All About Current Admin of Duterte

[firestarter]

---

Bai @disk88

Klahoray lang ta para naa tay basihan ha.

Wikipedia ni pero kung gusto kag lain source nahala.. pero i quote nako diri ang wiki..

The Commission on Human Rights is an independent office created under the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines, with the primary function of investigating all forms of human rights violations involving civil and political rights in the Philippines.[2]

The Commission is composed of a Chairperson and four members. Commissioners hold a term of office of seven years without reappointment. The Philippine Constitution requires that a majority of the Commission’s members must be lawyers.

As a National Human Rights Institution, the Commission enjoys Status A[3] accreditation by the International Coordinating Committee of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights.

History[edit]
After the ratification of the 1987 Philippine Constitution on 2 February 1987, which provides for the establishment of a Commission on Human Rights, President Corazon Aquino, signed Executive Order No. 163 on 5 May 1987, creating the Commission on Human Rights and abolished the Presidential Committee on Human Rights. The Commission was created as an independent office mandated to investigate complaints of human rights violations, promote the protection of, respect for and the enhancements of the people's human rights including civil and political rights.


Core Mandates and Functions[edit]
The Commission derives its mandates from the Constitution, relevant domestic laws, and the eight core International Human Rights Instruments to which the Philippines is a State Party, as well as other United Nations Human Rights Conventions newly enforced.

Under Section 18, Article XIII of the Philippine Constitution, the Commission's sole duty is to protect the civil and political rights of citizens in the Philippines.

Based on the Philippine Constitution, the Commission has a broad mandate, which can be categorized into three major functional areas:

Human Rights Protection - Investigation and case management of complaints of violations, including all the powers and services in aid of investigation, of civil and political rights as well as economic, social, and cultural rights. Such powers and services include: citing for contempt for violations of its rules of procedure; legal aid and counseling; visitorial powers over jails and detention facilities; application of forensic techniques in aid of investigation; witness protection; and, financial assistance to victims[4]
Human Rights Promotion, which includes the wide range of strategies for policy, advocacy, promotion, social mobilization, education, training, public information, communication, research, networking and linkages[4]
Human Rights Policy Advisory derived from monitoring government’s compliance with the treaty obligations that the Philippines has acceded to: International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), Convention Against Torture and Other Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), Convention Against Racial Discrimination (CERD), Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), Convention on the Protection of Migrant Workers and their Families (CMW); Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). This also includes the entire aspect of monitoring and evaluating the performance of the Executive, Legislative, and Judiciary to translate international human rights standards into national policies, laws, and practice.[4]
The Supreme Court of the Philippines, in Cariño v. Commission on Human Rights, 204 SCRA 483 (1991), declared that the Commission did not possess the power of adjudication, and emphasized that its functions were primarily investigatory.[5]

The Commission on Human Rights have the following powers and functions:

Investigate, on its own or on complaint by any party, all forms of human rights violations involving civil and political rights
Adopt its operational guidelines and rules of procedure, and cite for contempt for violations thereof in accordance with the Rules of Court
Provide appropriate legal measures for the protection of human rights of all persons within the Philippines, as well as Filipinos residing abroad, and provide for preventive measures and legal aid services to the under-privileged whose human rights have been violated or need protection
Exercise visitorial powers over jails, prisons, or detention facilities
Establish a continuing program of research, education, and information to enhance respect for the primacy of human rights
Recommend to Congress effective measures to promote human rights and to provide for compensation to victims of violations of human rights, or their families;
Monitor the Philippine Government's compliance with international treaty obligations on human rights
Grant immunity from prosecution to any person whose testimony or whose possession of documents or other evidence is necessary or convenient to determine the truth in any investigation conducted by it or under its authority;
Request the assistance of any department, bureau, office, or agency in the performance of its functions
Appoint its officers and employees in accordance with law
Perform such other duties and functions as may be provided by law[6]

Murag wala gyud koy nabasa diha nga mandate imong gi ingon.. basin tua sa Executive Order ni Cory Aquino..

- - - Updated - - -

If ang source sa abuse kay ang government, most likely the DOJ will not push for its prosecution. And that is within its power. Only exception is when there is grave abuse of discretion blah blah blah Rules of Court. Lacking proof of that (which in rules of evidence is nearly impossible to prove if wala kay resources), dili jud na ma prosecute imo case. Wala juy public attorney makaduol nimo kay ipa inhibit na tanan.

Sa imo example, pwede siya muduol ug lain police, yes. But kutob rana blotter kay dili man ang police ang mu prosecute, ang prosecutor man, which is under the DOJ. So back to square one ka. Ang CHR, makatabang na nimo sa ing.ana na situation. Maka provide sila ug lawyer, free of charge.

- - - Updated - - -



Troll? Ay kog ingna padung ad hominem imo arguments.. Klaruhon lang sad natu kay way gamit if ing.ana diay. Based on actual practices ni ako gipangyawit, walay trolling intawn ngari. Klarohay lang sad ta.

Diha palang daan bro... Wala natay istoryahan..

You derived your conclusion from your own misinterpretation..

Tell me, kung nahitabo pa ni sa panahon ni noynoy ang gipagamyan ang ilang budget to 1k, mo register kaha ka dinhi para i latag ang imong argument regarding CHR?

Klarohay lang.

[disk88]

Bai @disk88

Klahoray lang ta para naa tay basihan ha.

Wikipedia ni pero kung gusto kag lain source nahala.. pero i quote nako diri ang wiki..




Murag wala gyud koy nabasa diha nga mandate imong gi ingon.. basin tua sa Executive Order ni Cory Aquino..

- - - Updated - - -



Diha palang daan bro... Wala natay istoryahan..

You derived your conclusion from your own misinterpretation..

Tell me, kung nahitabo pa ni sa panahon ni noynoy ang gipagamyan ang ilang budget to 1k, mo register kaha ka dinhi para i latag ang imong argument regarding CHR?

Klarohay lang.

Even without considering the Constitutional Mandate and not minding the Paris principles, a quick look at the 2015 annual report clearly shows that they have already been doing those things. Ang nakita lang gud nimo karun is ang gi.sensationalize sa media ONLY.

Looking at legislative intent (Gascon was one of the men who drafted the new Constitution by the way), makita jud nimo na framework sa UN ila gisunod.

- - - Updated - - -

Bai @disk88

Klahoray lang ta para naa tay basihan ha.

Wikipedia ni pero kung gusto kag lain source nahala.. pero i quote nako diri ang wiki..




Murag wala gyud koy nabasa diha nga mandate imong gi ingon.. basin tua sa Executive Order ni Cory Aquino..

- - - Updated - - -



Diha palang daan bro... Wala natay istoryahan..

You derived your conclusion from your own misinterpretation..

Tell me, kung nahitabo pa ni sa panahon ni noynoy ang gipagamyan ang ilang budget to 1k, mo register kaha ka dinhi para i latag ang imong argument regarding CHR?

Klarohay lang.

Misinterpretation? That is a fact. Unsai misinterpretation ana sir? Klarohay lang ta. Dili ni about political parties, stop trying to bring that up. Which Rule of Court or Rule on Evidence ako na misinterpret? Dili ba common sense?

Ingna kuno ko, aside sa Constitution, which is very very open to interpretation, unsa pay lain source nimo? Basin ikaw naka misinterpret.

[firestarter]

Even without considering the Constitutional Mandate and not minding the Paris principles, a quick look at the 2015 annual report clearly shows that they have already been doing those things. Ang nakita lang gud nimo karun is ang gi.sensationalize sa media ONLY.

Looking at legislative intent (Gascon was one of the men who drafted the new Constitution by the way), makita jud nimo na framework sa UN ila gisunod.

Unsa nga Constitution imong pasabot? Constitution sa Philippines? or basin imong pasabot ang enabling law or ilahang Charter?

Bisan pag gipattern na diha ug international law, which by the way has limited control over local laws, kung ni ingon na ang Supreme Court nga investigative ra ang ilang function diha ra gyud na sila kutob. Kay we follow the paramount law of the land ang atong 1987 Constitution.

Unya unsa may gibutang sa Constitution sa Philippines?

Under Section 18, Article XIII of the Philippine Constitution, the Commission's sole duty is to protect the civil and political rights of citizens in the Philippines.

Meaning as long as walay enabling law nga mao lang ni ang limit sa inyong function, they cannot invoke the intent of the Executive Order from Cory to safeguard only abuses committed by the government.

Meaning we still need that enabling law from congress. So as far as my understanding is correct..

1. the Commission's sole duty is to protect the civil and political rights of citizens in the Philippines <--- this means TANAN citizens dili kay kadto lang mga accused.
2. As decided by the highest court of the land, CHR's function is limited to investigation and NOT prosecution.

[disk88]

Unsa nga Constitution imong pasabot? Constitution sa Philippines? or basin imong pasabot ang enabling law or ilahang Charter?

Bisan pag gipattern na diha ug international law, which by the way has limited control over local laws, kung ni ingon na ang Supreme Court nga investigative ra ang ilang function diha ra gyud na sila kutob. Kay we follow the paramount law of the land ang atong 1987 Constitution.

Unya unsa may gibutang sa Constitution sa Philippines?

Under Section 18, Article XIII of the Philippine Constitution, the Commission's sole duty is to protect the civil and political rights of citizens in the Philippines.

Meaning as long as walay enabling law nga mao lang ni ang limit sa inyong function, they cannot invoke the intent of the Executive Order from Cory to safeguard only abuses committed by the government.

Meaning we still need that enabling law from congress. So as far as my understanding is correct..

1. the Commission's sole duty is to protect the civil and political rights of citizens in the Philippines <--- this means TANAN citizens dili kay kadto lang mga accused.
2. As decided by the highest court of the land, CHR's function is limited to investigation and NOT prosecution.

Uhmmm, an international law pattered as a local law has the force and effect of law gihapon sa Philippines.

Atu i.simplify:

Do you have evidence na only abuses committed by the government ila gi.investigate? Kay based on 2015 (if naa kay latest kay better) Annual report, they have investigated other abuses. And since kibaw man diay kag jurisprudence, kibaw sad ka nga naay presumption of regularity sila diba? So naa kay evidence na remiss sila sa ila trabaho? Na wa sila nitabang when asked for it? Or imo basis ra kay silence nila sa media?

Also, in that case kay prosecution here does not mean they cannot provide for lawyers to the victim. In all criminal cases lead jud na by the public prosecutor. When the public prosecutor refuses (in the case of government sanctioned offenses), ngara na ka kailangan ug lawyer.

[ComeToPapa]

Hasula aning mga agencies sa governemnt pari pariha ra og roles dapat naay klaro nga borderline sa ila mga mandate.

[THE KID]

..................

[firestarter]

Even without considering the Constitutional Mandate and not minding the Paris principles, a quick look at the 2015 annual report clearly shows that they have already been doing those things. Ang nakita lang gud nimo karun is ang gi.sensationalize sa media ONLY.

Looking at legislative intent (Gascon was one of the men who drafted the new Constitution by the way), makita jud nimo na framework sa UN ila gisunod.

- - - Updated - - -



Misinterpretation? That is a fact. Unsai misinterpretation ana sir? Klarohay lang ta. Dili ni about political parties, stop trying to bring that up. Which Rule of Court or Rule on Evidence ako na misinterpret? Dili ba common sense?

Ingna kuno ko, aside sa Constitution, which is very very open to interpretation, unsa pay lain source nimo? Basin ikaw naka misinterpret.

I'm actually referring to this sir.

If ang source sa abuse kay ang government, most likely the DOJ will not push for its prosecution. And that is within its power. Only exception is when there is grave abuse of discretion blah blah blah Rules of Court. Lacking proof of that (which in rules of evidence is nearly impossible to prove if wala kay resources), dili jud na ma prosecute imo case. Wala juy public attorney makaduol nimo kay ipa inhibit na tanan.

Sa imo example, pwede siya muduol ug lain police, yes. But kutob rana blotter kay dili man ang police ang mu prosecute, ang prosecutor man, which is under the DOJ. So back to square one ka. Ang CHR, makatabang na nimo sa ing.ana na situation. Maka provide sila ug lawyer, free of charge.

When you say MOST LIKELY will NOT push for its prosection. You are talking about rules of court and procedures, maybe mao nang mga duwa sa sulod.

Also when you say "Dili jud na ma prosecute imo case"... Natural kay lacking man kaha ang proof..

These are all rules of court which most lawyers know, but here we are talking about our Constitutional Right to due process and to council.

Dili na pwede ma impair ang duha, sige inhibit ang usa, ngitag lain, inhibit na pud ngita napud ug lain.. kay that is your Constitutional Rights.

Ug wala ang CHR, naay uban Free Legal Assistance nga libre.. naay mga budding lawyers nga mo take on sa imong kaso, naay daghan sa online makatabang..

[firestarter]

Uhmmm, an international law pattered as a local law has the force and effect of law gihapon sa Philippines.

Atu i.simplify:

Do you have evidence na only abuses committed by the government ila gi.investigate? Kay based on 2015 (if naa kay latest kay better) Annual report, they have investigated other abuses. And since kibaw man diay kag jurisprudence, kibaw sad ka nga naay presumption of regularity sila diba? So naa kay evidence na remiss sila sa ila trabaho? Na wa sila nitabang when asked for it? Or imo basis ra kay silence nila sa media?

Also, in that case kay prosecution here does not mean they cannot provide for lawyers to the victim. In all criminal cases lead jud na by the public prosecutor. When the public prosecutor refuses (in the case of government sanctioned offenses), ngara na ka kailangan ug lawyer.

And your point is? We still need them? Naa man gihapon sila.. 1k lang ang budget.


Actually, the Lower House has made it known it's intention, nga it is Gascon who is the sagabal.. And is the reason for the budget, that if he resigns, they can talk again revising the budget.

It's political in nature, pressuring an executive office.. which as of the moment without an enabling law will remain as one.

[disk88]

I'm actually referring to this sir.



When you say MOST LIKELY will NOT push for its prosection. You are talking about rules of court and procedures, maybe mao nang mga duwa sa sulod.

Also when you say "Dili jud na ma prosecute imo case"... Natural kay lacking man kaha ang proof..

These are all rules of court which most lawyers know, but here we are talking about our Constitutional Right to due process and to council.

Dili na pwede ma impair ang duha, sige inhibit ang usa, ngitag lain, inhibit na pud ngita napud ug lain.. kay that is your Constitutional Rights.

Ug wala ang CHR, naay uban Free Legal Assistance nga libre.. naay mga budding lawyers nga mo take on sa imong kaso, naay daghan sa online makatabang..

Dili rana sa sulod ang rules of court sir. Apil na sa gawas. Apil na sa discretion sa public prosecutors ug DOJ Secretary. Natural, bisag naay proof dili jud mu prosecute (since we are talking here of government-sanctioned offenses). Im not saying here naa juy government-santioned offenses, Im just saying na when there are, ang CHR jud ang pinaka duol natu na madaganan. But tungod sa gibuhat sa house of reps, potentially wa na ta'y lain madaganan.

Sayup na sir. All public prosecutors are mandated to follow the orders of the SOJ. Kung muingon siya na inhibit mo, inhibit jud tanan. Wala kay lain daganan sa government na libre.

Uban Free Legal Assistance? We are talking here about Constitutionally provided rights, not pro bono cases. Kay kanang pro bono cases, dili ta pwede mupugos nila na tabangan ta kung dili jud sila ganahan. Ang CHR mapugos nimo na tabangan ka. But

- - - Updated - - -

And your point is? We still need them? Naa man gihapon sila.. 1k lang ang budget.


Actually, the Lower House has made it known it's intention, nga it is Gascon who is the sagabal.. And is the reason for the budget, that if he resigns, they can talk again revising the budget.

It's political in nature, pressuring an executive office.. which as of the moment without an enabling law will remain as one.

Not you or me literally. Dili man gud ka ka.feel sa katung mga tao na wala ju'y kwarta mu prosecute. They need the CHR. Everything there is my point. Please read.

So balik ta, naa ba kay PROOF na dili regular ilang pag perform sa ila mandate? Kay kung wala, we are done talking here

[firestarter]

Dili rana sa sulod ang rules of court sir. Apil na sa gawas. Apil na sa discretion sa public prosecutors ug DOJ Secretary. Natural, bisag naay proof dili jud mu prosecute (since we are talking here of government-sanctioned offenses). Im not saying here naa juy government-santioned offenses, Im just saying na when there are, ang CHR jud ang pinaka duol natu na madaganan. But tungod sa gibuhat sa house of reps, potentially wa na ta'y lain madaganan.

Sayup na sir. All public prosecutors are mandated to follow the orders of the SOJ. Kung muingon siya na inhibit mo, inhibit jud tanan. Wala kay lain daganan sa government na libre.

Uban Free Legal Assistance? We are talking here about Constitutionally provided rights, not pro bono cases. Kay kanang pro bono cases, dili ta pwede mupugos nila na tabangan ta kung dili jud sila ganahan. Ang CHR mapugos nimo na tabangan ka. But

- - - Updated - - -



Not you or me literally. Dili man gud ka ka.feel sa katung mga tao na wala ju'y kwarta mu prosecute. They need the CHR. Everything there is my point. Please read.

So balik ta, naa ba kay PROOF na dili regular ilang pag perform sa ila mandate? Kay kung wala, we are done talking here

What your doing is cornering the argument into what is provided for by the rules of court brod.. mao nang inyong master kanang sulod sa korte.. Are you a lawyer kay maayo man kaayo ka mo corner?

Balik lang ta sa Constitution...

As a Constitutional Right to every citizen, is the Government mandated by the Constitution to provide legal assistance to the offended?

So balik ta, naa ba kay PROOF na dili regular ilang pag perform sa ila mandate? Kay kung wala, we are done talking here

Again , we are not talking about proof of irregularity of CHR's work here. I'm merely pointing the fact that, that office has been pressured to make suka Gascon or else 1k is their budget for the year 2018..