International Relations.docx

Legitimacy of the Extra-Judicial Killings in The Philippines, with respect to International Law and alternate methods to combat drug trafficking. Mihir Ganachari [1] [2]

Abstract The current paper attempts to understand the existing situation in The Philippines. It has been approximately 11 years since these acts have been taken up. The author of the paper is of firm opinion that such acts are arbitrary and unconstitutional and the international community should quickly act to put an end to the same, which otherwise would lead to the gross violation of human rights. [3]“Sadly, The Philippines in the eyes of the international community has a very poor human rights record

due

to

its

alarming

incidence

of

extrajudicial

killings

and

unexplained

disappearances/abductions of private individuals without anyone being held accountable. And now, various sectors of the society are prodded to seek for viable solutions to address the poor human rights problems of the country. We sincerely believe that the root of the problem is not really much on the laws related to curbing and punishing human rights violators. Actually, it has always been the implementation of these laws. As part of the judicial institution whose power is drawn from the pen, we are here to present some issues to be mulled over.” The current research looks into the legal frameworks in place, both national and international. The paper also looks into viable alternatives to combat drug trafficking. The author thanks his readers for their interest and invites any suggestions to the email provided.

1

The author is a sophomore at the Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad, E-mail: [email protected]

2

I am thankful for the support of my lecturers and companions who have provided me with their valuable feedback. I

would specially mention my respected senior Mr. Nikhil Gangai, and Mr. Yasaswi Kondapalli for their constructive feedback. This paper would not have been possible had it not been for their guidance. 3

“Thoughts on Extrajudicial Killings and Unexplained Disappearances”, PJ Ruben T. Reyes and Mariano C. Del

Castillio, available at http://ca.judiciary.gov.ph/index.php?action=mnuactual_contents&ap=j5050 , last updated on 17.05.2017 at 11:30 P.M. EXTRA-JUDICIAL KILLINGS

MIHIR GANACHARI

PAGE 1

CHAPTERS

Introduction

3

The Constitution of Philippines

4

Previous legal attempts to curb the extrajudicial killings

5

Promulgation of writs of Amparo and Habeas Data

5

Extra-Judicial Killings: A violation of the presumption of Innocence?

8

The International Criminal Court on the nature of Extra Judicial Killings

10

The Alternatives

13

CONCLUSION

15

EXTRA-JUDICIAL KILLINGS

MIHIR GANACHARI

PAGE 2

Introduction The question raised by the President of the United States of America, Barrack Obama, on the battle of the Philippines against the Drug regime garnered a negative remark by the Philippines President, Rodrigo Duterte. Multiple sources have claimed that, in less than three months, Rodrigo Duterte ha presided over three-quarters as many extra-judicial killings as there were lynchings of black people in America between 1877 and 1950[4][5][6]. The President has taken a very confident stand on his method of extra judicial killings [7], his country and it has been observed that this affirmation by him has received a very positive response from the people of Philippines. The issue in contention here is if such action by the President is backed by legal enforceability. This is exactly what this paper tries to deal with. The bill of rights speaks about the protection of the civilians and their legal rights, one of them, which happens to be - protection of civilians from deprivation of life, without the due process of law. Clearly, the acts of the President are unconstitutional. It is time, that these extra-judicial killings came to an end and that the President sought for an alternate remedy to combat drug trafficking. Audi Alteram Partem (Which is Latin for “Hear the other side “) is one of the basic principles of Natural Justice. Which is the reason why, many Constitutions of the world, have adopted the concept of fair trial as one of the fundamental rights. Natural justice is another name for common-

4

“Rodrigo Duterte may undo the economic gains of recent years”, The Economist (2016), available at

http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21707167-new-President-not-just-crass-and-brutal-also-alarmingly-volatilerodrigo-duterte-may?fsrc=scn/fb/te/bl/ed/ , last updated on 15.09.2016 at 2:45 P.M. 5

“Death toll in Philippines drug war hits 2,000, Reuters (2016)”, available at http://in.reuters.com/article/philippines-

duterte-idinkcn1151vv , last updated on 16.09.2017 at 2:45 P.M. This report is from the month of August, 2016. There has been a considerable rise in the number of extra judicial killings ever since. 6

“History

of

lynching

in

U.S.

worse

than

believed,

study

finds”,

Reuters

(2015),

available

at,

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-race-lynching-iduskbn0le2vp20150210 , last updated on 16.09.2016 at 3:00 P.M. 7

The term ‘extrajudicial killing’ in its original meaning refers to homicides that are committed outside the legal system

with no prior judgement of a court. In this sense, the term comprises a large number of violent acts with different motives, victims and perpetrators. For instance, acts that are predominantly seen as vigilante killings or lynching, carried out by privately organized groups can be called an extrajudicial killing as well as homicides that are committed by the state without legal proceedings.

EXTRA-JUDICIAL KILLINGS

MIHIR GANACHARI

PAGE 3

sense justice. Rules of natural justice are not codified canons, but they are principles ingrained into the conscience of man. Natural justice is the administration of justice in a common-sense liberal way. Justice is based substantially on natural ideals and human values, the administration of which, is to be freed from the narrow and restricted considerations which are usually associated with a formulated law involving linguistic technicalities and grammatical niceties. It is the substance of justice which has to determine its form [8]. The only difference between the vigilante and the justice bestowed by a court of law is that, in the case of vigilantism, the vigilante does whatever that is appealing to him. In the latter case, due chance for the parties involved is given to present themselves (fair hearing) and then, an order is passed. This is what demarcates a civilized society from an uncivilized one. “Even God did not pass a sentence upon Adam, before he was called upon to make his defence. “Adam” says God, “where art thou? hast thou not eaten of the tree whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat [9]”. Time and again, emphasis has been laid on the need for everyone to be given a fair hearing. So is the case with Philippines as well.

The Constitution of Philippines: The 1987 Constitution of Philippines has presented its people with article 3 which is the bill of rights. This particular article lays down all the fundamental rights, that a citizen is entitled to and the rights, that will be protected by the state. “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.” [10]This section of the Constitution elucidates that every person shall be protected from the deprivation of life without a due process of law. Which is exactly what “Extra Judicial Killings” does. It deprives a person of his life, without the due course of law. This is against §3, article III, Bill of Rights, Constitution of Philippines, 1987, that states: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects

8

Uma Nath Pandey v. State of U.P. AIR 2009 SC 2375, ¶5

9

Cooper v. Wandsworth Board of Works [(1863) 143 ER 414]

10

§1, Article III, Bill of Rights, Constitution of Philippines, 1987.

EXTRA-JUDICIAL KILLINGS

MIHIR GANACHARI

PAGE 4

against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge after examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized” Such proceedings have been termed as inhuman acts [11]. In its analysis, the court held that the case was admissible since the substance before it pertained to occurrence of an alleged human rights violation. Regarding the defendant’s argument that the interest of presumed dead persons cannot be defended before court, the court stated that “it is indeed possible to sue a State for the ‘murder or disappearance’ of human beings whose right to life the state is under obligation to protect.”

Previous legal attempts to curb the extrajudicial killings [12]: Promulgation of writs of Amparo and Habeas Data: In 2007, the Supreme Court hosted a summit on extrajudicial executions. [13] Following this summit, the Court promulgated the writs of Amparo and habeas data, which were intended to serve as protective tools against both extrajudicial executions and enforced disappearances. The writ of Amparo permits persons whose lives, liberty or security have been violated or are in danger of violation to seek protection or information from respondent parties. The writ of habeas data, on the other hand, permits the issuance of writs against violations to rights to privacy, liberty or security. Most importantly for the purposes of this article, both writs were expressly made available against private as well as public parties. In its annotation to the writ of Amparo, the Supreme Court defined

11

“ECOWAS COURT DELIVERS JUDGMENT ON ALLEGED EXTRA-JUDICIAL KILLINGS OF FIVE

NIGERIANS”,

available

at

http://www.courtecowas.org/site2012/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=283:ecowas-court-deliversjudgment-on-alleged-extra-judicial-killings-of-five-nigerians&catid=14:pressrelease&Itemid=36 , last updated on 16.09.2016 at 3:15 P.M. 12

Not with respect to the current President Rodrigo Duterte. This is related to the pre-existing problem of extrajudicial

killings. 13

“National Summit on Extra Judicial Killings”, available at http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/publications/summit/ , last

updated on 17.05.2017 at 11:00 P.M.

EXTRA-JUDICIAL KILLINGS

MIHIR GANACHARI

PAGE 5

‘extralegal killings’ [ 14 ] as ‘killings committed without due process of law, i.e. without legal safeguards or judicial proceedings.’ Such killings comprised killings without due process ‘regardless of the motive. ‘This, the Court said, would be more ‘protective’ of rights to life and liberty than a writ available against the government alone. Various remedies are available to a petitioner in a Writ of Amparo. For instance, there is a provision for Temporary protection order [15], where The Court, justice or judge, upon motion or motu proprio, may order that the petitioner or the aggrieved party and any member of the immediate family be protected in a government agency or by an accredited person or private institution capable of keeping and securing their safety. The Inspection order [16] under same writ, allows the court, justice or judge, upon verified motion and after due hearing, to order any person in possession or control of a designated land or other property, to permit entry for the purpose of inspecting, measuring, surveying, or photographing the property or any relevant object or operation thereon. [17]The court, justice or judge, upon verified motion and after due hearing, may order any person in possession, custody or control of any designated documents, papers, books, accounts, letters, photographs, objects or tangible things, or objects in digitized or electronic form, which constitute or

14

The Supreme Court adopted the term ‘extralegal killing’ on the ground that this was in accordance with United Nations

instruments.

Phil.

Sup.

Ct.,

Annotation

to

the

Writ

of

Amparo

3

fn.

10,

availableat

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/Annotation_amparo.pdf , last updated on 17.05.2017 at 11:00 P.M. The United Nations, in fact, also uses the term ‘extrajudicial executions,’ hence the term Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions in use since 1992. U.N. Comm’n on Human Rts. Res. 1992/82 (Mar. 5, 1992). 15

Section 14(a),“The Rule on the Writ of Amparo”, Supreme Court of The Philippines, available at

http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/research/Philippines/The%20Rule%20On%20The%20Writ%20Of%20Amparo.pdf

,

last

updated on 17.05.2017 at 11:45 P.M. 16

Section 14(b),“The Rule on the Writ of Amparo”, Supreme Court of The Philippines, available at

http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/research/Philippines/The%20Rule%20On%20The%20Writ%20Of%20Amparo.pdf

,

last

updated on 17.05.2017 at 11:45 P.M. 17

Section 14(c),“The Rule on the Writ of Amparo”, Supreme Court of The Philippines, available at

http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/research/Philippines/The%20Rule%20On%20The%20Writ%20Of%20Amparo.pdf

,

last

updated on 17.05.2017 at 11:45 P.M.

EXTRA-JUDICIAL KILLINGS

MIHIR GANACHARI

PAGE 6

contain evidence relevant to the petition or the return, to produce and permit their inspection, copying or photographing by or on behalf of the movant. [ 18 ]The court, justice or judge, upon motion or motu proprio, may refer the witnesses to the Department of Justice for admission to the Witness Protection, Security and Benefit Program, pursuant to Republic Act No. 6981. The court, justice or judge may also refer the witnesses to other government agencies, or to accredited persons or private institutions capable of keeping and securing their safety. Moving on to assess the Writ of Habeas Data: [19]The writ of habeas data is a remedy available to any person whose right to privacy in life, liberty or security is violated or threatened by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private individual or entity engaged in the gathering, collecting or storing of data or information regarding the person, family, home and correspondence of the aggrieved party. 20

Special” trial courts to give priority to political cases: In early March 2007, the Chief Justice of the

Supreme Court, Reynato Puno, issued Administrative Order 25-2007 designating 99 trial courts across the country as special tribunals to try cases of political killings, a designation which is apparently intended to give priority to such cases in the courts’ trial calendars. The order mandates continuous trials for such cases, and limits the duration of such trials to 60 days after their commencement, with judgment to be rendered within 30 days of the close of the trial. A spokesperson for the Presidential Human Rights Committee told Human Rights Watch in October 2007 that only a small fraction of relevant cases were in fact being tried in front of these special courts, while the vast majority were being handled by regular courts.

18

Section 14(d) “The Rule on the Writ of Amparo”, Supreme Court of The Philippines, available at

http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/research/Philippines/The%20Rule%20On%20The%20Writ%20Of%20Amparo.pdf

,

last

updated on 17.05.2017 at 11:45 P.M. 19

Section 1, “The Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data”, Supreme Court of The Philippines, available at

http://www.chanrobles.com/writofhabeasdata.html#.WRyfNBhh3Vo , last updated on 17.05.2017 at 11:47 P.M. 20

“Universal

Periodic

Review

of

The

Philippines”,

07.04.2008,

available

at

http://pantheon.hrw.org/legacy/english/docs/2008/03/10/philip18248_txt.htm , last updated on 17.05.2017 at 11:55 P.M.

EXTRA-JUDICIAL KILLINGS

MIHIR GANACHARI

PAGE 7

21

There was an establishment of new human rights offices to deal with extrajudicial killings, enforced

disappearances and other issues. President Arroyo also ordered the creation of the new Presidential Human Rights Committee, in addition to the existing Commission on Human Rights and the Ombudsman’s Office, which are largely tasked with similar functions. So far, these offices have done much to advertise the government’s rather cosmetic measures taken on the issue of extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances but have done little to help bring perpetrators to justice. Such attempts by the courts show that there is no insufficiency of on the part of the legal frameworks22.

Extra-Judicial Killings: A violation of the presumption of Innocence? It is a well-known fact under the Criminal law that a man is presumed innocent until proven guilty. That is clearly not the case when it comes to extra-judicial killings. Let alone “until proven guilty”, one is shot dead merely upon “suspicion”. Philippines acceded to the International covenant on civil and political rights. It is mentioned in this covenant that “Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall have the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.” The concept of extra judicial killing violates the very fundamental aspect of criminal law, which is presuming one to be innocent until proven guilty. The principle of presumption of innocence implies two elements: a rule regulating the location and standard of the burden of proof and secondly a policy directive that the subject of a criminal investigation must be treated as innocent at all stages of criminal proceedings irrespective of the probable outcome of the trial. This is not the first time that a contention has been raised against the concept of extra judicial killing. In December 2015, in the Israel and Palestine coup, there have been a series of extra judicial killings, conducted by Israel. To this, Secretary of State, John Kerry expressed his views saying “We urge everybody to exercise restraint and restrain from any kind of self-help in terms of the violence” [23]

21

Supra note 20.

22

Ibid note 3

23

“Israel

applies

lethal

response

to

wave

of

Palestinian

attacks,

Reuters

(2015)”,

available

at

http://in.reuters.com/article/israel-palestinians-casualties-idinkbn0ts1wq20151209, last updated on 16.09.2016 at 3:17 P.M.

EXTRA-JUDICIAL KILLINGS

MIHIR GANACHARI

PAGE 8

Part III, article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and political rights states that “Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life.” Doesn’t extra judicial killing do the exact opposite? Does it not promote arbitrariness? It places the lives of people in the hands of the others, who might arbitrarily deprive them of their right to live at any point of time. A careful analysis of India reveals the existence of the very same problem. AFSPA [24] is one of the measures taken, which was enacted in 1958 to bring under control what the government of India considered ‘disturbed’ areas. The Tripura government on Thursday decided to lift the controversial law which according to a Press Trust of India report “was in effect for the last 18 years to curb insurgency.” The special powers for "disturbed areas" were first used in 1958 by the central government and subsequently extended to most of the northeast, most recently to Arunachal Pradesh, which borders China. They have been in force in the disputed region of Kashmir since 1990. But, the withdrawal of the AFSPA was credited to various human rights groups [25], as they believed that the arbitrary power bestowed upon the personnel was being misused. People have to live without fear and the state police will always have to be there to protect them. If the very people are scared of their own “protectors”, then the government has failed its country’s citizens, which again was stated by the Supreme Court of India that the use of excessive force by the armed personnel is not permissible [26].

24

Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1958.

25

“Tripura strips army of shoot-to-kill powers”, Reuters (2015), available at http://in.reuters.com/article/tripura-afspa-

army-idinkbn0od1ue20150528 , last updated on 16.09.2016 at 3:20 P.M. 26

Extra Judicial Execution Victim Families Association (EEVFAM) & Anr. Versus Union of India & Anr, (W.P. (CRL.)

129 OF 2012

EXTRA-JUDICIAL KILLINGS

MIHIR GANACHARI

PAGE 9

The International Criminal Court on the nature of Extra Judicial Killings: Despite these offences, it becomes imperative to understand if the leading international court on crimes, considers such acts as arbitrary. The answer is a yes. The International Criminal Court (hereinafter referred to as the ICC), as per the Roman Statute (the governing mandate) considers arbitrary deprivation of a person’s life as a crime. [27] As per the Republic act number 9851 (hereinafter referred to as the R.A. No.9851) is an act passed by the government of Philippines that identifies and penalizes activities that are categorized as crimes against humanity under the international law. This has been considered as a breakthrough [ 28 ] in the area of international humanitarian law and has been widely appreciated by various governments. [29]While the context of this provision refers to war crimes, genocide, and “other crimes against humanity” under R.A. No. 9851, this sets a statutory precedent for its extension to the cases of other serious crimes like torture, enforced disappearances, and extrajudicial killings in the corresponding special laws, if any, on such crimes. This Philippine statutory codification of the doctrine of command responsibility, we might say, is only fitting because the roots of the doctrine are usually traced to the 1946 ruling in the Yamashita case [30] for atrocities committed by the Japanese armed forces in the Philippines during the Second World War, albeit the relevant ruling is the one by the U.S., not the Philippine, Supreme Court. The historical development or evolution of the doctrine was extensively discussed in the 2007 Melo Commission Report [31] on extrajudicial killings, which recommended a special law for strict chainof-command responsibility for police and military forces and other government officials with respect

27

Republic Act Number 9851: ‘AN ACT DEFINING AND PENALIZING CRIMES AGAINST INTERNATIONAL

HUMANITARIAN LAW, GENOCIDE AND OTHER CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY, ORGANIZING JURISDICTION, DESIGNATING SPECIAL COURTS, AND FOR RELATED PURPOSES’ 28

“R.A.

No.

9851

–

breakthrough

law

for

IHL

enforcement

in

the

Philippines”,

available

at

http://www.preda.org/media/research-documents/r-a-no-9851-breakthrough-law-for-ihl-enforcement-in-thephilippines/ , last updated on 03.05.2017 at 2:45 P.M. 29

Supra note 16

30

U.S. Supreme Court: In re Yamashita, 327 U.S. 1 (1946), No. 61, Misc. Argued January 7, 8, 1946, Decided February

4, 1946, 327 U.S. 1 31

“Meet the Melo Commission”, available at http://pcij.org/blog/2006/08/24/meet-the-melo-commission , last updated on 03.05.2017 at 2:55 P.M.

EXTRA-JUDICIAL KILLINGS

MIHIR GANACHARI

PAGE 10

to such killings and other offenses committed by personnel under their command, control or authority. The 2007 National Consultative Summit on Extrajudicial Killings and Enforced Disappearances convened by the Supreme Court recommended the enactment of a law to address the lack of understanding of the doctrine of command responsibility. The 2007 Alston Mission Report[32] on extrajudicial killings in the Philippines specifically recommended that “The necessary measures should be taken to ensure that the principle of command responsibility, as it is understood in international law, is a basis for criminal liability within the domestic legal order.” R.A. No. 9851 is thus a major step forward in acting on these several related recommendations. In its provision on orders from a superior [Sec. 12] [33], R.A. No. 9851clarifies that “orders to commit genocide or other crimes against humanity are manifestly unlawful.” In customary IHL, every combatant has in fact a duty to disobey a manifestly unlawful order. So, this could also extend to war crimes, and not just the aforesaid two serious international crimes. In R.A. No. 9851’s provision on non-prescription [Sec. 11] [34], “The crimes defined and penalized under this Act, their prosecution,

32

A/HRC/8/3/Add.2, 16 April 2008: ‘Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions,

Philip Alston’ available at http://www.hr-dp.org/files/2014/06/27/Mission_to_Philippines_2008.pdf , last updated on 03.05.2017 at 3:00 P.M. 33

Section 12 of the R.A. 9851: Orders from a Superior. - The fact that a crime defined and penalized under this Act has

been committed by a person pursuant to an order of a government or a superior, whether military or civilian, shall not relieve that person of criminal responsibility unless all of the following elements occur: (a) The person was under a legal obligation to obey orders of the government or the superior in question; (b) The person did not know that the order was unlawful; and (c) The order was not manifestly unlawful. For the purposes of this section, orders to commit genocide or other crimes against humanity are manifestly unlawful. 34

Section 11 of the R.A. 9851: Non-prescription. - The crimes defined and penalized under this Act, their prosecution,

and the execution of sentences imposed on their account, shall not be subject to any prescription.

EXTRA-JUDICIAL KILLINGS

MIHIR GANACHARI

PAGE 11

and the execution of sentences imposed on their account, shall not be subject to any prescription.” This is already well-established for war crimes in customary IHL. [35]In 2016, the alleged killing of the President Rodrigo Duterte’s of Philippines against the brutal war on the illegal drugs, the ICC’s chief prosecutors have started close inspection against the said perpetuators, they said that any persons who engaged in acts of mass violence including by ordering, requesting, encouraging or contributing in any other manner to the commission of crime within the jurisdiction of ICC is potentially liable to the prosecution before the court. In light of the above initiatives taken by the government of Philippines itself, it is evident that Philippines has already identified ‘extra-judicial killings’ as arbitrary, unlawful and an international crime and is continuing to participate in the furtherance of the said crimes, thereby, attracting the jurisdiction of the ICC. This has accordingly taken the shape of a case filed at the ICC [36]. Going as per the facts of the present situation, the President shall be held liable for all sorts of mass killings that he has promulgated during his tenure.

35 36

‘Extra Judicial Killings and the role of the International Criminal Court’, Abhilasha Shrawat. Criminal case vs Duterte filed before International Criminal Court, Patricia Lourdes Viray, available at

http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2017/04/24/1693489/criminal-case-vs-duterte-filed-international-criminal-court

,

last updated on 03.05.2017 at 3:15 P.M.

EXTRA-JUDICIAL KILLINGS

MIHIR GANACHARI

PAGE 12

The Alternatives What Philippines requires, is an alternate law enforcing remedy. Definitely not the option of extra judicial killing. The United Nations also wasn’t myopic to the fact that the war on drugs needs to be more health oriented. It very well knew the same principle of regulation. Which is why it passed the First Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs [37].

To hit the drug cartels at the very foundation would be to strike their primary source of revenue. The sale of drugs. Uruguay is the best model for this. In 2012, Uruguay legalized the use of Marijuana for personal use and sales and this was a huge blow to the drug market. Uruguay also bravely paved way for other countries to look at it as an initiator for legalizing drug intake. This is quite a strategic move as it reverses the tables. What serves as a source of income for major drug cartels is now a source of income for the government itself. So now, one can buy these drugs from a licensed pharmacy. This is a win - win situation for both the government and society. While the government makes some extra cash, the society is comparatively safer due to reduced crimes of drug abuse. Also, there

have

been

rehabilitation

centers

established

to

combat

over

intake.

This is a progressive way to bleed the cartels to extinction. Another case study could be of the Netherlands. They're not criminalizing the people who use the drugs. In the past, Amsterdam has undertaken a citywide campaign [38] to inform people about the white heroin on the market — and to reassure them they can seek medical assistance without fear of police reprisal. This is in line with Dutch drug law, which prioritizes providing aid over stigmatizing drug use.

37

“

SINGLE

CONVENTION

ON

NARCOTIC

DRUGS,

1961”,

Available

at

https://www.unodc.org/pdf/convention_1961_en.pdf , last updated on 7th September, 2016 at 8:30 P.M. 38

“Eileen Shim, The Netherlands Just Did Something to Fight Its Drug Problem That the U.S. Would Never Do”. Mic

(2015), available at https://mic.com/articles/105584/the-netherlands-just-showed-the-u-s-what-a-sane-drug-policylooks-like , last updated on 15.09.2017 at 4:00 P.M..

EXTRA-JUDICIAL KILLINGS

MIHIR GANACHARI

PAGE 13

The country has recently followed the example of Netherlands and Germany and opened “fix rooms [39]” for serious drug addicts where they can safely consume and inject drugs in a supervised environment. The facilities are on offer to adults with serious addictions can bring their illegal drugs and take them, legally, under the watchful eye of a nurse. The capital Copenhagen opened the first with other cities following suit. One may take a gander at Portugal for a case. 16 years prior, Portugal took a jump and decriminalized the ownership of all medications — everything from marijuana to heroin. By most measures, the move has paid off. Today, Portuguese powers don't capture anybody discovered holding what's viewed as not exactly a 10-day supply of an illegal medication — a gram of heroin, euphoria, or amphetamine, two grams of cocaine, or 25 grams of cannabis. Rather, tranquillize guilty parties get a reference and are requested to show up before alleged "prevention boards" made up of legitimate, social, and mental specialists. Most cases are essentially suspended. People who over and again precede the boards might be recommended treatment, extending from motivational guiding to sedative substitution treatment, precisely in which, the legislature needs to contribute as opposed to subsidizing the medication war. When Portugal decided to decriminalize in 2000[40], many skeptics assumed that the number of users would skyrocket. That did not happen. With some exceptions, including a marginal increase among adolescents.s Nearly a decade and a half later, Portugal demonstrates that decriminalization does not definitely prompt increments in medication use, nor does it lead to a society of wilderness. Without a doubt, none of the feelings of dread of faultfinders have happened. Rather, law authorization and the criminal equity framework work all the more proficiently, and Portugal has possessed the capacity to put resources into enhancing the wellbeing and prosperity of individuals battling with medication

“Drug

39

laws

around

the

world

-

does

anyone

get

it

right?”,

The

Telegraph,

available

at

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11197559/drug-laws-around-the-world-does-anyone-get-it-right.html last updated on 15.09.2016 at 4:00 P.M. “Portugal's Example: What Happened After It Decriminalized All Drugs, From Weed to Heroin” | VICE News VICE

40

News RSS, By Samuel Oakford, available at https://news.vice.com/article/ungass-portugal-what-happened-afterdecriminalization-drugs-weed-to-heroin last updated on 15.09.2016 at 4:15 P.M.

EXTRA-JUDICIAL KILLINGS

MIHIR GANACHARI

PAGE 14

problems. Community relations with the police have additionally significantly improved [41]. This health centric approach by the government is well appreciated and one might learn lessons from this. There are so many alternatives available that limit human atrocities which is better both for the government as well as the citizens. So, there is no reason why a government should resort to extrajudicial killings.

CONCLUSION:

The extensive ascent in extra judicial killings, in the condition of Philippines to "secure lawfulness" and bring the "lawbreakers" to equity, is a children's story idea. Who are the criminals? What is this Justice? Who decides the status of these criminals? How is the justice bestowed supported? Every one of these inquiries stays unanswered. This stipend of an infamous approach to abet wrongdoing rates is an infringement of human rights as well as an aggregate homicide of human rights. Every case of murder at the hands of the law enforcement agencies is an act of crime committed by the state and it is a negation of the principles of natural justice. Encounter killing [42] or whatever euphemistic term we attribute to these murders, is a denial of justice to a suspect. It is a violation of the fundamental right to fair hearing and denial of the fundamental right to life. So, by this sense we can say that extrajudicial killing seems to be a Murder of Human Rights, rather than violation Human Rights.

41

“Drug

Decriminalization

in

Portugal:

A

Health-Centered

Approach”,

available

https://www.drugpolicy.org/sites/default/files/DPA_Fact_Sheet_Portugal_Decriminalization_Feb2015.pdf

,

at last

updated on 7.08. 2016 at 8:30 P.M. 42

“EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLING IN BANGLADESH: A MURDER OF HUMAN RIGHTS “by A. Z. M. Arman Habib

EXTRA-JUDICIAL KILLINGS

MIHIR GANACHARI

PAGE 15

EXTRA-JUDICIAL KILLINGS

MIHIR GANACHARI

PAGE 16