Introducing: The Philippines’ Commission On Selective Human Rights (CSHR)

IMG_2147
CHR’s Chito Gascon

The Commission on Human Rights (CHR) appealed on Saturday to the government to consider stopping military airstrikes in besieged Marawi City, to avoid more civilian and even military deaths as well as massive property destruction.

It is not totally unexpected of the CHR to issue such a statement but it also shows the commission’s utter lack of  sensibility and understanding of the situation in Marawi.

For all intents and purposes, the Marawi siege is an act of war declared by the terrorists against the duly-constituted government of the Philippines.  And no, it wasn’t just a siege on Marawi alone.  Marawi is part of the Philippines.  It IS the Philippines.

The painful reality of any war is that casualties occur on all sides — including civilians and government troops.
“While the Commission supports the government’s efforts to impose peace and order in the said city, the military must take every precaution to avoid harming civilians and civilian objects,” the CHR said in a statement. “The airstrikes have not only caused the destruction of buildings and civilian property, but, worse, have resulted in the killing of innocent civilians, including children, and even our own troops.”
“The airstrikes are a major factor in the internal displacement of civilians within the area and local residents are reporting that members of the criminal Maute band are now engaged in the ransacking of their abandoned homes,” the CHR added.

The statement was isued by Jacqueline Ann de Guia, director of CHR Public Affairs and Strategic Communications Office.

So, Politikal Pinoy asks the CHR:  what about the innocent victims of the Marawi siege, the tens of thousands who were displaced as a result of the terrorist act? Where would justice be for the families of those killed in the encounter?  What about the pledged duty of our troops and police to defend and protect our country from elements who seek to destabilize us and curtail our freedom? What about the very possibility that terrorism will spread in other parts of the country? Are all these less important to the CHR?

If so, then we should rename it the Commission on Selective Human Rights (CSHR).  It seems its only goal is to promote its good image regardless of what happens to those whom it is supposed to defend, protect and advocate for.

As such we should henceforth refer to it as an Unconstitutional Commission.

 

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s