MEMORY AID FOR HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

(PREMIDTERM)
United Nations General Assembly (UNGA)
- This proclaimed the commencement of the
World Program for Human Rights Education
on Jan. 1, 2005.
Resolution # A2007-028 & A2007-029
- This urged the CHED and law schools in the
Philippines to offer Human Rights in the law
curriculum.
NOTE: In Dec. 19, 2011, the UNGA adopted the UN
Declaration on Human Rights Education and Training.
Article 3 of which provides that Human Rights education
and training concerns all ages and all levels including preschool, primary, secondary and higher education.

United Nations Human Rights Commission

- Responsible for drafting of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights.
NOTE: According to Article 2 of UN Declaration on Human
Rights Education and Training, the most effective tool
against human right abuse is education. It makes a person
less likely to commit human rights violations and less likely
to become a victim either.

GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

a. Human Rights Law
b. The United Nations System
c. The core human right treaties and their
application & monitoring systems
d. International Humanitarian Law
e. International Criminal Tribunals
PHILIPPINES CONTRIBUTION TO
INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW
International
Convention on
Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights (ICESCR)
International
Convention on Civil
and Political Rights

Signed by the
Philippines on Dec.
19, 1966 and
ratified in June 7,
1974 and Oct. 23,
1986, respectively.

(ICCPR)

Convention on the Elimination of

Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)
SOURCES OF HUMAN RIGHTS LAWS IN THE
PHILIPPINES
a. Constitution
b. Legislative enactments
c. Supreme Court rules, rulings and orders
d. Executive Issuances.

CONSTRUCTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

INSTRUMENTS
Human Rights Law is a dynamic and continues to
evolve. The instrument embodying human rights
treaties, laws and principles are living instruments that
must be interpreted in the light of circumstances
surrounding and attachment to every case. They cannot
be tied down to obsolete practices and beliefs but have
to be made adaptable to current societal landscapes if
they are to have any relevance at all
NOTE: When a human rights law has the effect of
modifying another law without repealing the latter, an
attempt at harmonizing them has to be made.

Human Rights
- The inherent dignity and of the equal and
inalienable rights of all members of the human
family.
ATTRIBUTES OF HUMAN RIGHTS
1. Universal human rights apply to all humans,
regardless of race, culture, age, sex or creed.
2. Inherent all human beings are born with
these rights.
3. Equal every human being has the same set
of rights as any other.
4. Inalienable human rights cannot be taken
form or given away by any human.
THREE GENERATIONS OF HUMAN RIGHTS
I. FIRST GENERATION
- Refer mostly to the political rights and civil
liberties found in the International Civil and
Political Rights (ICCPR).
- Comprises of negative rights in the sense that
they prohibit the doing of something.
- No one shall Rights.
- Ex: Prohibition against searches and seizures,
interruption of peaceful meetings or undue
intervention to the freedom of expression.
II. SECOND GENERATION
- These are the positive rights that enjoin States
to perform an act or do something for the
enjoyment of these rights by the people.
- These are the rights mostly found in ICESCR.
- They are the shall rights
III. THIRD GENERATION
- Refer mostly to the political rights and civil
liberties found in the International Civil and
Political Rights (ICCPR).
ANONYMOUS DONOR | 1

STATE RESPONSIBILITY
NOTE: The State is not the giver of human rights, for
these are inherent in all human beings. The role of the
State in the social order is to see to it that members of
society acknowledge its authority and that it governs the
people properly. In turn, the State must recognize that the
people have rights and freedoms that are inherent in them
and cannot be taken away. As guarantor of human rights,
the State may be held accountable when people are
deprived of their rights by its action or inaction.

VIOLATIONS BY STATE ACTORS

- When a State Actor violates the human rights
of an individual, it is deemed a violation by the
State itself.
- This is the reason why demands for human
rights are made against the Government
when, for instance, a police officer fails to
observe the Miranda warning or makes
shortcuts in implementing the law.
NOTE: The State responsibility extends to acts committed
by instrumentalities of the State. Persons and entities
which have the status of organs in the internal law of the
State are included in the term State Organs. So also are
persons and entities who, although not organs of the
State, are empowered by law of the State to exercise
elements of Governmental Authority.

VIOLATIONS BY PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS

- Individual responsibility for human rights
violations committed by private persons are
treated and punished under the criminal law
system.
- For the individual to be punished, the act or
omission must be defined and penalized
under an existing domestic law, otherwise the
offender could not be held liable for it. Nulla
Poena Sine Lege there is no crime if there is
no law punishing the act or omission.
REQUISITES:
1. The State, through its lawmaking body, must
enact the appropriate laws to criminalize human
rights violations.
2. The State, through its judiciary, must provide
adequate judicial remedies.
When can the State be liable for human rights
violations committed by Non-State Actors?
State liability may attach for human rights violations
committed by Non-State Actors if the State failed to
pass laws to protect its people from these violations,
and to provide for adequate judicial remedies.
The States role as guarantor of human rights
enjoyment and protection carries with it the obligation
to ensure that State actors and non-State actors do
not violate them.

INTERNATIONAL STATE RESPONSIBILITY

NOTE: The traditional principle in international law is that
individuals are not directly bound by it, for individuals are
not subjects of international law. By ratifying a treaty, the
State agrees to be bound by international law and
thereupon incurs responsibility. In turn, the State has to
ensure that the obligations under the treaty are observed
within its jurisdiction by its people.

ELEMENTS OF AN INTERNATIONALLY
WRONGFUL ACTS OF THE STATE
[Article 2 of Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful
Acts 2001]

1) The act or omission is attributable to the State

under international law.
2) The conduct constitutes a breach of an
international obligation of the State.
VELASQUEZ-RODRIGUEZ VS. HONDURAS :
The Inter-American Court of Human Rights found that the
victim Manfredo Velasquez disappeared in the hands of
the Honduran officials. The Honduran Governments
failure to conduct an investigation on the disappearance,
compounded with allegations of attempts to thwart the
victimss plea for an investigation was deemed an
indication of the Governments invovlment in the
disappearance. The International Law held that an
impairment of the human rights of a person which is
attributable to public authority, constitutes an act
imputable to the State, which shall assume responsibility.

DERIVATIVE STATE RESPONSIBILITY FOR

COMPLICITY
a) Direct responsibility of the State committed by
State Actors
b) Responsibility for acts committed by non-state
actors when the State failed to pass laws, prevent
and punish violations and to provide adequate
legal remedies.
Can a State be held liable for the acts of another
State?
Under International Law, a State may be held liable
for a human rights violation even if it did not directly
commit the act constituting the violation, provided that
it assisted in the commission of the act or allowed it to
happen, similar to a conspirator, accomplice or
accessory in our criminal law.

Derivative Responsibility
- This is present when:
a. The State aids and assists in the
commission by another of the
internationally wrongful act.
b. The State exercises direction and control
over the commission of the act.
EFFECTIVE CONTROL TEST vs. OVERALL CONTROL TEST

Effective Control Test

ANONYMOUS DONOR | 2

The State directed or enforced the

perpetration of the acts contrary to human
rights and humanitarian law.

of the operations of war by commanders who

to some extent are responsible for their
subordinates. As commander, General
Yamashita was under an affirmative duty in
the circumstances to protect prisoners of war
and the civilian population.

EFFECTIVE CONTROL:
(1) The issuance of directions.
(2) The enforcement of each specific
operation.

ELEMENTS:
(1) Gravamen is failure to prevent or
prosecute.
(2) There is a violation of the subordinate.
(3) Knowledge of such violation.

Overall Control Test

- ???
PEOPLE VS. ANDRE MARTI :
The Supreme Court held that the illegal articles could be
admitted as evidence even if these were products of a
search conducted without a warrant, because the person
who conducted the search was a civilian, not a
government agent. The Constitutional proscription against
unlawful searches and seizures therefore applies as a
restraint directed only against the government and its
agencies tasked with the enforcement of the law. Thus, it
could be invoked against the State to whom the restraint
against arbitrary and unreasonable exercise of power is
imposed.
OPOSA VS. FACTORAN :
Doctrine of Intergenerational Responsibility
The present generation holds the natural resource
treasures of the Earth in trust for the benefit,
enjoyment and use of the generations of humankind
yet to come, and the State has the responsibility to
protect and see to it that this be realized.

Writ of Kalikasan
- This is akin to an injunction which is a remedy
to a natural or juridical entity authorized by
law, peoples organization or any public
interest group accredited by or registered with
any government agency, on behalf of persons
whose constitutional right to a balanced and
healthful ecology is violated.
- This usually involves environmental damage
of such magnitude as to prejudice the life,
health or property of inhabitants in two or
more cities or provinces
Doctrine of Command Responsibility
- The failure of the superior officer to stop
human rights violation committed his
subordinates, though absent showing that he
directly ordered the commission of these acts,
could still make him liable as well as for such
acts.
- This originated through the Yamashita
Standard.

Medina Standard
- A military commander or person effectively
acting as a military commander shall be
criminally responsible for crimes committed by
forces under his or her control or effective
authority and control as a result of his or her
failure to exercise control properly over such
forces.

Made a wrong turn, Once or twice

Dug my way out, Blood and fire
Bad decisions, thats alright
Welcome to my silly life
Mistreated, Misplaced
Misunderstood, Miss no way it's all good
It didn't slow me down.
Mistaken, Always second guessing
Underestimated, Look I'm still around
Pretty, pretty please, dont you ever, ever

feel
Like you're less than perfect
You're fucking perfect to me

~ Pink ~

Yamashita Standard
- The Court ruled in this case that under
International Law on the law of war, violations
of war have to be avoided through the control
ANONYMOUS DONOR | 3