THERE is enough basis to consider removing the Philippines from the United Nations Human Rights Council, the international group Human Rights Watch said over the weekend.
“We feel that the Philippines is in violation of its membership obligations, and that the General Assembly would have grounds to consider its removal [from the UNHRC],” HRW Geneva advocacy director John Fisher said in an interview.
He made the statement even as Presidential Spokesman Ernesto Abella said the Philippines would not be removed from the United Nations Human Rights Council over the drug-related killings in the country.
He told reporters the Philippines’ removal from the top UN Human Rights body waa simply a “depressing scenario” being painted by human rights groups.
“While there are those who call themselves watchdogs and tend to foretell gloomy and depressing scenarios, the truth is, the states and other governments [that] have strong trade relations with our country know better than these gloomy pictures,” Abella said.
Fisher made his statement after previously saying that the Philippines had not fulfilled its obligations as part of the 47 states that comprise the UNHRC.
“Being a member of the Human Rights Council is not a right, it’s a privilege for governments,” he said, noting that members should both uphold the highest standards of human rights and cooperate with the council.
“On both counts, the Philippines strikes out and clearly, the government is not upholding the highest standards of human rights when people can be killed in this country with impunity and that’s what we’re seeing happening.”
But Chief Presidential Legal Counsel Salvador Panelo said Monday the Philippines would not be removed from the UNHRC over the drug-related killings in the country.
He said the UN accepted the Philippines’ human rights report that was submitted by Foreign Affairs Secretary Alan Peter Cayetano.
Just last month, the UNHRC decided to adopt the Universal Periodic Review of the Philippines during the 36th Regular Session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva.
The Philippines, however, dismissed 154 of the UNHRC’s 257 recommendations to improve its rights situation.
“Many, many states called for an end to the killings and an end to the inflammatory rhetoric by the President, by President Duterte, for the Philippines to put in place investigations into these deaths, and for those responsible to be held into account,” Fisher said.
“Disappointingly, but perhaps not surprisingly, the Philippines, when it came to Geneva just a couple of weeks ago and gave its responses, rejected every single recommendation that related to ending the killings of holdings those to account.”
Fisher said the government was sending out a message that it would not take responsibility for human rights abuses.
“I think that sends a very clear message to the international community that the government has no interest in itself taking responsibility for ending these abuses or for complying with its international human rights obligations,” he said.
“For us at Human Rights Watch, what that means the United Nations has no option but to step in.”
Just last week, a group called the Philippine Universal Period Review Watch called on the UNHRC to remove the Philippines as a member amid the government’s “continued denial” of the alleged extra-judicial killings in the country.
“I think that’s a perfectly legitimate call to make,” Fisher said.
“When a government is engaged in violating something so basic as the right to life, and has no apparent interest in investigating the killings or holding people responsible, then it’s perfectly legitimate that groups would be calling for [its] removal from the Human Rights Council.”