Interim Report - Report No 346, June 2007

1361. The complaint is contained in a communication from the Kilusang Mayo Uno Labor Center (KMU) dated 31 October 2006.

1. 1362. The Government replied in a communication dated 1 March 2007.
2. 1363. The Philippines has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. The complainant’s allegations

1. 1364. In a communication dated 31 October 2006, the KMU explains that it is a labour centre in the Philippines representing approximately 300,000 members all over the country. Founded on 1 May 1980, it has 11 national federations and two mass organizations of informal workers under its wing. It has local unions as members in the industrial, service and agricultural sectors.
2. 1365. The acts complained of include killings, grave threats, continuous harassment and intimidation and other forms of violence inflicted on leaders, members, organizers, union supporters/labour advocates of trade unions and informal workers’ organizations who are actively pursuing their legitimate demands at local and national levels. Data gathered indicate that these violations are widespread and systematically committed directly and indirectly by government agencies, instrumentalities and officers in the current civilian Government and/or in the military, including their agents which, to a large extent, effectively crushed a number of existing labour and informal workers’ organizations, and if not stopped will dramatically weaken the country’s trade union movement.
3. 1366. According to the complainant, these acts are being committed by the Government of the Philippines, in pursuance of its neo-liberal policies of deregulation, liberalization and privatization which gravely affect the working people in order to attract foreign investment. In concrete terms, the acts complained of include, among others, the following: (1) summary killings of 64 trade union leaders, members, organizers and union supporters and informal workers at the height of the Government’s scheme to prevent workers and informal workers from exercising their freedom of association and their right to organize and bargain collectively; (2) abduction and enforced disappearances of trade union leaders, members, organizers and union supporters and informal workers committed by elements of the military and police, not only to intimidate and/or terrorize workers and informal workers from continuing their economic and political activities, but to ultimately paralyse and render the union or organization useless; (3) harassment, intimidation, witch-hunting and grave threats committed by the military and police forces against trade union leaders, members, organizers and union supporters and informal workers; (4) militarization of workplaces in strike-bound companies or where a labour dispute exists between management and workers and where existing unions or unions being organized are considered progressive or militant, by means of establishing military detachments and/or deployment of police and military elements under the pretext of counter-insurgency operations; and (5) arrest and detention of and subsequent filing of criminal charges against trade union leaders, members, organizers and union supporters and informal workers due to their involvement and active participation in legitimate economic and political activities of trade unions and informal workers’ associations. These acts directly contravene Articles 3, 5 and 11 of Convention No. 87 and Article 1 of Convention No. 98, as well as the Constitution of the Philippines.
4. 1367. However, although the right to self-organization provided for under article III and article XIII, section 3, of the 1987 Philippine Constitution means that the rights of workers to organize or join unions of their choice could not be thwarted, the workers’ exercise of those rights has proven to be not as easy in practice. A combination of factors, such as flexibilization of labour, stringent legal requirements for union registration and recognition and the employers’ calculated move to frustrate union organizing, such as summary dismissals of union officers and active members and enterprise closures, to name a few, have, to a great extent, barred the growth of trade unions in the country. In the last five years, KMU alone has lost 30 unions with an estimated total membership of 20,000 from factory closures at the time when the union was either being organized, or a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) was being renegotiated. These companies resumed operation, hiring new workers after several months.
5. 1368. The complainant refers to a number of obstacles to the establishment and operation of trade unions including: (i) the process of union organizing starting from petition for certification up to union recognition, which is in itself a labyrinth; (ii) an unwritten policy of no union and no strike, especially in the export processing zones and industrial enclaves where foreign investors are concentrated remains; (iii) labour flexibilization, locally known as contractualization which practically prevents the flexible workers (trainees, casual, probationary, apprentice, on-call, back-up, reliever, project worker, temporary, pakyaw, etc.) to exercise their right to freedom of association, to organize and to bargain collectively or simply to demand the implementation of labour standards, by fear of being dismissed; (iv) dismissals of union leaders and active members and company-instigated petitions to cancel the union registration, which virtually paralyses the union in its formative stage; in various cases, this condition prompted budding unions to launch concerted actions including strike in protest against union busting, only to face another stage of complex legal and political battle; (v) the powers of the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) secretary to impose compulsory arbitration ending strikes where in his/her view, the companies are indispensable to the national interest, (article 263(g) of the Labor Code of the Philippines) non-compliance with the Assumption of Jurisdiction Order (AJO) together with its accompanying Return to Work Order within 24 hours would risk the strike being declared illegal, as well as the loss of employment status of the officers who led the strike including those who defied the Return to Work Order. Union defiance to the AJO has resulted to police and military’s violent dispersal of strikes in Hacienda Luisita, Tarlac, for example, enforcement of the AJO claimed the lives of at least seven strikers and seriously injured 70 workers and supporters.
6. 1369. According to the complainant, nearly all the unions that were able to withstand the above were unions affiliated to KMU or unions which shared a similar progressive and militant orientation with the KMU. This has given the Government a convenient excuse to tag the KMU unions as factory terrorists and communist fronts. Thus, in a speech before newly elected barangay officials in Sta. Cruz, Laguna on 22 September 2002, the President said in part: “Let us fight against criminals, gambling lords, drug lords … and those who terrorize factories that create jobs …”. The speech, an obvious reference to militant trade unionism, immediately led to the strikes at Nestlé Philippines, Nissan Motors, a host of companies in Laguna’s several economic enclaves being harassed and dispersed violently by the Special Action Forces (RSAF), Philippine National Police (PNP) regulars and private guards.
7. 1370. KMU’s local union members and sympathizers were terrorized, harassed and intimidated, the name of KMU is demonized and, in order to create fear amongst workers, its leaders are tailed; some fortunately escaped attempts against their lives, others were killed.
8. 1371. Despite the workers’ distrust of the existing justice system, the workers particularly KMU members and sympathizers, have worked hard to help establish the Anakpawis Partylist (Party of toiling masses) in 2004. The KMU embraced as one of its tasks the organizing and strengthening of the Anakpawis Partylist, so its demands for reforms particularly on across-the-board wage increases could be brought to the halls of Congress. Many KMU leaders at the local, regional and nationals levels accepted key responsibilities in the political party in an effort to bring trade unionism to new heights. The effort paid off, with Anakpawis getting two seats at the House of Representatives. Like other conscientious critics of the administration, Anakpawis Partylist is also tagged as a communist front and the subject of the Government’s counter-insurgency operation or Oplan Bantay Laya (Operation Freedom Watch), thereby registering heavy losses in its leaders and organizers. Rep. Beltran – a long-time KMU leader and labour veteran – was subjected to an illegal warrantless arrest on 25 February and had remained in detention despite local and international protests.
9. 1372. Similarly, KMU continuously finds itself attacked in every counter-insurgency documents, assemblies, forums, media blitz and activities that the PNP and Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) hold and conduct in areas where KMU union organizing is expanding. KMU finds itself in the AFP’s “Know the Enemy” – a CD containing a PowerPoint presentation listing nearly all progressive legal organizations, as communist fronts and targets of military operations under the Oplan Bantay Laya (Operation Freedom Watch) – the Government’s national counter-insurgency programme.
10. 1373. The whole gamut of the Oplan Bantay Laya, in its concept and implementation essentially eliminates the distinction between the exercise of the workers’ legitimate rights and the acts perceived by the State as a threat to its security and deterrent to foreign investment. Thus, union organizing to launching concerted actions in pursuit of improving wages, benefits and job security to achieving meaningful reforms, as embodied in the Constitutions and ILO Conventions, are treated under Oplan Bantay Laya as inimical to state security. Lamentably, this virtually places every individual, every worker, every unionist and every union leader as open targets of this militaristic madness, resulting not only to strings of violations but further degradation of workers’ economic, social and political condition.
11. 1374. The complainant then goes on to make the following specific complaints.
12. 1375. Summary killings of 64 trade union leaders, members, organizers and union supporters and informal workers, most of whom were KMU members. For workers to be able to effectively pursue and get a meaningful result on their demands for better wages and benefits, job security and other economic and political benefits, it is necessary that they organize their unions or associations, get them recognized and sign a collective bargaining agreement (CBA). To a certain extent, it is also necessary that in between processes of organizing a local union to signing a CBA, they bring their local issues into the public consciousness through networking, alliances, lobbying and common advocacies including concerted actions. However, the Government’s answer to these legitimate actions is rampant repression.
13. 1376. A report released by the Center for Trade Union and Human Rights (CTUHR), an independent, non-governmental organization documenting and monitoring human rights violations committed against workers and trade unions, concluded that from 2001 to 30 September 2006, there were 410 cases of violations victimizing 30,825 workers. The summit of these violations was the unprecedented rise in the number of trade unionists, organizers, leaders, union supporters and informal workers killed in the last five years in the course of their union activities or in the case of ordinary workers, while they were protesting an illegal dismissal case. Most of these union leaders and organizers belonged to the KMU unions or its regional and provincial chapters and/or Anakpawis Partylist whose main tasks include organizing workers. Prior to their murders, they reported surveillances and threats from suspected military intelligence forces.
14. 1377. Notable cases are:
15. (1) Felipe Lapa – 49 years old, union president of Milagrosa Farm Workers’ Union – NAFLU–KMU, in Nagcarlan, Laguna, killed by a CAFGU paramilitary group on 25 October 2001 several metres away from his house. The day before he was killed, he collected food supplies (meat, sweet potato) from the union members and sent this food support to the striking workers of Nissan Motors Corp., in Santa Rosa, Laguna. As union president, he was elected community leader, and his advice often sought by residents. Prior to his death, he had been warned by CAFGU to stop supporting union activities and on several occasions accused of being an NPA supporter.
16. (2) Nenita Labordio – member of Samahan ng Manggagawa sa Footjoy Manufacturing-Independent, Marilao, Bulacan. Although not affiliated to a labour federation, the local union is a member of KMB (Bulacan Workers’ Movement) – a provincial workers’ alliance under Workers Alliance in Region III – KMU chapter. Labordio died when a company truck ran her over at the picket line in December 2002.
17. (3) Angelito Mabansay – KADAMAY organizer from Tondo, Manila, who was killed near his house in August 2003 by SPO4 Bartolome Tupaz of PNP anti-terrorist group. KADAMAY, an organization of informal workers and urban poor is an affiliate of KMU.
18. (4) Samuel Bandilla – 40 years old, KMU organizer in Tacloban, Leyte, Eastern Visayas, and at the same time, Anakpawis Partylist leader, shot dead by an unidentified man on a motorbike on his way home after speaking in front of striking workers of Metro Tacloban Water District on 4 May 2004.
19. (5) Seven victims of the Hacienda Luisita massacre of 16 November 2004; this was the most violent and bloody strike dispersal in recent years, committed by composite forces of the army and national police as an implementation of the AJO issued by the then DOLE secretary. The strike was jointly led by the United Luisita Workers’ Union or ULWU–NLU (the farm workers’ union) and Central Azucarera de Tarlac Labor Union (CATLU) (the millworkers’ union). ULWU and CATLU, though not affiliated to any KMU federation, are in fact members of the Workers’ Alliance in Region III – KMU’s regional chapter.
20. (i) Jesus Laza, 34 years old, male, farm worker and an active member of the United Luisita Workers’ Union (ULWU), sustained two gunshot wounds to the chest.
21. (ii) Jun David, 28 years old, farm worker since he began working and an active ULWU member, sustained a gunshot wound to the shoulder that penetrated downward to his left lung.
22. (iii) Adriano Caballero, 23 years old, male, part-time caddie at Hacienda Luisita Golf and Country Club, supported the strike. He sustained a gunshot wound to the chest that penetrated and lacerated his left liver, stomach and heart.
23. (iv) Jhaivie Basilio, 20 years old, male, worker with Central Azucarera de Tarlac, member of CATLU, sustained a gunshot wound to the left buttock and to the chest that penetrated his left lung and the base of his heart.
24. (v) Jaime Pastidio, 46 years old, male, farm worker and ULWU member, sustained a gunshot wound to the mandibular area, lacerating the neck and his left carotid artery and vein.
25. (vi) Juancho Sanchez, 20 years old, male, son of a retrenched farm worker of HLI and a jeepney driver, sustained a gunshot wound to the left pelvic area that penetrated his stomach. His family supported the strike and his father, a unionist, actively participated.
26. (vii) Jessi Valdez, 30 years old, male, farm worker of HLI and ULWU member. He sustained gunshot wounds to the right thigh but was taken by the army to the military camp instead of a hospital. He died of severe blood loss.
27. Congressional and senate inquires were carried out on the incident. The House of Representatives, through the Committees of Human Rights, Labour and Employment and Agriculture, concluded in part:
28. … The Committees have arrived at the conclusion that human rights violations were committed against the striking workers of Hacienda Luisita by the elements of the Philippine National Police and the Armed Forces of the Philippines, including the officers and the staff of the Department of Labor and Employment. Hence it is imperative that the officers concerned be held responsible directly or by reason of command responsibility for the said acts after proper investigation has been concluded.
29. (6) Abelardo Ladera, 45 years old, male, Tarlac City councillor, supporter of Hacienda Luisita strike, was killed on 3 March 2005 and the only motive known was his strong support for the strike and for pushing for the investigation of the Hacienda Luisita massacre at the Tarlac City Council.
30. (7) Father William Tadena, 37 years old, priest from the Iglesia Filipina Independiente, supporter of the Hacienda Luisita strike, was killed on 13 March 2005 immediately after he celebrated mass in his church and called on parishioners to donate rice and goods to the striking workers of Hacienda Luisita.
31. (8) Edwin Bargamento, 46 years old, male, National Federation of Sugar Workers (NFSW–KMU) Regional Executive Committee member. He was murdered on 13 April 2005, sustained 22 gunshot wounds, on his way to a friend’s house after attending a series of labour protests in Bacolod City, Negros. Prior to his murder, he received threats from members of RPA–ABB, an armed group linked to the AFP, asking him to stop his NFSW organizing in Negros Occidental.
32. (9) Mario Fernandez, 22 years old, National Federation of Sugar Workers (NFSW–FGT–KMU) organizer, was killed on 10 June 2005 in Silay City, Negros Occidental by suspected elements of the Regional Mobile Group of the PNP. The only possible motive known was to create an atmosphere of intimidation against organized masses who were set to join the 12 June Day of Mourning rally.
33. (10)Manuel Batolina, 50 years old, National Federation of Sugar Workers’ president and organizer of several haciendas in Manapla. He was killed on 13 June 2005 by unidentified armed men who opened fire on him while resting inside his nipa hut, killing him instantly. Prior to his murder – on the account of his daughter, Laura Batolina, at the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) – he had received threats from RPA–ABB to stop his NFSW organizing in his area.
34. (11)Antonio Pantonial, National Federation of Sugar Workers in Negros, was killed on 6 July 2005. Incidents surrounding Pantonial’s murder resembled that of other NFSW organizers/leaders killed before him.
35. (12)Diosdado Fortuna, president of the Union of Filipro Employees at Nestlé Philippines, who had led the workers’ strike since 14 January 2002. He was also the chairperson of PAMANTIK–KMU and chairperson of Anakpawis Partylist in the region. He was shot and killed on 22 September 2005, sustaining two gunshot wounds that pierced his lungs. Prior to his death, he reported constant surveillance since the strike began. He was the second Nestlé union president who was killed during the workers’ strike. Meliton Roxas, his predecessor, was killed in front of the picket line in 1989. Fortuna was elected union president a year later.
36. (13)Victoria Samonte, 50 years old, female, president of the Andres Soriano College Employees’ Union, vice-chairperson of KMU–CARAGA region, was killed on 30 September 2005. Her active involvement in different organizations as a long-time trade union leader was the only motive seen for her murder.
37. (14)Ricardo Ramos, 47 years old, male, president of CATLU, was killed on 25 October 2005, inside a bamboo hut by unidentified armed men believed to be led by Sgt Castillo and Sgt de la Cruz of the 7th Infantry Division, PA. Ramos was a leader of the strike and at the time of his murder, he had just finished distributing to union members the unpaid wages they had won during the strike.
38. (15)Ramon Namuro, AJODOM–PISTON–KMU member, was killed on 15 December 2005 by a Guardian (paramilitary group) member, who wanted to take control of the jeepney terminal managed by the association.
39. (16)Federico de Leon, 53 years old, tricycle driver, spokesperson of the Bulacan Confederation of Operators’ and Drivers’ Association (BCODA–PISTON–KMU) and chairperson of Anakpawis Partylist in Bulacan. He died from three gunshot wounds fired by an unidentified man and woman acting as passengers and who asked to be specially driven by de Leon in the afternoon of 26 October 2005. De Leon was a well known transport worker leader and was active in protest actions against oil price hikes and other government regulations affecting tricycle operations in the area.
40. (17)Florante Collantes, former president of the Ford Philippines union, used to work in the Bataan export processing zone, one of the organizers of the Workers’ Alliance in Region III–KMU and assigned to Hacienda Luisita and, at the same time, BAYAN MUNA coordinator in Camiling, Tarlac. He was shot while tending his sari-sari (retail) store by gunmen who posed as customers on 15 October 2005. According to his wife, Adelia Simon-Collantes, it was the second attempt to kill her husband; the first, which failed, was in 1985 when he was still organizing workers in the Bataan export processing zone. His wife gave an oral statement but politely refused to execute an affidavit, as she remained in the same house where her husband was killed.
41. (18)Crisanto Teodoro, was the former organizer of the Association of Democratic Labor Organizations – KMU, organizer of several transport workers’ associations in Bulacan and chairperson of Bagong Alyansang Makaban – Malolos, Bulacan, when he was killed on 9 March 2006. Teodoro was a key person in many protest actions held by transport workers in Bulacan against oil price hikes.
42. (19)Tirzo Cruz, board member, ULWU, killed on 17 March 2006, sustained nine gunshot wounds.
43. (20)Leodegario Punzal, informal workers, labour and community organizer and local leader of Anakpawis in Norzagaray, Bulacan, was killed on 13 September 2005 in his home while doing his job as an artist (making streamers, signages, t-shirts, etc.). The second bullet hit him while being cuddled by his crying mother. In an oral testimony by his mother and witness to the incident, Maxima Punzal, 70 years old, affirmed that her son did not have a known personal enemy and she only knew that he had been helping many people in their community.
44. (21)Rolando Mariano, male, former president of TARELCO 1 Workers’ Union, was an active union officer and community leader of Bayan Muna at the time of his murder on 7 October 2005. Following his murder, his family moved out of Tarlac to an undisclosed place in Metro Manila and, thus, getting a written testimony has proven difficult.
45. (22)Dante Teotino, union member of Schneider Packaging Corporations, in Kaybiga, Kaloocan City, was shot and killed by security guards on the order of the management to shoot the striking workers protesting about underpayment of minimum wages on 13 September 2005.
46. (23)Noel Daray, contractual worker of WL Food Inc., Valenzuela City, was killed by company security guards when he protested his being dismissed illegally on the night of December 2005. Witnesses to the incident refused to give detailed accounts for fear that they would be dismissed from their jobs or killed.
47. (24)Roberto Dela Cruz, 43 years old, male, former driver of Tritran Bus Company, was a board member of the Workers’ Union of Tritran, vice-chairperson of Alyansa ng mga Manggagawa ng Bus Company (AMB; Alliance of Bus Workers) and a member of Anakpawis. He was shot dead by motorcycle-riding men inside his eatery on 25 January 2006. Prior to his death, he had been pursued by military agents and was accused of helping the New People’s Army. A few days before he was killed, Dela Cruz presented himself to the Intelligence Service of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (ISAFP) to clear his name.
48. (25)Paquito Diaz, 44 years old, regional chairperson of the Confederation for Unity, Recognition and Advancement of Government Employees (COURAGE–EV) based in Tacloban, Leyte, was murdered on 6 July 2006. Prior to his murder, he had a long record of involvement in union struggles in various government agencies in the region.
49. (26)Ronald Adrada, male, KADAMAY–KMU, was killed by the Philippine National Construction Corporation (PNCC) highway patrol allegedly due to his illegal vending on 24 September 2005.
50. (27)Nilo Bayas, male, vice-chairperson of the Association of Charcoal Makers in Bulacan and member of Anakpawis, was killed on 17 July 2005 allegedly by members of the military.
51. (28)Albert Terradeno, president of the DAR Employees Association in Abra and member of COURAGE, was killed on 29 November 2005. Terradeno is a known trade union leader/organizer of government employees.
52. The complainant attaches further names of workers, trade unionists, organizers and informal workers who were killed allegedly by the PNP or military elements but the motives were quite difficult to establish.
53. 1378. The complainant points out, with regard to the manner by which the victims were killed, that 98 per cent were gunned down by motorcycle-riding men wearing either ski masks or helmets. Initial investigations revealed that most of the cases were premeditated, that is victims were under surveillance by suspected elements of the AFP or the PNP before their deaths.
54. 1379. The complainant further states that, alarmed by these heightening human and trade union rights violations in the country, the Ecumenical Institute for Labor Education and Research (EILER), the Center for Trade Union and Human Rights (CTUHR) and the Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT) spearheaded an international labour solidarity mission (ILSM) from 30 April to 8 May 2006, aimed at investigating the spate of trade union killings and violations in the country. Thirty international delegates from 12 countries participated in the ILSM and went to four areas in the country – Central Luzon and Southern Tagalog on Luzon Island, Negros on Visayas Island and Compostela Valley on Mindanao Island. At the end of the mission, the ILSM, in its public presentation of its findings, noted in part:
55. … ILSM noted with alarm and condemnation that the number of killings has substantially increased under the Arroyo government, that the “violation of labor rights and human rights in the Philippines is systematic and nationwide in scope” and that “the rampant attacks on workers are meant to create an environment of fear”.
56. 1380. In a similar manner, an Amnesty International (AI) report on political killings in the Philippines issued in August 2006 had concluded that “the attacks are not an unconnected series of criminal murders but constitute a politically motivated pattern of killings”. Expressing its grave concern “that members of the security forces may have been directly involved in the killings, or else have tolerated, acquiesced to, or been complicit in them,” AI recommended that “… investigations must then lead to the arrest, prosecution, conviction and punishment of the perpetrators” in order to stop the culture of impunity in the country.
57. 1381. Meanwhile, in a letter of concern dated 11 July 2006 and sent to the President of the Philippines, the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) said “the violation of trade union and democratic rights directed against workers and their leaders in your country is of very grave concern and has captured the attention of the international trade movement”. It noted that “the number of labour-related killings in the Philippines now places it in a similar category to Colombia … The Philippines appears to be heading rapidly towards second place”. In addition to these international bodies, a growing number of international organizations including trade unions, human rights groups and churches expressed grave alarm and concern over the spate of extrajudicial killings and the prevailing climate of impunity in the Philippines and have condemned the killings and the Government’s complicity or inaction against this systematic campaign.
58. 1382. In an attempt to temper the international pressure and protests, the Government was forced to create a task force, Usig, and later the Melo Commission to look into and solve these cases of extrajudicial killings. The public, particularly the victims, received the task force and the commission with a grain of salt, and in fact questioned its integrity. Military men or personalities known to be allies of the Government form the two bodies.
59. 1383. To date, not a single perpetrator has been apprehended in spite of strong indications that these killings, abductions and disappearances were the handiwork of either the police, military or their agents. Worse, perpetrators like Major General Jovito “the butcher” Palparan, accused of being the brains behind many of these killings, has been showered with lavish praises for his “good work” further reinforcing the culture of impunity.
60. 1384. Abduction and enforced disappearances of trade union leaders, members, organizers and union supporters and informal workers committed by elements of the military and police. According to the complainant, the CTUHR has recorded 22 cases of abduction and enforced disappearances, victimizing 52 unionists and union supporters from 20 January 2001 to 30 June 2006. The bulk of the cases occurred in 2005 (eight cases) and 2006 (ten cases). One of the prominent cases in 2005 was the disappearance of Perseus Geogoni, an organizer of the National Federation of Sugar Workers (NFSW) in Negros. Geagoni was last seen on the evening on 5 December 2005 when he followed up organizational matters in Bacolod City. Prior to his disappearance, he reported being tailed and that two unidentified individuals suspiciously asked of his whereabouts. A military man relayed that a group of 30 intelligence operatives led by First Lt Clarence Garrido of the 11th Infantry Division under the supervision of Visayas Military Intelligence command were responsible for Geogoni’s abduction. Geogoni remains missing up to this day. It is believed that the motive behind his abduction was related to his work as an organizer in sugar cane areas and peasant communities and his involvement in progressive organizations critical of anti-people government policies.
61. 1385. In 2006 alone, partial data gathered by CTUHR showed that there were ten cases of abductions involving 57 victims. Of the 33 victims, 11 remained missing, one was found dead and 21 were returned to their families, four were handed over to the PNP and were slapped with fabricated criminal charges. A summary of the accounts and victims is provided by the complainant and reproduced in part in Appendix II.
62. 1386. Harassment, intimidation, witch hunting and grave threats committed by the military and police forces against trade union leaders, members, organizers and union supporters and informal workers. According to the complainant, in collusion with foreign investors and local capitalists, the Government engaged in harassment, intimidation, witch hunting and grave threats aimed at trade union leaders, members, organizers, union supporters and informal workers. From 1 January 2001 to 30 June 2006, the CTUHR has recorded 81 cases of grave threats victimizing 16,276 workers and informal workers. Likewise, there were 114 cases of intimidation victimizing 13,454 workers and informal workers recorded during the same period. The Government through the military has included leaders, members, organizers and supporters of trade unions and informal workers’ organizations in their list of alleged terrorists and communists. This list is being used to justify harassment and intimidation, arrest and detention, and their eventual incarceration or summary execution. The military also uses the same list to intimidate and urge union members to dissociate from their union officers and organizers.
63. 1387. In a press conference organized at Camp Vicente Lim on 4 April 2001, the Philippine National Police Region IV Director, Domingo Reyes, admitted that 94 factories with militant unions under the Solidarity of Workers in Southern Tagalog, the Organized Labor Association in Line Industries and Agriculture (OLALIA–KMU) and the Alliance of Workers in Laguna are under surveillance.
64. Some notable cases of grave threats are the following:
65. (a) Angelina Ladera, 38 years old, female, acting chairperson of the Workers’ Alliance of Region 3 (WAR 3) and former president of the International Wiring Services Corporation Workers’ Union. Ladera is included in the military’s Order of Battle and is among the ten persons considered as threats to national security and branded as “enemies of the State” in a PowerPoint presentation entitled “Trinity of War” distributed by the Northern Luzon Command in January 2005.
66. (b) Romeo Legaspi, male, union president of Lakas Manggagwa Nagkakaisa sa Honda (United Workers’ Strength in Honda) and the current national president of the OLALIA–KMU, where the Honda union is affiliated. Since October 2005, Legaspi was forced to refrain from going home and had to transfer from one place to another due to threats to his life as a result of his active involvement in trade union and community activities.
67. (c) Harassment and surveillance activities on a number of union leaders and members of the Nestlé Workers’ Union in Cabuyao, which included tailing the workers in the strike area, in their activities and in their homes and being threatened with arrest. Among those who have executed their affidavits are Reynaldo B. Batites, union board member, Roberto L. Berroya Jr, union office and shop steward, Rene A. Manalo, Ariel G. Legaspi and Noel T. Sanchez. In their affidavits, they attested that these cases of intimidation and harassment were related to their active involvement in the ongoing strike of the Nestlé Philippines’ workers.
68. (d) Interrogation of a number of union leaders and members of the NAMAOS in Compostela town, Compostela Valley. On separate occasions, union leaders and members were “invited” for questioning by members of the Special Operating Team of the 36th Infantry Battalion, PA under M/Sgt Alexander Iscarten. The military accuses NAMAOS of being backed up by the NPA, that all NAMAOS members are NPA members and that monthly union dues are being given to the NPA as support.
69. (e) Vicente Barrios, male, president of the United Workers in Suyapa Farms (NAMASUFA) – summoned by the military on several occasions in September 2005. The military accused NAMASUFA of being led by the NPA rebels and accused Barrios of being an NPA organizer. The company used the military to interfere in the union’s concerted actions aimed at airing the workers’ grievances. Barrios has received several warnings about a supposed plot to kill him because of his union activities.
70. (f) Console Farm Workers’ Union in San Miguel, Bulacan. Continuous military harassment against union members and officers which included coercion to withdraw affiliation from their labour federation, the Association of Nationalist and Genuine Labor Organization (ANGLO–KMU), auditing union books of accounts, closely monitoring the workers’ movements, branding union organizers and leaders who join legitimate protest rallies as terrorists, communists and NPA sympathizers. The military twice assembled the workers for a meeting inside the company in 2005.
71. (g) NAMASUFA, the workers’ union in Packing Plant 90 of the Fresh Banana Agricultural Corporation, located in Purok 4, Barangay Siocon, Compostela, Compostela Valley. The military, under the 28th Infantry Battalion of the PA, called a meeting with the workers on 16 August 2005. The military told them not to form a union because the business would close down and their families would not be able to find jobs because they were unionists. Union members were also tagged as rebels and were told to clear their names or else be tailed and summoned for investigation.
72. (h) United Workers of San Jose (NAMASAN), the workers’ union in Packing Plant 95 of the Fresh Banana Agricultural Corporation, located in Barangay San Jose, Compostela. The military conducted a meeting with about 160 workers on 21 August 2005. The workers were told not to participate in the union because it would cause the plant to close down; their families would not be able to find jobs because of their union involvement; that KMU members are Satanists and rebels and that it was okay to form a union but not under the KMU.
73. (i) Harassment of the workers of Packing Plant 92 of the Fresh Banana Agricultural Corporation, located in Barangay New Alegria, Compostela. The military called a meeting with more than 100 workers on 18 August 2005. The military told them that they were called for a meeting because they were forming a union, that the union they were approaching for assistance – NAMAOS – were rebels and that the NAMAOS and the KMU were fake unions.
74. (j) Surveillance on labour lawyers belonging to the Pro-Labor Assistance Center (PLACE). On 6 October 2006, Pfc Rommel Felipe Santiago, an intelligence officer of the PA admitted doing surveillance work, after he was apprehended by security guards of the Food Terminal Inc. (FTI) when he tailed a group of union officers from the labour office to the FTI. A blotter was entered in the Taguig police precinct but Pfc Santiago was later released after and unidentified inspector general called the Taguig police and vouched that Santiago was “on official duty”. As of this writing, men in various vehicles continue their surveillance work at the labour office whose clients are mostly from militant and independent unions.
75. 1388. Militarization of workplaces through the establishment of military detachments and/or deployment of police and military elements in strike-bound companies or where there exists a labour dispute between management and workers and where existing unions or unions being organized are considered progressive or militant. The complainant alleges that, as part of the Government’s objective of maintaining “industrial peace”, military detachments are being established and/or military elements are deployed in strike-bound companies or where there is a presence of militant unions. These detachments are used to violently disperse legitimate workers’ strikes and protest actions and to “safeguard” the companies against disruption by “untoward elements”. Even after a strike has been dismantled, military detachments remain to ensure that no similar strike will occur in the near future, to harass and intimidate workers and to ultimately crush the workers’ union into the ground.
76. 1389. The presence and direct intervention of military and police in labour disputes is a growing practice. The presence of elements of Regional Special Action Forces, the PNP Mobile Group and the Special Weapons Action (SWAT) in full battle gear are a common sight in companies in Southern Tagalog and Central Luzon, two of the industrial areas in the country where most of the foreign investors are concentrated. In Nestlé Cabuyao, the military has maintained operations inside the factory from 2002 until the present.
77. 1390. Some of the recorded cases of militarization are the following:
78. (a) Console Farm Workers’ Union in San Miguel, Bulacan – The military has forced the workers to become members of the Barangay Defence System (BDS), a paramilitary unit, allegedly set up to keep peace and order in the area. As members of the BDS, workers are compelled to render on a rotation basis at least two hours’ military duty every day. Refusal to follow orders is tantamount to being treated as terrorists or communists or listed in the military’s Order of Battle.
79. (b) Robina Farms Workers’ Union – The military has set up a detachment within Robina Farms, conducted military census, roamed the area in full battle gear and harassed the union members, asking them to disaffiliate from the Kilusang Mayo Uno, the union’s centre. Workers fear for their lives and union officials are afraid to even go home.
80. (c) In Compostela Valley, members of the 28th Infantry Battalion held assembly meetings inside the packing plants of the Fresh Banana Plantation. These military-initiated meetings coincided with the establishment of unions in Packing Plants 95, 90 and 92.
81. (d) NAMASAN, United Workers in San Jose – Military elements under the 28th Infantry Battalion conducted a meeting with the workers inside Packing Plant 95 and told the workers to refrain from participating in the union and especially with the KMU. When asked by the workers who had hired them to conduct the meeting, the soldiers replied that is was part of their jurisdiction.
82. (e) In the NAMAOS, leaders were tailed following the conclusion of their collective bargaining agreement and, on 14 November 2004, soldiers roamed around the NAMAOS office in the middle of the night and put up posters depicting the KMU as a devil and warning workers not to “be used by Communists”.
83. (f) In Japanese-owned Sun Ever Lights in Santa Rosa, Laguna, elements of the Special Weapons Action Group (SWAG) were deployed to man the production line and keep watch on union leaders of the newly formed union. This occurred during the period when the union was heading for a certification election.
84. 1391. Arrest and detention of trade union leaders, members, organizers and union supporters and informal workers due to their involvement and active participation in the economic and political activities of trade unions and informal workers’ associations. The complainant alleges the following:
85. (a) Illegal arrest and detention of Rep. Crispin Beltran, KMU Chairman Emeritus and Anakpawis Partylist representative – Beltran was abducted and arrest in Bulacan on 25 February 2006, a day after the President of the Philippines declared a state of emergency. He was arrested on the basis of trumped-up charges dating back two decades and already quashed by the Philippine courts. Later, the Government through the Department of Justice implicated Beltran in failed attempts to overthrow the Government. He continues to be in hospital detention at the moment, owing to his failing health.
86. (b) Arrest and detention of five members of the National Federation of Sugar Workers (NFSW–KMU) and two others on 30 September 2005 near the detachment of the Alpha company of the 12th Infantry Battalion at Carmingawan, Kabankalan City, Negros Occidental. The military accused those arrested of being high-ranking officers of the Communist Party of the Philippines and the New People’s Army (CPP/NPA).
87. 1392. Finally, the complainant indicates that, although most of the victims and their families were reluctant to give written testimonies and/or execute affidavits, for fear of being harassed, it attaches the Fact-Finding Mission Reports of the International Labor Solidarity Mission (ILSM) which was conducted from 30 April to 8 May 2006, as well as several fact sheets, affidavits and sworn statements, reports, newspaper clippings, photographs and other documents as part of the evidence which can draw more light to the complaint.
88. B. The Government’s reply
89. 1393. In a communication dated 1 March 2007, the Government indicated that the President of the Philippines established the Independent Commission to Address Media and Activist Killings (Melo Commission) – headed by retired Philippine Supreme Court Justice Jose A.R. Melo and having the following members: director Mantaring (National Bureau of Investigation); Jovencito R. Zuno (chief state prosecutor); Nella I. Gonzales (regent, University of the Philippines); and Rev Juan DeDios M. Pueblos, D.D. (Catholic Bishop of Butuan). The report of this Commission was submitted on 30 January 2007 and released on 22 February 2007.
90. 1394. The Government considers it significant to point out that the complainant KMU has failed and refused to participate in the proceedings of the Melo Commission and has instead chosen to file the present complaint.
91. 1395. The Melo Commission concluded in its report that:
92. From the evidence gathered and after an extensive study of the same, the Commission comes to the conclusion that there is no direct evidence, but only circumstantial evidence, linking some elements of the military to the killings. There is no official or sanctioned policy on the part of the military or its civilian superiors to resort to what other countries euphemistically call “alternative procedures” – meaning liquidations. However, there is certainly evidence pointing the finger of suspicion at some elements and personalities in the armed forces … as responsible for the undetermined number of killings, by allowing, tolerating and even encouraging the killings.
93. […]
94. … due to lack of cooperation from the activist groups, not enough evidence was presented before the Commission to allow it to pinpoint and eventually recommend prosecution of the persons ultimately responsible for the killings. There is no definite or identifiable person, entity or interest behind the killings. There is likewise no definitive account of the actual number [of] activist killings. Even Karapatan and Amnesty International have wildly differing figures.
95. […]
96. In any case, further in-depth investigation into the numerous killings, including extensive evidence gathering, is necessary for the successful prosecution of those directly responsible. In this, the testimony of witnesses and the presentation of evidence from the victims and their families and colleagues would be indispensable.
97. 1396. The Commission thereafter made the following recommendations:
98. 1. Political will – “It is urged that the President reiterate in the strongest possible manner her expressions or pronouncements of determination and firm resolve to stop the same … the Government must consistently and at all levels condemn political killings. The President and all the departments of Government should make clear to all members of the police and military forces that extrajudicial executions will not be countenanced under any circumstances.”
99. 2. Investigation – “The investigation must be conducted by a body or agency independent from the armed forces … This civilian investigative agency should … have control of its own budget, with personnel trained in enforcement and investigative work, authorized to execute warrants and make arrests, provided with adequate technology …”
100. 3. Prosecution – “the DOJ must create a special team of competent and well-trained prosecutors to handle the trial of said cases. Also the DOJ should request the Supreme Court to designate special courts to hear and try said cases”.
101. 4. Protection of witnesses – “The Government must give the highest priority to the improvement, strengthening, and funding of the Witness Protection Program.”
102. 5. Special law for strict chain-of-command responsibility – “The President should propose legislation to require police and military forces and other government officials to maintain strict chain-of-command responsibility with respect to extrajudicial killings and other offences committed by personnel under their command, control or authority.”
103. 6. Proper orientation and training of security forces – “The AFP should be encouraged and supported to conduct intensive seminars, orientations, or training for mid to high ranking officers to make them conscious of the prevailing doctrines of command responsibility and the ramifications thereof.”
104. 1397. Subsequent to the report, the President gave the following instructions:
105. (1) She asked the Melo Commission to continue its work and submit supplementary reports from time to time (thus, clarifying that the work of the Melo Commission is not yet finished).
106. (2) She instructed the Department of Foreign Affairs to submit a formal proposal to the European Union, Finland, Spain and Sweden to send investigators to assist the Melo Commission.
107. (3) She ordered the Departments of Justice and National Defense to coordinate with the Commission of Human Rights for the constitution of a joint fact-finding body to delve deeper into the matter of involvement of military personnel in unexplained killings, file the corresponding charges against and prosecute the culpable parties.
108. (4) She ordered the Department of Justice to broaden the Witness Protection Program to cover all witnesses to the unexplained killings of an ideological/political nature.
109. (5) She requested the Supreme Court to create special courts for the trial of charges involving unexplained killings of ideological/political nature.
110. 1398. Since then, the Supreme Court has responded by designating – through Administrative Order No. 25-2007 – 99 regional trial courts in the country as special tribunals that shall expeditiously resolve or decide the cases of extrajudicial killings. Administrative Order No. 25-2007 enjoined the special courts to give priority to cases of activists and media personnel; mandated a continuous trial that shall be terminated within 60 days from the commencement of the case and required a judgment to be rendered within 30 days from submission for decision; and prohibited the filing of motions for postponements or other dilatory pleadings or motions.
111. 1399. From this summary of recent developments, it is at once apparent that much remains to be done before definite results can be achieved in the matter of the unsolved killings generally, and on the issue of trade union rights violations in particular. In this sense, action on the killing of activists, including those complained of by KMU, is a work in progress.
112. 1400. The Government submits to the Committee on Freedom of Association that:
113. (1) It is premature to entertain the present complaint, based on the generalized and unsubstantiated allegations of the complainant, which fails to present prima facie that the Government has violated trade union rights under Conventions Nos 87 and 98. The burden of evidence is on the complainant and in the absence of evidence supporting a prima facie case, then the complaint should be dismissed.
114. (2) The complainant is effectively shopping for a forum that it hopes would give it the greatest publicity mileage. The Government invites the Committee’s attention to the view that the local forum – i.e. the Philippines’ internal investigative processes – should take priority when it is clear that such a forum is available, before the Committee formally recognizes a complaint as valid for proper ILO investigation. The Government likewise invites the Committee’s attention to the fact that the complainant KMU has failed and refused to come forward to prove its case before the Government of the Philippines’ Melo Commission.
115. (3) The Philippines has been facing an insurgency problem for the past 60 years that had been compounded by worldwide terrorism over the past 20 years. The Government invites the Committee to recognize that the complainant, KMU, is an arm of an insurgent movement – the CPP/NPA – and distinctions should be made between legitimate trade union activities fully entitled to ILO protection, and subversive activities in violation of Philippine law, which lie outside the parameters of the ILO Conventions alleged to have been violated.
116. (4) In considering a complaint, the Committee should take into account, not only the plain allegations of the complainant but the general ILO record of the Government complained against. For the Philippines, its ratification and active participation record, its overall labour situation, and the comments of the ILO offices in the country should be take into account.
117. (5) In sum, the Government has no past record of and no present grand design to suppress trade union rights; much less will it condone or tolerate the police and the military if and when they violate these rights.
118. 1401. With regard to the complainant, KMU, the Government indicates that the KMU is a trade union centre founded in 1980. It is not registered with the Government of the Philippines, yet has been operating unhampered for the past 27 years. It is linked to 11 federations, two mass organizations and 300,000 workers as members. The KMU was founded by Felixberto Olalia. Felixberto’s son, Rolando, succeeded Felixberto at the helm of KMU. After Rolando’s death, KMU’s leadership was transferred to Crispin Beltran. After bolting prison in the early 1980s, Crispin Beltran joined the NPA. Later he co-founded Partido ng Bayan (PnB), Bagong Alyansa ng mga Makabayan (BAYAN), Partido Bayan Muna and, lately, Anakpawis which he currently represents in Congress. In this respect, the Government notes that according to the complainant, KMU unions embraced as one of their tasks the organizing and strengthening of Anakpawis and many KMU leaders at the local, regional and national levels accepted key responsibilities in the political party in an effort to bring trade unionism to new heights. The Government adds that BAYAN and Anakpawis are left-leaning political organizations associated with the CPP/NPA and the National Democratic Front (NDF). In fact, KMU has Marxist–Leninist–Maoist orientation similar to those of the CPP/NPA and the NDF, and the NPA counts in its fold KMU members.
119. 1402. The Philippines has about the longest-running insurgency in Asia where the NPA boasts a 10:1 tactical advantage, with workers’ support, over the armed forces. It is identified as the author of the murder of Col Rowe, Congressman Rodolfo Aguinaldo and Congressman Marcial Punzalan Jr. It is also the author of internal purges, the summary killing of its members, and the killing fields unearthed in Misamis Occidental reminiscent of the Pol Pot regime. It has set up a parallel government engaged in its own taxation, interference in election, and harassment of workers who shun foreign ideology and strikes.
120. 1403. In August 2002, the NPA and the CPP were listed as terrorist organizations by the United States and the European Union. This resulted in massive withdrawal of foreign financial support to left-leaning organizations and affiliated unions. From 9 August 2002 to the present, the NPA has been besieged by internal dissension, retaliatory action by private enemies, international pressure and successful campaigns by the armed forces. The fight against terrorism continues. At the same time, the Government of the Philippines ensures full observance of the Bill of Rights. The President in fact condemns the spate of extrajudicial killings in the strongest terms possible and it is for that reason that open hearings by Congress and special commissions to identify the culprits are ongoing.
121. 1404. With regard to the labour relations record of the Philippines, the Government indicates that the Philippines has ratified both Conventions Nos 87 and 98. In fact the Philippines was the 11th country in the world and the fourth country outside Europe to ratify both Conventions Nos 87 and 98. The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines categorically provides that the workers shall be entitled to the right to self-organization, the right to collective bargaining and negotiations and the right to strike and to engage in concerted activities.
122. 1405. The Department of Labor and Employment of the Philippines recorded 260 strikes in 1981, topping by 66 per cent the previous high of 157 counted in 1971. The 1981 numbers rose to 282 in 1984, to 371 in 1985 and to 581 – or one new strike every 15 hours – in 1986. It was that same year (1986) that the number of registered unions in the Philippines passed the 2,000 mark. It breached the 3,000 total in 1988, the 4,000 mark in 1990 and grew steadily thereafter. Under this climate, the complainant expanded and raised its membership to 300,000 workers, as stated in the complaint. Its membership would not have risen to where it is had there been an active design to suppress it and its legitimate activities.
123. 1406. In the last two months of 2007, only 61 notices of strikes have been filed. Of these, the Department of Labor assumed jurisdiction over one case and certified another to the National Labor Relations Commission for compulsory arbitration. Some of these cases were settled through conciliation. Only one notice of strike ripened into an actual strike. This record is a source of pride for the Government and one that investors have taken notice of. It would be grossly unfair to the Government if this achievement were to be weakened by a premature complaint with anaemic allegations of ILO violations.
124. 1407. The best reliable source of information perhaps for the Committee is the ILO’s own Subregional Office in the Philippines. The Government recommends that, even if only on the issue of the general state of health of labour in general and unionism in particular, the Committee should secure information from its Subregional Office which can best attest to the efforts of the Government of the Philippines, not only in unionism but in the fields of decent work, child labour and other live areas of ILO intervention.
125. 1408. With regard to the allegations on KMU chairman, Crispin Beltran, and seven other leaders and members of the National Federation of Sugar Workers (NFSW–KMU) who had been the subject of a warrantless arrest in Bulacan on 25 February 2006 – one day after President Arroyo declared a state of emergency – the Government indicates that Beltran had been arrested on the basis of a warrant of arrest. The allegation that a previous charge against Beltran had been quashed remains an unsupported allegation as the KMU cannot show any proof in this respect. Moreover, the charge for which Beltran was arrested has no bearing on trade union activities, as it relates to the charge of rebellion. Significantly, the Government later implicated Beltran in the failed attempts to overthrow the Government; he is currently still under hospital detention because of failing health.
126. 1409. An examination of the KMU’s complaint and its attachments would also show lack of linkage between the arrest and detention of NFSW members and trade union activities. The members/leaders of NFSW were arrested on 30 September 2005 near the detachment of the Alpha Company of the 12th Infantry Batallion at Camingawan, Kabankalan City, Negros Occidental, after they were accused of being high-ranking officers of the Communist Party of the Philippines and the New People’s Army (CPP/NPA). These cases are pointed out early on because they show the overriding patterns in the KMU complaint. It is strong on allegations but very soft and non-existent on support, particularly with respect to allegations and evidence of violation of trade union activities.
127. 1410. With regard to the Hacienda Luisita case, the KMU allegations that law enforcers shot and killed Jesus Laza, Jun David, Adriano Caballero, Jhaivie Basilio, Jaime Pastidio, Juancho Sanchez and Jessie Valdez at the height of the dispersal of the strike and while the composite forces of the police and the military were enforcing the AJO issued by the Secretary of Labor, the Government indicates that congressional hearings were held on the incident and the Congressional Committees on Human Rights, Labor and Employment and Agriculture concluded in part that human rights violations were committed against the striking workers of Hacienda Luisita.
128. 1411. The Government stresses, however, that the Hacienda Luisita case was not a pure case of police action against strikers. The records show that the dispersal of the strike came several days after the strike and not immediately after its commencement; there were clear indications of provocation on the part of the strikers that compelled the police and the military forces to forcibly enforce the return to work order of the Department of Labor and Employment. To be sure, the strikers and most especially the trade union leaders, could have actually contributed to the peaceful resolution of the dispute had they complied with the legal orders issued by the lawfully constituted authority – the AJO issued by the Secretary of Labor. Had the striking workers returned to their work as ordered, the Hacienda Luisita incident would not have resulted in the death and injuries to workers.
129. 1412. The exercise of the right to strike carries with it the correlative obligation to observe the limitations imposed by law, especially those that are essential to the maintenance of peace and order of the community. Under Philippine law, a strike should not result in the obstruction of the ingress to and egress from the enterprise and, when this recognized statutory limitation is violated by the strikers, it may be necessary to call on, or seek the assistance of, the law enforcement officers. In the context of the Hacienda Luisita strike, the excesses committed by the strikers in obstructing the ingress to and egress from the workplace dictated the intervention of the law enforcement officers who are expected to maintain peace and order at all times. Indeed, an otherwise absolute right ends when the rights of others begin.
130. 1413. If indeed law enforcers exceed the limits of their authority to beyond what is required or dictated by the situation, there are built-in remedies in law to address this situation; the incident need not call for the conclusion of a violation of trade union rights by a party to the Conventions. What happened in Hacienda Luisita is isolated and was affected by abnormal circumstances; it was a deviation from the normal course of things. It is not at all indicative of a governmental design or a premeditated attempt directed at suppressing trade union rights.
131. 1414. With regard to the allegations concerning killings and other actions against activists, the Government responds that the KMU complaint has not pointed to any direct evidence in the cited cases showing that the police and the military were indeed the perpetrators of the killings and other actions against KMU leaders and members. Nor does the complaint categorically state in what manner the cited ILO Conventions have been violated. At best, the link to the police and to the military appears to be merely circumstantial – a conclusion that the Melo Commission itself arrived at in its initial report. To state the obvious, implicating the police and the military in the killings without any cited evidence amounts to pure conjecture or speculation. Unfortunately, this is how the KMU generally made its allegations in linking the military and the police to the acts complained about. In some instances, it was only an alleged and unsubstantiated police or military surveillance immediately before the killing that brought on a linkage to the police or the military. It should of course take more than this type of allegation before the Committee on Freedom of Association should give due course to a complaint for violation.
132. 1415. With regard to the allegations concerning the disappearance of Perseus Geagoni, the Government emphasizes the absence of evidence pointing to the responsibility of the military. The basis for alleging military participation is merely the hearsay evidence that a military man disclosed that a group of 30 intelligence operatives were responsible for Geagoni’s disappearance. This allegation is very weak to substantiate the alleged involvement of the military. The same holds true with the case of Ronald Intal.
133. 1416. In the case of Nenita Labordio, Dante Teotino, Noel Daray and Ronald Andrade, the KMU complaint and its attachment show that they were in fact killed by private persons; thus, there clearly was no military and/or police participation in these cases.
134. 1417. In the cases of Antonio Pantonial, Victoria Samonte, Federico de Leon, Crisanto Teodoro, Tirso Cruz, Leodogario Punzal, Rolando Mariano and Albert Terradeno, the complainant, KMU, did not allege even a single circumstance that would indicate the police’s and the military’s participation in the killings. What was clearly established solely in these cases was that the victims were either KMU leaders and members or employees active in trade union activities, no more no less. There was even no allegation that they were killed for specific trade union activities.
135. 1418. With regard to Father William Tadena, a priest, and Abelardo Ladera, a local councilman, who were allegedly victims of trade union repression, and known supporters of Hacienda Luisita workers, the complainant, KMU, significantly did not even allege, much less cite evidence, of military or police participation in their killings.
136. 1419. In the cases of Ramon Namuro and Nilo Bayas, the complainant, KMU, alleged, beside their KMU membership or affiliation, the additional claim that they were killed by members of a paramilitary group and the military, respectively. Other than this bare and self-serving claim the complainant does not provide particular or details of how the military might have been involved in these cases.
137. 1420. Samuel Bandilla, Anakpawis member, was allegedly killed by motorcyclists. Other than the conjectural link of motorcyclists with the military, the complainant failed to specifically allege military or police involvement in the killing.
138. 1421. With regard to the killings that allegedly involve the military: (1) Felipe Lapa, union president of the Milagrosa Farm Workers’ Union (NAFLU–KMU); (2) Angelito Mabansag, a member of an urban poor organization affiliate of KMU; (3) Edwin Bargamento, regional executive committee member of the National Federation of Sugar Workers (NFSW–KMU); (4) Mario Fernandez, NFSW organizer; (5) Manuel Bartolina, NFSW present and organizer in several haciendas in Manapla, Negros Occidental; (6) Diosdado Fortuna, president of the union of Filipro Employees at Nestlé Philippines; (7) Ricardo Ramos, Central Azucarera de Tarlac Labour Union (CATLU); (8) Roberto dela Cruz, board member of the Workers’ Union of Tritran and Anakpawis member, as well as some 35 additional cases listed by the complainant with regard to alleged killings by the police or military elements without an indication of the motives, the Government notes that a common thread in the allegations about these cases is that the supporting documents are mostly narrations from the KARAPATAN or the International Labor Solidarity Mission Philippines, or other organizations allied to the KMU activist community. They likewise contain narrations that do not constitute sufficient evidence that would stand up in formal or judicial investigations relating to military or police involvement in the killings or of trade union rights violations. To illustrate, KMU’s allegations of military linkages, pressures or threats preceding the killings must be established by supporting conclusive evidence, which is not in any way satisfied by the self-serving attachments to the KMU’s complaints. In other words, there must be at least some proof of the pertinent allegations. Additionally, these organizations that provided the fact sheets to the KMU’s allegations are the same entities that failed to participate in the Melo Commission despite open invitations extended to them. The Government submits that allegations of violations of trade union rights under the Conventions should not be entertained under these circumstances.
139. 1422. With regard to the alleged kidnappings and forced disappearances, the Government indicates that, by the KMU’s own allegations, victims like Armando Leabres, Francis Noel Desacula, Rogelio Concepcion and Leopoldo Ancheta were abducted by suspected military men. Again, military participation in these cases is nothing but conjectural and cannot be considered abductions committed by the military to suppress trade unionism. The Government should not carry the burden of evidence on the basis of these conjectural allegations.
140. 1423. The other cases of abduction or kidnappings allegedly perpetrated by the military similarly rest on surmises, conjecture and speculation. Some KMU claims on the other hand are not fully supported by evidence that would stand the test of general acceptance. The cases for instance of Robin Solano and Ricardo Valmocina, who were allegedly abducted by military elements who had earlier massacred the workers in CV Tamayo Farm shows lack of substantiation of the essential allegations that contain no less than charges of massacre.
141. 1424. In some cases, the military appears to have valid reasons to pursue the “alleged victims”. Four members of the PISTON group for instance were subsequently charged with illegal possession of explosives – a crime punishable under Philippine law. The pursuit in this case is not therefore directed against trade union activities but for commission of crimes against public order.
142. 1425. With regard to the allegations of militarization of workplaces, the Government denies putting up military detachments or deploying military forces in strike-bound workplaces or in workplaces where there are militant unions because of the trade union situation in these places. Police and military presence is dictated by public need. Where what are involved are peace and order concerns, then the police are generally in attendance, but the military may be involved where matters of insurgency and terrorism are involved. To be sure, these responsibilities cannot be held back or withheld from the public simply because there is a strike in the vicinity or there are workers in the process of organizing themselves. At the very least, charges of this nature should be supported by evidence, not by mere second-hand narratives. These narratives are necessarily suspect, too, if they do not appear to have been brought to the attention of the Department of Labor and Employment, by complaint or otherwise.
143. 1426. The allegations that workers are required to render assistance to the military appears irrelevant to the cited Conventions in the absence of any relationship to trade union activities. In other words, assistance may have been requested as members or as citizens of a local community – a request that does not go at all into the Conventions under consideration. Thus, these allegations need not be addressed here at all. The Government adds that it does not allow itself, or any of its agents, to be used by private firms and companies for the purpose of denying workers their right to organization, collective action and collective bargaining as the complainant, KMU, wants to impress on this body. The KMU’s complaint in this regard should not be considered for lack of evidentiary basis.
144. 1427. With regard to the allegations of army surveillance, the Government indicates that surveillance is a legitimate law enforcement tool that, by itself, cannot be alleged to be a violation of trade union rights. For it to be so, there must be more to the surveillance, showing the intention to affect, subvert or undermine the exercise of trade union activity. Surveillance of a member of the KMU does not per se indicate such a violation, given the thin red line that divides the KMU and some of its members from the illegal activities of the CPP/NPA discussed earlier. Where a KMU member has crossed that dividing line, then there should be no question about the legitimacy of the surveillance. At the same time, it should take more than a plain claim of surveillance to merit a consideration of a violation of trade union rights before the Committee on Freedom of Association.
145. 1428. In conclusion, the Government emphasizes that the present complaint raised purely political issues whose ultimate underlying facts cannot be proved in a forum such as the Committee on Freedom of Association. Necessarily, these facts must be settled at the local forum; only thereafter and with these as bases can the issue of violation of trade union rights be ripe for the Committee’s consideration.

C. The Committee’s conclusions

1. 1429. The Committee notes that the present case concerns allegations of killings, grave threats, continuous harassment and intimidation and other forms of violence inflicted on leaders, members, organizers, union supporters/labour advocates of trade unions and informal workers’ organizations who actively pursue their legitimate demands at the local and national levels.
2. 1430. The Committee notes that the Government raises some preliminary objections to this case stating the following: (i) the complaint is prima facie unsubstantiated; (ii) the complainant is shopping for a forum with greatest publicity whereas a local forum, i.e. the Philippine internal investigative process, is available and should take priority; (iii) the Philippines has been facing an insurgency for the past 60 years which has been compounded by terrorism in the past 20 years; (iv) the complainant, KMU, is an arm of an insurgent movement, the Communist Party of the Philippines/New People’s Army (CPP/NPA) and distinctions should be made between legitimate trade union activities fully entitled to ILO protection and subversive activities which violate Philippine laws and lie outside the parameters of ILO Conventions on freedom of association.
3. 1431. The Committee notes the following in this respect: (i) it is within the mandate of the Committee to examine whether, and to what extent, satisfactory evidence is presented to support allegations; this appreciation goes to the merits of the case and cannot support a finding of irreceivability [see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, fifth edition, 2006, para. 9]; (ii) although the use of internal legal procedures, whatever the outcome, is undoubtedly a factor to be taken into consideration, the Committee has always considered that, in view of its responsibilities, its competence to examine allegations is not subject to the exhaustion of national procedures [Special procedures for the examination in the International Labour Organization of complaints alleging violations of freedom of association, para. 30]; and (iii) where the government concerned considers that the questions raised are purely political in character, the Committee has decided that, even though allegations may be political in origin or present certain political aspects, they should be examined in substance if they raise questions directly concerning the exercise of trade union rights [Procedures, op. cit., para. 25]; moreover, within the terms of its mandate, the Committee is empowered to examine to what extent the exercise of trade union rights may be affected in cases of allegations of the infringement of civil liberties [Digest, op. cit., para. 7].
4. 1432. The Committee wishes to emphasize that the object of the special procedure on freedom of association is not to blame or punish anyone, but rather to engage in a constructive tripartite dialogue to promote respect for trade union rights in law and in practice [Digest, op. cit., para. 4]. It is in this spirit that the Committee will pursue with an examination of this case.
5. 1433. The Committee notes that the complainant refers to the following types of violations: (i) summary killings of trade union leaders, members, organizers and union supporters and informal workers from 2001 to 2006 as the height of the Government’s scheme to prevent the workers and informal workers from exercising their freedom of association and their right to organize and collectively bargain; in conformity with its mandate, which empowers it to examine to what extent the exercise of trade union rights may be affected in cases of allegations of the infringement of civil liberties [Digest, op. cit., para. 7], the Committee has in this respect retained a list of 44 murders of trade union leaders or members found in Appendix I; (ii) abduction and enforced disappearances of trade union leaders, members, organizers and union-supporters and informal workers committed by elements of the military and police from January 2001 to June 2006, not only to intimidate and/or terrorize the workers and informal workers from continuing their economic and political activities, but to ultimately paralyze and render the union or organization useless; the Committee has retained a list of incidents concerning trade union leaders or members found in Appendix II; (iii) harassment, intimidation and grave threats by the military and police forces against trade union leaders, members, organizers and union supporters and informal workers; (iv) militarization of workplaces in strike-bound companies or where a labour dispute exists and where existing unions or unions being organized are considered progressive or militant, by means of establishing military detachments and/or deployment of police and military elements under the pretext of counter-insurgency operations; and (v) arrest and detention of and subsequent filing of criminal charges against trade union leaders, members, organizers and union supporters and informal workers due to their involvement and active participation in legitimate economic and political activities of trade unions and informal workers’ associations.
6. 1434. The Committee notes the Government’s indications according to which the President of the Philippines established an Independent Commission to Address Media and Activist Killings (the Melo Commission) which submitted its report on 30 January 2007. In the report, which was released on 22 February 2007, “the Commission comes to the conclusion that there is no direct evidence, but only circumstantial evidence, linking some elements of the military to the killings … However, there is certainly evidence pointing the finger of suspicion at some elements and personalities in the armed forces … as responsible for the undetermined number of killings, by allowing, tolerating and even encouraging the killings”. In addition to this, “further in-depth investigation into the numerous killings, including extensive evidence gathering, is necessary for the successful prosecution of those directly responsible. In this, the testimony of witnesses and the presentation of evidence from the victims and their families and colleagues would be indispensable”.
7. 1435. The Committee also observes that the recommendations of the Melo Commission emphasized the need for: (i) strong political condemnation of the killings by the Government and the President in particular; (ii) an investigation conducted by a body or agency independent from the armed forces; (iii) the creation of a special team of competent and well-trained prosecutors to handle the trials and special courts to hear and try these cases; (iv) reinforcement of the Witness Protection Program; (v) legislation to require police and military forces and other government officials to maintain strict chain-of-command responsibility with respect to extrajudicial killings and other offences committed by personnel under their command, control or authority; and (vi) orientation and training of the armed forces.
8. 1436. The Committee observes that, as a result, the President of the Philippines gave the following instructions: (i) that the Melo Commission continue its work and periodically submit supplemental reports; (ii) that a formal proposal be submitted to the European Union, Spain, Finland and Sweden to send investigators to assist the Melo Commission; (iii) the constitution of a joint fact-finding body by the Departments of Justice, National Defence and the Commission of Human Rights to delve deeper into the matter of involvement of military personnel in unexplained killings, file the corresponding charges against and prosecute the culpable parties; (iv) to broaden the Witness Protection Program so as to cover all witnesses to unexplained killings of an ideological/political nature; and (v) the creation of special courts for the trial of charges involving unexplained killings of an ideological/political nature. The Supreme Court responded to the latter request by designating 99 regional trial courts as special tribunals which shall expeditiously resolve or decide the cases of extrajudicial killings. Trials will be terminated within 60 days and a judgement will be rendered within 30 days, priority will be given to cases of activists and media personnel and any dilatory pleadings or motions will be prohibited.
9. 1437. The Committee notes with interest the steps taken by the Government in recognition of the gravity of the problem of killings. The Committee also recalls, however, that this is the third complaint filed before it with regard to very serious allegations of murders, abductions, disappearances, attacks on picket lines and illegal arrests [Case No. 1572, 292nd Report, paras 297–312 and Case No. 1444, 279th Report, paras 544–562]. The Committee deplores the gravity of the allegations made in this case and the fact that more than a decade after the filing of the last complaint on this issue, inadequate progress has been made by the Government with regard to putting an end to killings, abductions, disappearances and other serious human rights violations which can only reinforce a climate of violence and insecurity and have an extremely damaging effect on the exercise of trade union rights – on the contrary, the number of alleged murders has dramatically increased as can be seen by the list in Appendix I. The Committee emphasizes that freedom of association can only be exercised in conditions in which fundamental rights, and in particular those relating to human life and personal safety, are fully respected and guaranteed [Digest, op. cit. para. 43]. The rights of workers’ organizations can only be exercised in a climate that is free from violence, pressure or threats of any kind against the leaders and members of these organizations, and it is for governments to ensure that this principle is respected [Digest, op. cit., para. 44]. A climate of violence, such as that surrounding the murder or disappearance of trade union leaders, or one in which the premises and property of workers and employers are attacked, constitutes a serious obstacle to the exercise of trade union rights; such acts require severe measures to be taken by the authorities [Digest, op. cit. para. 46].
10. 1438. The Committee must also observe with deep concern that although the Melo Commission recommended that the investigation of the killings be carried out by a body independent of the army, the joint fact-finding body actually set up includes among the bodies responsible for its establishment the Department of National Defence. The Committee recalls in this regard that the killing, disappearance or serious injury of trade union leaders and trade unionists requires the institution of independent judicial inquiries in order to shed full light, at the earliest date, on the facts and the circumstances in which such actions occurred and in this way, to the extent possible, determine where responsibilities lie, punish the guilty parties and prevent the repetition of similar events [Digest, op. cit., para. 48].
11. 1439. The Committee also observes that while the killings alleged in this case date as far back as 2001 – although the main bulk dates from 2005 – the Government does not mention one single case in which a suspect was summoned for interrogation or any concrete step was taken to investigate the murders. The Committee recalls that justice delayed is justice denied and that the absence of judgements against the guilty parties creates, in practice, a situation of impunity, which reinforces the climate of violence and insecurity, and which is extremely damaging to the exercise of trade union rights [Digest, op. cit., paras 105 and 52]. The Committee therefore requests the Government to keep it informed of the progress of the investigation to be carried out by the special joint fact-finding body concerning the killings of trade union leaders and members and, in particular, the steps taken to investigate the murders alleged by the complainant which are listed in Appendix I. The Committee firmly expects that the investigation and trials will proceed without delay and in full independence, so that all responsible parties may be identified and punished before the competent courts as soon as possible and a climate of impunity be avoided. The Committee requests to be kept informed of developments in this respect.
12. 1440. Furthermore, the Committee notes with regret that the Government rejects the allegations concerning police or army involvement in the killings on the basis of lack of sufficient evidence. The Committee considers that, regardless of the question of any involvement of members of the armed forces or the police in the killings, numerous murders have actually taken place as the Melo Commission and the Government itself have acknowledged. In this respect, the Committee considers that facts imputable to individuals bring into play the State’s responsibility owing to the State’s obligation to prevent violations of human rights. Consequently, governments should endeavour to meet their obligations regarding the respect of individual rights and freedoms, as well as their obligation to guarantee the right to life of trade unionists [Digest, op. cit., para. 47]. Thus, the Government is under a responsibility to take all necessary measures to have the guilty parties identified and punished – in particular by ensuring that witnesses, who are crucial for the successful identification and prosecution of suspects, are effectively protected – and to successfully prevent the repetition of human rights violations.
13. 1441. In this respect, the Committee notes with concern that the Government has not provided any information on measures taken to implement the recommendations of the Melo Commission concerning: (i) the reinforcement of the Witness Protection Program (the information provided by the Government is confined to the expansion of this programme to include witnesses of killings); (ii) the adoption of legislation to ensure strict chain-of-command responsibility in the police and armed forces with respect to the killings; and (iii) the carrying out of orientation and training of the armed forces. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take all necessary measures without delay to ensure full implementation of these important recommendations of the Melo Commission.
14. 1442. The Committee must also observe with concern that the mandate of the Melo Commission is limited to extrajudicial killings, so that allegations of abductions and disappearances remain unexplored. Furthermore, the Committee notes with concern that the Government does not mention any steps taken to investigate the alleged abductions or disappearances or summon the alleged perpetrators for questioning; on the contrary, the Government tends to reject outright the allegations on the basis of lack of sufficient evidence. The Committee recalls that the killing, disappearance or serious injury of trade union leaders and trade unionists requires the institution of independent judicial inquiries in order to shed full light, at the earliest date, on the facts and the circumstances in which such actions occurred and in this way, to the extent possible, determine where responsibilities lie, punish the guilty parties and prevent the repetition of similar events [Digest, op. cit., para. 48]. It also emphasizes that the absence of judgements against the guilty parties creates in practice a situation of impunity which reinforces the climate of violence and insecurity, and which is extremely damaging to the exercise of trade union rights [Digest, op. cit., para. 52]. The Committee therefore requests the Government to establish an independent judicial inquiry and proceedings before the competent courts as soon as possible with regard to the allegations of abductions and disappearances of trade union leaders and members which are listed in Appendix II with a view to shedding full light onto the relevant facts and circumstances, and to determine where responsibilities lie, punish the guilty parties and prevent the repetition of similar events. The Committee requests to be kept informed of progress made in this respect.
15. 1443. The Committee notes further allegations made by the complainant on a number of obstacles to the establishment and activities of trade unions including: (i) serious obstacles in the process of union recognition; (ii) an unwritten policy of no-union and no-strike in the export processing zones and industrial enclaves where foreign investors are concentrated; (iii) a trend of flexibilization which prevents the workers from organizing or collectively bargaining for fear of dismissal; (iv) dismissals of union leaders and active members and company-instigated petitions to cancel union registrations which virtually paralyze unions in their formative stages; (v) the power of the DOLE Secretary to impose compulsory arbitration ending strikes through the issuance of the AJO under article 263(g) of the Labour Code; and (vi) police and military dispersal of strikes where the union defies the AJO, like in the Hacienda Luisita case in Tarlac where enforcement of an AJO order claimed the lives of at least seven strikers and seriously injured 70 workers and supporters.
16. 1444. The Committee notes that, in reply to these allegations, the Government makes reference to its labour relations record (ratification of Conventions Nos 87 and 98, recognition of freedom of association in the Constitution, etc.). With regard to the right to strike in particular, the Government refers to statistics showing that the rate of strikes has fallen dramatically since the 1980s so that, in the first two months of 2007, only one strike actually took place out of 61 notices of strikes; some were settled through conciliation, the Department of Labour assumed jurisdiction over one case and certified another to the National Labor Relations Commission for compulsory arbitration. The Government states that this record is a source of pride and one that investors have taken notice of.
17. 1445. The Committee notes that most of the issues raised by the complainant have been examined on several occasions by the Committee in previous cases [most recently Case No. 2252, 343rd Report, paras 182–190, and Case No. 2488, 346th Report, paras 1271–1360.]. The Committee will pursue in the framework of these other cases its examination of the matters related to the lack of a fair, independent and speedy certification process providing adequate protection against acts of employer interference, the power of the DOLE Secretary under section 286(g) of the Labour Code to put an end to strikes in sectors which do not qualify as essential in the strict sense of the term or concern public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, dismissals of trade union leaders and members in that context, and the lack of effective protection before the courts against anti-union discrimination.
18. 1446. The Committee takes this opportunity to emphasize, with regard to the Government’s reply to the allegations, that trade union rights, like other basic human rights, should be respected no matter what the level of development of the country concerned [Digest, op. cit., para. 19] and recalls the Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy, adopted by the Governing Body of the ILO in November 1977, which states that (paragraph 46 of the Declaration, as amended in November 2000): “where governments or host countries offer special incentives to attract foreign investment, these incentives should not include any limitation of the workers’ freedom of association or the right to organize and bargain collectively” [Digest, op. cit., paras 19 and 20]. The Committee also emphasizes that workers in export processing zones – despite the economic arguments often put forward – like other workers, without distinction whatsoever, should enjoy the trade union rights provided for by the freedom of association Conventions [Digest, op. cit., para. 264]. Finally, the Committee has always recognized the right to strike by workers and their organizations as a legitimate means of defending their economic and social interests [Digest, op. cit, para. 521].
19. 1447. With regard to the Hacienda Luisita incident, which concerns police and army intervention in a strike which claimed the lives of at least seven trade union leaders and members and led to the injury of 70 others, the Committee notes that according to the Government, the records show that there were clear indications of provocation on the part of the strikers who refused to comply with the AJO of the DOLE Secretary to end their strike and emphasizes that the exercise of the right to strike carries with it obligations to observe legal limitations, especially with regard to the prohibition of obstructing the ingress to and egress from enterprises. The excesses committed by the strikers dictated the intervention of the law enforcement officers.
20. 1448. The Committee observes, from the numerous documents provided by the complainant, that three of the six gates of the Hacienda Luisita were open while the workers were holding their picket at gate 1; this is how the army and police managed to enter the hacienda and strike at the workers. The Committee further observes that the House of Representatives Committees on Human Rights and Labor and Employment reached the following conclusions on this incident: (i) “there was no evidence whatsoever of criminal acts being committed and/or civil disturbance being perpetrated by the striking workers which could have justified police intervention”; (ii) “on November 6 to 7, 2004 when the members of the police already allegedly harassed the workers, the DOLE had not yet issued any order seeking assistance from law enforcement agencies … There was no basis therefore for the PNP [Philippines National Police] to deploy CDM police force at the striking area”; (iii) “There was, undoubtedly, excessive use of force against the workers”; (iv) “On November 16, 2004, the Armed Forces of the Philippines [AFP] joined the PNP in harassing, hurting and in shooting the striking workers, which caused the death of a number of workers. The AFP’s participation was upon the request or order of the DOLE Secretary.” The Committees concluded: “After careful deliberation and review of the testimonies of the witnesses and all the parties invited by the Committees and examination of all documents submitted in the course of the congressional inquiry, the Committees have arrived at the conclusion that human rights violations were committed against the striking workers of Hacienda Luisita by the elements of the Philippine National Police and the Armed Forces of the Philippines, including the officers and the staff of the Department of Labor and Employment. Hence, it is imperative that the officers concerned be held responsible directly or by reason of command responsibility for the said acts after proper investigation has been concluded.”
21. 1449. The Committee recalls that the authorities should resort to calling in the police in a strike situation only if there is a genuine threat to public order. The intervention of the police should be in proportion to the threat to public order and governments should take measures to ensure that the competent authorities receive adequate instructions so as to avoid the danger of excessive violence in trying to control demonstrations that might undermine public order. In cases in which the dispersal of public meetings by the police has involved loss of life or serious injury, the Committee has attached special importance to the circumstances being fully investigated immediately through an independent inquiry and to a regular legal procedure being followed to determine the justification for the action taken by the police and to determine responsibilities [Digest, op. cit., paras 140 and 49].
22. 1450. The Committee deeply regrets the involvement of the army and police in the dispersal of the picket line and further observes with deep regret that the Government does not refer to any investigation carried out, or suspects identified pursuant to the recommendations of the Congressional report. The Committee requests the Government to take all necessary measures so as to have an independent investigation carried out in the Hacienda Luisita incident with a view to identifying and punishing those responsible without further delay. It also requests the Government to give adequate instructions to the law enforcement authorities so as to eliminate the danger entailed by the use of excessive violence when controlling demonstrations. The Committee requests to be kept informed in this respect.
23. 1451. The Committee notes that, with regard to the serious allegations of militarization of workplaces, the Government indicates that military detachments are not deployed in strike-bound workplaces or in workplaces where there are militant unions because of the trade union situation in these places, but because of matters of insurgency and terrorism. Furthermore, with regard to allegations that workers are required to render assistance to the military, the Government indicates that assistance may have been requested not because of trade union activities but as part of civic duties and the Government does not allow itself to be used by private firms and companies for the purpose of denying the workers their right to organization, collective action and collective bargaining.
24. 1452. The Committee notes with deep regret that the Government essentially confirms the complainant’s allegation that the Regional Special Action Forces, the Philippine National Police Mobile Group and Special Weapons Action (SWAT) in full battle gear are a common sight in companies in Southern Tagalog and Central Luzon, two of the industrial areas where most of the foreign investors are concentrated. The Committee further notes with regret that the Government does not provide specific answers to the following allegations of the complainant: (i) military presence and operation in the Nestlé Cabuyao factory since 2002; (ii) in Console Farm the military forced the workers to become members of a paramilitary unit and to render at least two hours of military duty every day on a rotating basis; workers are moreover coerced by the army to withdraw trade union affiliation, union books are audited, workers’ movements are closely monitored, union organizers and leaders who join legitimate protest rallies are branded as terrorists, communists and NPA sympathizers; (iii) in Robina Farms the military set up a detachment and harassed the union members asking them to disaffiliate from the KMU; (iv) in the Fresh Banana Agricultural Corporation, Compostela Valley, members of the 28th Infantry Battalion held meetings inside packing plants 90, 92 and 95 in August 2005 to prevent workers from establishing trade unions; the military allegedly told the workers that establishing a union would cause the plant to close down and their families would not be able to find jobs, that the KMU members were satanists and rebels and that it is fine to form a union but not under the KMU; and (v) in the Sun Ever Lights in Sta. Rosa, Laguna, elements of the Special Weapons Action Group were deployed to man the production line and keep watch on union leaders of the newly formed union.
25. 1453. The Committee expresses concern at the allegations of a prolonged presence of the army inside workplaces, which, if correct, is liable to have an intimidating effect on the workers wishing to engage in trade union activities, and to create an atmosphere of mistrust which is hardly conducive to harmonious industrial relations. The Committee recalls that the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations has emphasized that the freedom of association Conventions do not contain any provision permitting derogation from the obligations arising under the Convention, or any suspension of their application, based on a plea that an emergency exists [Digest, op. cit., para. 193]. All appropriate measures should therefore be taken to guarantee that, irrespective of trade union affiliation, trade union rights can be exercised in normal conditions with respect for basic human rights and in a climate free of violence, pressure, fear and threats of any kind [Digest, op. cit., para. 35]. The International Labour Conference has also pointed out that the right of assembly, freedom of opinion and expression and, in particular, freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers constitute civil liberties which are essential for the normal exercise of trade union rights (resolution concerning trade union rights and their relation to civil liberties, adopted at the 54th Session, 1970) [Digest, op. cit., para. 38]. Finally, workers should have the right, without distinction whatsoever, in particular without discrimination on the basis of political opinion, to join the organization of their own choosing. They should have the right to establish the organizations that they consider necessary in a climate of complete security irrespective of whether or not they support the social and economic model of the Government, including the political model of the country [Digest, op. cit., paras 212 and 213].
26. 1454. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take measures, including the issuance of appropriate instructions, to bring to an end prolonged military presence inside workplaces. The Committee also requests the Government to give appropriate instructions so as to ensure that any emergency measures aimed at national security do not prevent in any way the exercise of legitimate trade union rights and activities, including strikes, by all trade unions irrespective of their philosophical or political orientation, in a climate of complete security. The Committee requests to be kept informed in this respect.
27. 1455. Furthermore, the Committee notes that with regard to allegations of surveillance of trade union leaders, the Government indicates that this legitimate law enforcement tool cannot by itself be alleged to be a violation of trade union rights and that surveillance does not per se indicate an intention to undermine trade union activity given the thin red line that divides the complainant KMU and some of its members from the illegal activities of the CPP/NPA.
28. 1456. The Committee expresses regret at the brevity of the Government information given in reply to the allegations of the complainant which include: (i) the alleged admittance on 4 April 2001 during a press conference by Philippine National Police Region IV director Domingo Reyes, that 94 factories with militant unions were under surveillance; (ii) surveillance of Angelina Ladera, chairperson of the Workers’ Alliance of Region 3 (WAR-3) and former president of the International Wiring Services Corp. Workers’ Union from which she had to quit because of fear for her life, especially after learning that she had been included in a list of “enemies of the state” in a CD-ROM distributed by the Northern Luzon Command to local and international media in January 2005; (iii) harassment and surveillance of a number of union leaders and members of Nestlé Workers Union in Cabuyao; and (iv) the tailing of NAMAOS leaders in Compostela town following the conclusion of a collective agreement.
29. 1457. The Committee recalls that the rights of workers’ organizations can only be exercised in a climate that is free from violence, pressure or threats of any kind against the leaders and members of these organizations, and it is for governments to ensure that this principle is respected [Digest, op. cit., para. 44]. The Committee therefore requests the Government to give specific instructions without delay so as to ensure the strict observance of due process guarantees in the context of any surveillance and interrogation operations by the army and police in a way that guarantees that the rights of workers’ organizations can be exercised in a climate that is free from violence, pressure or threats of any kind against the leaders and members of these organizations. The Committee requests to be kept informed in this respect.
30. 1458. The Committee also notes with regret that the Government does not provide a reply to the remaining allegations of harassment and intimidation, in particular: (i) 81 cases of grave threats recorded by the CTUHR, including threats against the life of Romeo Legaspi, president of the United Workers’ Strength in Honda; (ii) interrogation of a number of union leaders and members of the NAMAOS by the members of the Special Operating Team of the 36th Infantry Battalion; (iii) interrogation of Vicente Barrios, president of the United Workers at Suyapa Farms by the military on several occasions in September 2005; and (iv) the incident of 14 November 2004, during which soldiers roamed around the NAMAOS office putting up posters warning workers not to “be used by Communist”.
31. 1459. Recalling that measures depriving trade unionists of their freedom on grounds related to their trade union activity, even where they are merely summoned or questioned for a short period, constitute an obstacle to the exercise of trade union rights and that the inviolability of trade union premises is a civil liberty which is essential to the exercise of trade union rights and, furthermore, that a climate of violence, coercion and threats of any type aimed at trade union leaders and their families does not encourage the free exercise and full enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set out in Conventions Nos 87 and 98 [Digest, op. cit., paras 63, 178 and 58], the Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in respect of the allegations of harassment and intimidation of trade union leaders and members affiliated to the KMU.
32. 1460. With regard to the allegations concerning the arrest of Crispin Beltran, long-time KMU leader and current congressman with the Anakpawis Partylist to which the KMU is closely linked, as well as five members of the NFSW on 30 September 2005 under the accusation of being high-ranking officers of the CPP/NPA, the Committee notes that according to the Government: (i) Crispin Beltran was arrested on the basis of a warrant under the charge of rebellion which is unrelated to trade union activities; the Government later implicated him in the failed attempts to overthrow the Government and he is currently under hospital detention because of failing health; (ii) there was no linkage between the arrest of the NFSW members/leaders and trade union activities, given that they were accused of being high ranking officers of the Communist Party of the Philippines and CPP/NPA.
33. 1461. The Committee is not in a position to determine, on the basis of the information brought before it, whether these cases concern trade union activities. The Committee recalls that in cases where the complainants alleged that trade union leaders or workers had been arrested for trade union activities, and the Governments’ replies amounted to general denials of the allegation or were simply to the effect that the arrests were made for subversive activities, for reasons of internal security or for common law crimes, the Committee has always followed the rule that the governments concerned should be requested to submit further and as precise information as possible concerning the arrests, particularly in connection with the legal or judicial proceedings instituted as a result thereof and the result of such proceedings, in order to be able to make a proper examination of the allegations. In many cases, the Committee has asked the governments concerned to communicate the texts of any judgements that have been delivered together with the grounds adduced therefore [Digest, op. cit., paras 111–112].
34. 1462. The Committee requests the Government to communicate the texts of any judgements handed down in the cases of Crispin Beltran, long-time KMU leader, as well as five members of the NNFSW who were arrested, and to ensure that all relevant information is gathered in an independent manner so as to shed full light on their situation and the circumstances surrounding their arrest. Should it be determined by the court that they were arrested in relation to their trade union activities, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that they are immediately released.

Z. ANNEX

• Appendix I
• Alleged murders
• Name
• Date killed
• Organization and position
  1. 1 Felipe Lapa
  25. 25 October 2001
• Leader, Milagros Farm Workers’ Union
  2. 2 Nenita Labordio
  27. 27 October 2002
• Worker, Footjoy Company
  3. 3 Angelito Mabansag
  28. 28 September 2003
• Community organizer, KADAMAY, Manila
  4. 4 Melita Carvajal
  27. 27 August 2004
• KADAMAY, Laguna
  5. 5 Samuel Bandilla
  15. 15 October 2004
• TU organizer, Leyte Metropolitan Waterworks District Employees’ Association
  6. 6 Jhaivie Basilio
  16. 16 November 2004
• Hacienda Luisita, Inc.
  7. 7 Adriano Caballero
  16. 16 November 2004
• Hacienda Luisita, Inc.
  8. 8 Jun David
  16. 16 November 2004
• Hacienda Luisita, Inc.
  9. 9 Jesus Laza
  16. 16 November 2004
• Hacienda Luisita, Inc.
  10. 10 Jaime Pastidio
  16. 16 November 2004
• Hacienda Luisita, Inc.
  11. 11 Juancho Sanchez
  16. 16 November 2004
• Hacienda Luisita, Inc.
  12. 12 Jessie Valdez
  16. 16 November 2004
• Hacienda Luisita, Inc.
  13. 13 Ronnie Almoete
  5. 5 February 2005
• Member, Bayan Muna/Urban Poor sector
  14. 14 Abelardo Ladera
  3. 3 March 2005
• Councilor – Tarlac City; Member, Bayan Muna/Convenor, Kapitbisig support campaign for the families and victims of Hacienda Luisita Massacre
  15. 15 Samuel Dote
  11. 11 April 2005
• Member, Municipal Association of Catbalogan Employees affiliated with the Confederation for Unity, Recognition and Advancement of Government Employees – Western Samar (COURAGE–WS)
  16. 16 Manuel “Edwin” Bargamento
  13. 13 April 2005
• Organizer – Negros Federation of Sugar Workers
  17. 17 Mario Fernandez
  10. 10 June 2005
• NFSW–FGT organizer
  18. 18 Manuel Batolina
  13. 13 June 2005
• NFSW–FGT organizer and local federation president of NFSW in Haciendas Navidad, Candelaria and Begonia
  19. 19 Antonio Pantonial
  6. 6 July 2005
• Member of the NFSW
  20. 20 Nilo Bayas
  17. 17 July 2005
      • Vice-Chairperson, Samahan ng Mag-uuling sa Sapang Bulak, Dona Remedios Trinidad, Bulacan, Provincial Health Office employee in Malolos, Bulacan under Malaria Control Program
  21. 21 Ryan Cabrigas
  1. 1 September 2005
• Employee, Samar Electric Cooperative II
  22. 22 Benedicto Gabon
  1. 1 September 2005
• Employee, Samar Electric Cooperative II
  23. 23 Engr. Dalmacio Cepeda
  1. 1 September 2005
• Employee, Samar Electric Cooperative II
  24. 24 Dante Teotino
  13. 13 September 2005
• Worker/union member
  25. 25 Diosdado Fortuna
  22. 22 September 2005
• President of the Nestlé Employees’ Union
  26. 26 Ronald Andrada
  24. 24 September 2005
• Member, KADAMAY
  27. 27 Victoria P. Samonte
  30. 30 September 2005
• Regional Vice-Chairperson, KMU CARAGA President, Andres Soriano College Employees’ Union
  28. 28 Jimmy Legaspi
  1. 1 October 2005
• Union President, BOD Sierra Madre Bus Line Co.
  29. 29 Rolando Mariano
  7. 7 October 2005
• Former president, TARELCO 1 Employees’ Union
  30. 30 Florante Collantes
  15. 15 October 2005
• Secretary-General, Bayan Muna-Tarlac
  31. 31 Ramon Namuro
  15. 15 October 2005
• Staff, AJODOM-PISTON
  32. 32 Ricardo Ramos
  25. 25 October 2005
• President, CATLU
  33. 33 Federico de Leon
  26. 26 October 2005
• President, PISTON – Bulacan and Provincial Coordinator, Anakpawis
  34. 34 Errol Sending
  19. 19 November 2005
• KADAMAY, Pampanga
  35. 35 Rommel Arcilla
  21. 21 November 2005
• Member, Bagong Alyansang Makabayan Community Relations Officer, Pampanga Electric Cooperative II
  36. 36 Albert Terredaño
  29. 29 November 2005
• President, Department of Agrarian Reform Employees’ Association (DAREA); Convenor of the Provincial Organizing Committee of COURAGE-ABRA
  37. 37 Junico Halem
  6. 6 December 2005
• Bayan Muna Municipal Coordinator
  38. 38 Jess Alcantara
  16. 16 December 2005
• Former Municipal Coordinator and former Secretary of the TODA
  39. 39 Noel Daray
  25. 25 December 2005
• Member, Association of Workers in WL Food Inc.
• Appendix II
• Alleged abductions and disappearances
• Date/time
• Place
• Perpetrator
• Account of incident
• Victims’ profile
• Status
  8. 8/1/2006;
  10. 10 a.m.
• Ormoc, Leyte
  8. 8th Infantry Division under Major General Bonifacio Ramos
• Abducted by eight men wearing bonnets, detained and interrogated for almost five hours on his alleged connections to the New People’s Army (NPA), the military threatened to harm him and his family if he did not cooperate
• Rafael Tarroza – Regional Chairman of National Federation of Labor Unions (NAFLU–KMU)
• Returned to his family after six hours after he told the military agents that he will cooperate
  10. 10/1/2006; 7.20 a.m.
• Penaranda, Nueva Ecija
• Suspected military elements
• Abducted by armed men while on his way to work, found dead the following day
• Armando Leabres
• Found dead
  29. 29/1/2006
• Lemery, Batangas
  30. 30 elements of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP)
• Francis Noel Desacula
• Missing
  1. 1/2/2006;
  8. 8 p.m.
• San Ildefonso, Bulacan
  24. 24th Infantry Battalion
• Abducted by the 24th Infantry Battalion of the Philippine Army (IBPA) after the massacre of CV Tamayo Farms
  1. (1) Robin Solano, worker of the farm;
  2. (2) Ricardo Valmocina, caretaker of the Tamayo Farm
• Missing
  6. 6/3/2006;
  10. 10 p.m.
• San Ildefonso, Bulacan
• Suspected military elements
• Abducted by suspected military men from the 24th IB in the field near Solid Development Corp.
• Rogelio Concepcion, acting union president of Solid Development Corp. Workers’ Association (SDCWA). His predecessor also went into hiding after the military from 24th IB of 7th ID of the Philippine Army camped inside the company in December 2006.
• Missing, his wife refused to meet anybody in person or execute an affidavit for fear
  3. 3/4/2006;
  11. 11 a.m.
• Tarlac City, Tarlac
• Unidentified military elements
• According to witnesses, was abducted by military men and brought to Aqua Farms
• Ronald Intal, charcoal maker inside the Hacienda Luisita, suspected as NPA sympathizer
• Missing
  17. 17/04/2006;
  9. 930 a.m.
• Dona Remedios Trinidad, Bulacan
  56. 56th Infantry Battalion under Lt Ferdinand Basas, members of the RHB
• Members of the RHB assaulted and tortured the victims, then abducted Mendiola, Leuterio,Virgilio and Teresita Calilap. Afterwards, 26 members of the 703rd Brigade of the AFP came and forced 15 other residents to ride a truck and were brought to a chapel, where they were given lectures on anti-insurgency and anti-communist propaganda. They were released thereafter. Those who remain missing were accused by the military as NPA rebels
  1. (1) Virgilio Calilap – organizer
  2. (2) Teresita Calilap – wife of Virgilio
  3. (3) Bernabe Mendiola – the company’s operations manager
  4. (4) Oscar Leuerio – mine worker
  24. 24/06/2006
• Guiginto, Bulacan
• Unidentified men
• Abducted by unidentified men on board a van, suspected as military agents
• Leopoldo Ancheta
• Missing
  3. 3/07/2006;
  11. 11 a.m.
• Angeles City, Pampanga
• Philippine National Police – CIDG – Angeles City
  69. 69th and 56th Infantry Battalions
• Abducted by the combined forces of the PNP and AFP when they were supposed to meet and discuss important issues in the transportation industry. They were tortured before being surrendered to the PNP Angeles headquarters. All were released except Lipio, who is still under the custody of the military
  1. (1) Emerito Gonzales Lipio, member of PISTON Nacional Council and PISTON leader in Bulacan
  2. (2) William Agilar, PISTON Central Luzon and KMU organizer
• Emerito Gonzales Lipio is still under AFP custody. The rest of the victims were released from detention