidnon. In February 2022, the Armed Forces dropped at least 30 bombs in Cagayan Valley where there is a population of 41,680 people. In October 2022, the 94th infantry battalion conducted strafing and bombings in Negros Occidental, resulting in over 15,000 evacuees. (17) The United States continues to provide robust assistance to state security forces of the Philippines. Despite clear documentation of abuses and international condemnation, in April 2020, the United States announced a pair of arms sales totaling $2,000,000,000 for items including hellfire missiles and attack helicopters. In July 2020, the United States announced an additional sale of $126,000,000 worth of assault boats and armaments. In October 2022, the United States provided $100,000,000 in military financing. 3. Suspension of security assistance (a) Suspension of security assistance No Federal funds are authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available to provide assistance for the police or military of the Philippines, including assistance in the form of equipment or training, until the date described in subsection (d). (b) Loans from multilateral development banks The President shall instruct United States representatives at multilateral development banks to vote against providing any loans to the police or military of the Philippines. (c) Report required Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Inspectors General of the Department of State and Department of Defense shall jointly submit to the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate a report that— (1) specifies all forms of security assistance or loans made available to the Philippine National Police or the Armed Forces of the Philippines, including any organizations or individuals operating with the authority of the Philippine National Police or the Armed Forces of the Philippines, by the United States or by multilateral development banks during the period beginning January 1, 2016, and ending on the date of the submission of the report; (2) contains all reports generated by recipients of United States security assistance or loans from multilateral development banks to the Philippines with respect to the use, investment, or transfer of such assistance or loans; and (3) details any and all misuses of security assistance and loans during the period beginning January 1, 2016, and ending on the date of the submission of the report by the Philippine National Police, the Armed Forces of the Philippines, or any affiliated groups or individuals, such as extrajudicial killings, intimidation of political opponents, illegal sales under Philippine or international law, or misappropriation. (d) Conditions for lifting suspension of assistance The suspension of security assistance under subsection (a) shall terminate on the date on which the Secretary of State certifies to the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate that the Government of the Philippines has— (1) investigated and successfully prosecuted members of military and police forces who have violated human rights, ensured that the military and police cooperated in such cases, and affirmed that such violations have ceased; (2) withdrawn the military from involvement in domestic policing activities, in accordance with the Philippine Constitution, and ensured that all domestic police functions are separated from the military chain of command and are instead directly responsible to civilian authorities; (3) established that it effectively protects the rights of trade unionists, journalists, human rights defenders, critics of the Government, faith and religious leaders, and other civil society activists to operate without interference; (4) taken effective steps to guarantee a judicial system that is capable of investigating, prosecuting, and bringing to justice members of the police and military who have committed human rights abuses; and (5) fully complied with domestic and United States audits and investigations regarding the improper use of prior security assistance.