HUMAN RIGHTS ADVISORY

ON
THE PREVALENT KILLINGS OF OUR SECURITY SECTOR

CHR RO3 ADV-2018-0327-002

Protecting those who protect us would entail the participation of the public and
other government agencies. The Commission on Human Rights being the frontliner of
advocating the right to life must not only focus on the killings of private citizens but
must act as well on the deaths and violations commited to our men in uniform. The Arm
Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and the Philippine National Police (PNP) are the most at
risk of their lives and limbs for maintaning peace and order in our country. The AFP in
its mission of upholding the sovereignty, supporting the Constitution, and defending the
territory of the Republic of the Philippines against all enemies foreign and domestic
together with the PNP whose mission shall enforce the law, prevent and control crimes,
maintain peace and order, and ensure public safety and internal security with the active
support of the community. Security would not be properly given until those who protect
us is also being protected.

The subsequent incidents of killing and arson committed to our security sector
allegedly by insurgents should be treated with great deal and priority.

On October 16, 2018, SPO2 Angelo N. Gawat, the Chief Investigator of Maria
Aurora Police Station and PO2 Martial Ronald B. Ruidera assigned at First Provincial
Mobile Force Company of Aurora Police Provincial Office were ambushed at Brgy.
Villa, Maria Aurora, Aurora Province by armed groups (New People’s Army). PO2
Ruidera died instantaneously due to gunshot wounds while SPO2 Gawat suffered
injuries also to gunshot wounds.

On November 5, 2018 Private James Lanes, 24 was killed when the Philippine
Army’s 92nd Infantry Battalion (92IB) clashed twice against suspected New People’s
Army (NPA) rebels in Sitio Dadyangao and Sitio Madaraki in Barangay Umiray,
General Nakar, Quezon (https://news.mb.com.ph/2018/11/05/soldier-killed-in-quezon-clash-with-
npa-rebels/)

On June 5, members of the Regional Mobile Force Battalion 15 and Mountain

Province Provincial Mobile Force Company had an encounter with an undetermined
number of NPA guerrillas at Mt. Sipitan, Brgy Aguid, Sagada, Mt. Province. The
encounter resulted in the killing of PO2 Henry Dion, and wounding Police
Superintendent Joseph B. Cayat, PO3 Wilfred Manacnis, PO1 Aldrin C. Bocalan, PO1
Clarence D. Abuan, PO1 Antolin D. Potpoten, PO1 Xander M. Depnag, PO1 Jake B
Paat, PO1 Yasser L. Guzman and PO2 Regie Palome. Earlier on June 4, Monday, 6
members of the Philippine Army under the 86th Infantry Battalion were wounded in a
20-minute clash with NPA guerrillas in Echague, Isabela .
(https://www.rappler.com/nation/204279-encounters-with-npa-cordillera)

Although the military remain the backbone of most peacekeeping operations,

today’s peacekeepers undertake a wide variety of complex tasks, from helping to build
sustainable institutions of governance, through human rights monitoring and security
sector reform, to the disarmament, demobilization and reintegration of former
combatants.

The men and women of our security sector who defend our nation and
independence sacrifices their own lives for us to live peacefully. The duty, honor,
courage and commitment are all values they embrace. This Office salutes their service
and their values.. We believe these men and women should be protected in battle with
the best equipment the Philippines can provide.

Recommendations:

In view of the foregoing, the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) Regional

Office 3 hereby recommends the following actions:

- To resume peace talks between the government and the leftist groups ( National
Democratic Front (NDF), New People’s Army (NPA), Etc.)

- Draft an effective peace process through political settlement.

- Build more sustainable peace in the country

- Recommend prospective legislation that might enhance the protection of officers in

the security sector
- Improve the protection and safety of law enforcement officers

- Codifying new violent crime statutes and recommending higher penalty for acts of
violence directed against law enforcement.

Issued this 27th of November 2018, City of San Fernando, Pampanga

The PNP leadership quickly condemned the latest hostility initiated by the CPP/NPA against
government troops engaged in medical-dental civic action operations who were hurt in an ambush
staged by the NPA, using internationally outlawed landmines in Sitio Patag, Brgy. Mambulo Nuevo,
Libmanan, Camarines Sur.
PNP Spokesperson, Chief Superintendent Benigno B Durana Jr. described the
attack as “another example of either duplicity or lack of influence of Utrecht-
based CPP/NPA/NDF leaders who shamelessly ask for a meeting with PRRD while
carrying out terror attacks against security forces personnel helping less fortunate
Filipinos.”
The CPP/NPA leadership has obviously lost control over maverick commanders of
its wayward guerilla fronts, Durana said.
Pursuit operations were mounted by AFP and PNP units in Camarines Sur against
the NPA unit responsible for the attack.
Reports reaching the National Operations Center in Camp Crame, said the
wounded PNP personnel were part of the 1st Camarines Sur Provincial Mobile
Force Company on their way to the Libmanan town Proper from a medical mission
in Barangay Bagamelon.
Upong reaching Sitio Patag, undetermined armed men who believed to be
members of the New People’s Army ambushed the 9-man team resulted to the
injuries to six members namely:
PO3 Roland G Hermogeno;
PO1 Vladimir Guadalupe;
PO1 Roy V Carbonell;
PO1 Eliseo Jomar N Palaroan;
PO1 Daisy Bhel Genova;
PO1 Mikhail Jose P Concina
The wounded were evacuated to the Mother Seton Hospital in Naga City while PNP
and Philippine Army troops launched hot pursuit operations against the suspects.

From head to toe, mounted or dismounted – DuPont provides material science for personal
protection including military armor.
The men and women of our armed forces volunteer to defend our nation; they
steel themselves for sacrifice. Duty, honor, country, courage, commitment – all
are values they embrace. DuPont salutes their service and their values.. We
believe these men and women should be protected in battle with the best
equipment America can provide. Our scientists, engineers, and business
professionals are committed to making products that help protect our protectors –
the volunteer warfighter. They carry a heavy enough burden, so we must lighten
their loads with innovative technologies and materials for military body armor,
combat helmets, vehicle armor and more.
Supplying the U.S. Military with critical materials is our heritage. They were our
first customer in 1802, and we are proud (210 years later) to still call on them as
our customer. Today, products made from DuPont™ Kevlar® and Nomex® fiber
are used in military body armor, helmets, flight suits, and chemical protective
suits.
Our core value is safety; our core mission is to help bring you home safe!

Protect The Protectors is a multi-faceted campaign seeking to safeguard the physical and mental wellbeing of police

officers. Our aims are tougher sentences for those who assault police officers and other emergency service workers, in

addition to ensuring officers have the right protective tools and equipment and, in the case of police drivers, are not

unfairly prosecuted when responding or pursuing in a police vehicle. British Transport Police Federation and the Prison

Officers' Association (POA) have signed up to partner PFEW in the campaign.

The campaign includes a series of videos and written case studies with officers, giving first-hand accounts of being
assaulted or subjected to prosecution and/or disciplinary proceedings following a police response drive.

Public Trust

What is the public trust, one may ask. John Locke, writing in his “Second Treatises on
Government” (1691), postulated a theoretical situation called “Social Contract Theory.”

Locke hypothesized that a bargain between the free citizens of a particular society and their
government exists and through this bargain a society would grant certain rights to their
government in order to protect the society’s natural and inalienable rights and to ensure the
collective safety of all (Social Contract Theory).

Perhaps the central right that is granted to the government is to correct or punish those that
would violate or take advantage of the rules of society. It is this set of rights conferred upon a
government by the governed that is often referred to as the public trust.

The public trust, in summary, is the specific list of rights granted by the governed to their
government to ensure that the individuals in a society will retain their inalienable rights and
to provide for community safety and prosperity.
 Responsibility of Officers

As police officers, the front line representatives of organized government, we are charged
with the responsibility to safeguard the rights that our citizens have granted to our
government. We accomplish this task in numerous ways, but we are always expected to do so
ethically from a value base that is both legally right and morally correct.

Police officers are expected to uphold the public trust in a fair and equitable manner, and with
equal access to all. We must always balance the goal of order maintenance with the goal of
law enforcement, to do so objectively, and to do so as part of a team in the criminal justice
system.

Perhaps the biggest responsibility of any law enforcement officer is to recognize that his or
her authority is not derived by a set of laws and ordinances, or an oath of office, but is
granted to them from the very community they serve.

What is peace?
Peace is when people are able to resolve their conflicts without violence and can work together to improve the quality of
their lives.
Peace is when:
1. everyone lives in safety, without fear or threat of violence, and no form of violence is tolerated in law or in practice
2. everyone is equal before the law, the systems for justice are trusted, and fair and effective laws protect people’s rights
3. everyone is able to participate in shaping political decisions and the government is accountable to the people
4. everyone has fair and equal access to the basic needs for their wellbeing – such as food, clean water, shelter, education,
healthcare and a decent living environment
5. everyone has an equal opportunity to work and make a living, regardless of gender, ethnicity or any other aspect of
identity

After the Honorable Jeff Sessions was sworn in as our nation's attorney general,
President Trump issued an executive order that prioritized the "protection and
safety" of law enforcement officers. Bravo! This Order will hopefully end what I
refer to as the Police Piñata Perception: an expectation that allegedly unarmed
criminals can take swings at cops while cops dispense candy instead of justice.
President Trump's Executive Order, "Preventing Violence Against Federal, State,
Tribal and Local Law Enforcement Officers," is a welcome show of support.

The order is comprised of two main parts. The first section states that it's the
policy of our nation to augment protections and safety measures for law
enforcement. In the second section, the order directs the Department of Justice
(DOJ) to lead efforts to fulfill the first section. DOJ is tasked with reviewing
current federal laws, as well as coordinating with state, tribal, and local
governments, to develop a strategic plan for prosecuting those who attack law
enforcement officers. Additionally, the DOJ is tasked with making
recommendations to President Trump regarding prospective legislation that might
enhance the protections for officers. This could include codifying new violent
crime statutes and recommending new mandatory minimum sentences for acts of
violence directed against law enforcement.

The order also calls for a review of DOJ grant programs to assess their
effectiveness. Specifically, the review would include making recommended
changes to DOJ policy that would provide increased safety and protection
measures for officers. This review is overdue and welcome, and the hope is that
the resulting recommendations will be properly funded.

The data reflecting law enforcement fatalities for 2016 is staggering, and
completely validates the need for this executive order. According to the National
Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund (NLEOMF) annual report, "Firearms-
related incidents were the number one cause of duty deaths in 2016, with 64
Officers shot and killed across the country. This represents a significant spike-56
percent-over the 41 Officers killed by gunfire in 2015."

To add to the disheartening fatality data from 2016, NLEOMF also reported that
among the 64 law enforcement heroes killed by gunfire, "21 Officers were shot
and killed without warning in ambush-style shootings." This amounts to a 163%
increase over the officer ambush fatalities for 2015. With 21 heroes fatally
wounded by ambush or assassination, we expect our national leadership to do
more than send us to sensitivity training.

Based on recent data on violent crime, it appears that the rule of law is under
attack as well. According to a Violent Crime Survey released by the Major Cities
Chiefs Association, 61 responding agencies reported an increase in the top
categories of violent crime. Compared to 2015, homicides increased from 5,787
to 6,407 in 2016. In 2015, there were 26,913 rapes reported, as compared to
28,757 in 2016. It is clear that violence committed against law enforcement and
the public is rising. I applaud President Trump for recognizing that both our
nation's laws and elected leaders need to do more to protect law enforcement and
the American citizenry.

So what can be done to improve the protections and safety of law enforcement
officers? The obvious first point is to increase staffing levels. But that requires a
funding commitment on local, state, and federal levels. Same applies to safety
equipment. Every uniformed officer should be issued a TASER, body armor,
mobile deployable ballistic shields, and interoperable radios. Warrant teams
should all have the L-3 Range-R handheld radar system to assess the distance
and movement of potential threats through walls and minimize exposure to
ambush attacks.

We can't eliminate the harm caused by inflammatory biased news headlines, but
we can improve on data collection to empower our position. All departments
should capture data relating to attacks against law enforcement—including
noncompliance to verbal commands. We need to illustrate the number of attacks
committed by criminals on illegal substances to counter the ignorant notion that
dope peddlers are nonviolent.

There is also a need for legislation that would allow law enforcement viable
recourse against those who conspire to bring false allegations against us. What
was Officer Darren Wilson's recourse after having his reputation trampled and his
career ruined? I am optimistic President Trump's order will increase our
protections and provide real body armor for the honorable thin blue line.

“Human rights defender” is a term used to describe people who, individually or with others, act to promote
or protect human rights.
Supporting the peace process in
the Philippines
Creating the conditions for sustainable peace

This project aims to achieve an inclusive and lasting peace in the Philippines through a
negotiated political settlement between the government and National Democratic Front
(NDF).

The peace process between the government and NDF is the region's longest peace
undertaking. The formal resumption of talks in 2011 was short-lived. The challenge now is to
resume talks and broaden the 'peace constituency' to include businesses, the judiciary, the
media and international development agencies, who can shape public opinion and ensure a
successful and inclusive political settlement.

We help to sustain communication between the government and NDF, so as to prevent the
deterioration of relations and the potential increase in armed conflict. We also advocate a
joint peace platform that gives voice to the marginalised in Philippine society.

This project builds on the strengths of previous and ongoing work with the principal actors in
the formal peace negotiations in the Philippines, and is critical to building more sustainable
peace in the country.

Monitoring the Bangsamoro

conflict
Shaping development approaches in the
Philippines

This project monitors violent conflict and crime in the core territories within the
Bangsamoro – a proposed autonomous region within the Philippines – in order to inform
and shape development approaches.
The Philippines is approaching a landmark step in the peace process between the
government and Moro Islamic Liberation Front, after decades of conflict. Yet it is feared that
some groups will violently contest these agreements, as witnessed in the hostilities by the
Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters and recent attack by a faction of the Moro National
Liberation Front in Zamboanga City.

Using the Conflict Alert system, we systematically monitor any conflict (particularly violent
conflict) within the Bangsamoro, generating data, analysis and recommendations that can
inform development plans and policies. We hope this will lead to greater adoption of this
robust and reliable conflict monitoring system.

To sustain this initiative, we will also strengthen the capacities of partners in conflict
monitoring.

UN Photo/Abel Kavanagh

UN peacekeepers in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

Saving succeeding generations from the scourge of war was the main motivation for creating the United Nations,
whose founders lived through the devastation of two world wars. Since its creation, the UN has often been called
upon to prevent disputes from escalating into war, or to help restore peace when armed conflict does break out, and
to promote lasting peace in societies emerging from wars.
Security Council
Over the decades, the UN has helped to end numerous conflicts, often through actions of the Security Council — the
organ with primary responsibility, under the United Nations Charter, for the maintenance of international peace and
security. When a complaint concerning a threat to peace is brought before it, the Council's first action is usually to
recommend to the parties to try to reach agreement by peaceful means. In some cases, the Council itself
undertakes investigation and mediation. It may appoint special representatives or request the Secretary-General to
do so or to use his good offices. It may set forth principles for a peaceful settlement.

When a dispute leads to fighting, the Council's first concern is to bring it to an end as soon as possible. On many
occasions, the Council has issued ceasefire directives which have been instrumental in preventing wider hostilities.
It also deploys United Nations peacekeeping operations to help reduce tensions in troubled areas, keep opposing
forces apart and create conditions for sustainable peace after settlements have been reached. The Council may
decide on enforcement measures, economic sanctions (such as trade embargoes) or collective military action

United Nations peacekeeping operations are a vital instrument employed by the international community to
advance peace and security.
The first UN peacekeeping mission was established in 1948, when the Security Council authorized the deployment
of the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) to the Middle East to monitor the Armistice
Agreement between Israel and its Arab neighbours. Since then, there have been more than 70 UN peacekeeping
operations around the world.

Over 70 years, UN peacekeeping has evolved to meet the demands of different conflicts and a changing political
landscape. Born at the time when Cold War rivalries frequently paralyzed the Security Council, UN peacekeeping
goals were primarily limited to maintaining ceasefires and stabilizing situations on the ground, so that efforts could
be made at the political level to resolve the conflict by peaceful means.

UN peacekeeping expanded in the 1990s, as the end of the Cold War created new opportunities to end civil wars
through negotiated peace settlements. A large number of conflicts were brought to an end, either through direct UN
mediation or by the efforts of others acting with UN support. Countries assisted included El
Salvador, Guatemala, Namibia, Cambodia, Mozambique, Tajikistan, and Burundi. As the decade drew to a close,
continuing crises led to new operations in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Central African
Republic, Timor Leste, Sierra Leone and Kosovo.

In the new millennium, peacekeepers have been deployed to Liberia, Côte d'Ivoire, Darfur, South Sudan, Haiti,
and Mali.

The conflicts of today, while fewer in number, are deeply rooted. For example, the Democratic Republic of the
Congo, Darfur, and South Sudan today, are in a second or third wave of conflict. And many are complicated by
regional dimensions that are key to their solution. In fact, some two-thirds of peacekeeping personnel today are
deployed in the midst of ongoing conflict, where peace agreements are shaky or absent. Conflicts today are also
increasingly intensive, involving determined armed groups with access to sophisticated armaments and
techniques.
The nature of conflict has also changed over the years. Originally developed as a means of dealing with inter-State
conflict, over time UN peacekeeping has been increasingly applied to intra-State conflicts and civil wars. Although
the military remain the backbone of most peacekeeping operations, today’s peacekeepers undertake a wide variety
of complex tasks, from helping to build sustainable institutions of governance, through human rights monitoring
and security sector reform, to the disarmament, demobilization and reintegration of former combatants,
and demining.

Peacebuilding
Within the United Nations, peacebuilding refers to efforts to assist countries and regions in their transitions from
war to peace and to reduce a country's risk of lapsing or relapsing into conflict by strengthening national capacities
for conflict management, and laying the foundations for sustainable peace and development.

Building lasting peace in war-torn societies is among the most daunting of challenges for global peace and
security. Peacebuilding requires sustained international support for national efforts across the broadest range of
activities – monitoring ceasefires; demobilizing and reintegrating combatants; assisting the return of refugees and
displaced persons; helping organize and monitor elections of a new government; supporting justice and security
sector reform; enhancing human rights protections and fostering reconciliation after past atrocities.

Peacebuilding involves action by a wide array of organizations of the UN system, including the World Bank, regional
economic commissions, NGOs and local citizens’ groups. Peacebuilding has played a prominent role in UN
operations in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cambodia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Kosovo, Liberia and Mozambique, as well
as more recently in Afghanistan, Burundi, Iraq, Sierra Leone and Timor-Leste. An example of inter-state
peacebuilding has been the UN Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea.

Recognizing that the United Nations needs to better anticipate and respond to the challenges of peacebuilding,
the 2005 World Summit approved the creation of a new Peacebuilding Commission. In the resolutions establishing
the Peacebuilding Commission, resolution 60/180 and resolution 1645 (2005), the United Nations General
Assembly and the Security Council mandated it to bring together all relevant actors to advise on the proposed
integrated strategies for post conflict peacebuilding and recovery; to marshal resources and help ensure
predictable financing for these activities; and to develop best practices in collaboration with political, security,
humanitarian and development actors.

The resolutions also identify the need for the Commission to extend the period of international attention on post-
conflict countries and where necessary, highlight any gaps which threaten to undermine peacebuilding.

The General Assembly and Security Council resolutions establishing the Peacebuilding Commission also provided
for the establishment of a Peacebuilding Fund and Peacebuilding Support Office.

Demining
In 2014, landmines and explosive hazards killed approximately 10 people every day — most of them children,
women and the elderly — and severely maim countless more. Scattered in some 57 countries and 4 territories,
landmines and other explosive hazards are an ongoing reminder of conflicts which have been over for years or even
decades.

The vision of the United Nations is a world free of the threat of landmines and explosive remnants of war, where
individuals and communities live in a safe environment conducive to development and where the needs of victims
are met. Twelve United Nations Departments and Offices of the Secretariat, specialized agencies, funds and
programmes play a role in mine-action programs in 30 countries and three territories.

Mine action makes it possible for peacekeepers to carry out patrols, for humanitarian agencies to deliver
assistance, and for ordinary citizens to live without the fear that a single misstep could cost them their lives.

Mine action entails more than removing landmines from the ground. It includes high impact efforts aimed at
protecting people from danger, helping victims become self-sufficient and active members of their communities
and providing opportunities for stability and sustainable development.

A policy developed jointly by these institutions, the Mine Action and Effective Coordination: the United Nations Inter-
Agency Policy guides the division of labor within the United Nations. Much of the actual work, such as demining
and mine-risk education, is carried out by nongovernmental organizations. But commercial contractors and, in
some situations, militaries, also provide humanitarian mine-action services. In addition, a variety of
intergovernmental, international and regional organizations, as well as international financial institutions, also
support mine action by funding operations or providing services to individuals and communities affected by
landmines and explosive remnants of war. United Nations peacekeeping operations often play a key role in this
process.

The mine-related activities of the UN system are coordinated by the UN Mine Action Service. UNMAS ensures an
effective, proactive and coordinated response to the problems of landmines and explosive remnants of war,
including cluster munitions. It assesses and monitors the threat posed by mines and unexploded ordnance on an
ongoing basis, and develops policies and standards. The Service mobilizes resources, and advocates in support of
the global ban on anti-personnel landmines. UNMAS sets up and manages mine-action coordination centres in
countries and territories as part of peacekeeping operations and humanitarian emergencies or crises. More
recently, UNMAS efforts have further strengthened the mine action response to the threat posed by improvised
explosive devices, or IEDs.

The UN has been actively engaged in addressing the problems posed by landmines since the 1980s. It acted
decisively to address the use of weapons having indiscriminate effects when it sponsored the 1980 Convention on
Certain Conventional Weapons.. In 1996, that Convention was strengthened to include the use of landmines in
internal conflicts and to require that all mines be detectable.

Eventually, a growing public outcry, combined with the committed action of non-governmental organizations
involved in the International Campaign to Ban Land Mines (ICBL), led to the adoption of a comprehensive global
agreement.

The landmark 1997 UN Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-
personnel Mines and on Their Destruction (Mine-Ban Convention) bans the production, use and export of these
weapons and has nearly universal support. As of November 2016, it had 162 States parties.
A United Nations International Day for Mine Awareness and Assistance in Mine Action is observed every year on 4
April.

On 14 April 2015, the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon designated the renowned actor Daniel Craig as the first UN
Global Advocate for the Elimination of Mines and Explosive Hazards at the UN Headquarters in New York.

Women and Children in Conflict

In contemporary conflicts, as much as 90 percent of casualties are among civilians, most of whom are women and
children. Women in war-torn societies can face specific and devastating forms of sexual violence, which are
sometimes deployed systematically to achieve military or political objectives. Moreover, women continue to be
poorly represented in formal peace processes, although they contribute in many informal ways to conflict
resolution.

However, the UN Security Council has recognized that including women and gender perspectives in decision-
making can strengthen prospects for sustainable peace. This recognition was formalized in October 2000 with the
unanimous adoption of resolution 1325 on women, peace and security. The landmark resolution specifically
addresses the situation of women in armed conflict and calls for their participation at all levels of decision-making
on conflict resolution and peacebuilding.

Since the agenda was set with the core principles of resolution 1325, three supporting resolutions have been
adopted by the Security Council — 1820, 1888 and 1889. The four resolutions focus on two key goals: strengthening
women’s participation in decision-making and ending sexual violence and impunity.

Since 1999, the systematic engagement of the UN Security Council has firmly placed the situation of children
affected by armed conflict as an issue affecting peace and security. The Security Council has created a strong
framework and provided the Secretary-General with tools to respond to violations against children.The Special
Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict serves as the leading UN advocate for the
protection and well-being of children affected by armed conflict.

Peaceful uses of outer space

The United Nations works to ensure that outer space is used for peaceful purposes and that the benefits from
space activities are shared by all nations. This concern with the peaceful uses of outer space began soon after the
launch of Sputnik— the first artificial satellite—by the Soviet Union in 1957, and has kept pace with advances in
space technology. The United Nations has played an important role by developing international space law and by
promoting international cooperation in space science and technology.

The Vienna-based United Nations Office for Outer Space serves as the secretariat for the Committee on the
Peaceful Uses of Outer Space and its subcommittees, and assists developing countries in using space technology
for development.
Peace and security are as essential to society as food and water are to living organisms: they are
mandatory for maintained growth. Peace and security are sought by all individuals, organizations,
and states whether it be personal security, financial security, or military security.

The shootings by and against police officers over the last few years have raised numerous
issues—political, social, and legal—on the relationship and interactions between officers and
citizens. [1] This Essay focuses on the criminal laws that govern these encounters. At first
blush, their application seems noncontroversial. If a crime is committed, the individual—
regardless of her status as police officer or citizen—should be held accountable. But it turns
out that the actual crimes are different depending on the victim.

If a police officer unlawfully harms a citizen, the officer is subject to assault or homicide
charges—no different than if the officer committed these crimes off duty. [2] However, if a
citizen unlawfully harms a police officer, the citizen is automatically subject to aggravated
assault or aggravated homicide charges, which carry more severe punishment. [3] In fact,
some states make the intentional killing of an on-duty officer a capital offense. [4] Enhanced
charges in police encounters are thus asymmetrical. They only apply if a citizen harms an
officer but not if an officer harms a citizen.

States have similar one-sided aggravated charges when it comes to crimes against other
employees performing public services such as paramedics, public-school teachers, and
firefighters. [5] The key in all these situations is that the victim was acting in her official
capacity at the time of the crime. [6] The rationale for these statutes is straightforward. It is
imperative for states to deter individuals sufficiently from interfering with their ability to carry
out state-authorized functions. [7]

But police officers serve a unique role compared to these other public-service professions.
Only their job authorizes the detention of citizens and the use of force—including deadly
force. [8] The inherent pressure of police action and the threat of physical harm—qualities not
present in other public-service-oriented professions—suggest more tailored scrutiny of this
activity that not only protects it but also prevents its abuse.

Some states already have in place certain statutes targeting the misconduct of state actors.
Dubbed “official oppression statutes,” these misdemeanor crimes are primarily designed to
prevent abuse by public officials that may not otherwise fall under general criminal
statutes. [9] These statutes seem well suited to deter abuse or mistreatment by public-school
teachers or firefighters who are not uniquely authorized to use physical force. But the greater
authority of police officers over citizens suggests something stronger is necessary to prevent
abuse by these individuals, especially when something stronger is used to prevent harm
against them.
States should care equally about harms by and against police officers and their impact on
state activity. Indeed, the recent (and seemingly consistent) news of police abuses—
particularly against minority communities—only underscores the importance of effectively
regulating police behavior in both directions. [10] This kind of change will ultimately go a long
way in helping to legitimate police activity in this context.

Part I of the Essay discusses the asymmetry of criminal statutes when it comes to police
encounters. Part II argues for aggravated criminal liability for crimes both by and against
officers. It focuses on the expressive nature of uniform criminal laws and the concurrent need
to regulate police behavior effectively. After addressing some potential (though unpersuasive)
explanations for the asymmetry, the Essay concludes by suggesting remedial measures that
may ultimately help restore confidence in police accountability.

I. Asymmetrical Criminal Statutes in

Performance of Police Duties

This Part describes the asymmetrical nature of criminal statutes that govern police and citizen
encounters. Part I.A discusses how states handle harm caused by police officers and Part I.B
focuses on the heightened punishment that applies when citizens harm police officers.

A. Crimes by Police Officers

Criminal law generally treats police officers the same way, whether they commit crimes on or
off duty. The elements of relevant crimes such as assault and manslaughter make no
distinction between these two contexts. These crimes typically require a specific mens
rea together with some physical act resulting in injury. A simple assault, for example, requires
a person to intentionally or recklessly cause bodily injury to another. [11] The charge can be
increased in severity if the act results in severe bodily injury. [12] Manslaughter generally
requires a person to recklessly cause the death of another. [13] Depending on the level of
intent, the police officer may be on the hook for murder. [14]

Recent indictments of police officers allegedly using excessive force bear this out. For
example, in the Freddie Gray case in Maryland, the local prosecutor—in connection with the
death of an arrestee in police custody—brought a number of general charges against a group
of officers including manslaughter, murder, and aggravated assault. [15]

Police officers can invoke special defenses on the use of reasonable force when their duties
implicate potential criminal liability. [16] This shouldn’t be surprising or problematic. Part of a
police officer’s job is to make arrests and keep the peace. These duties necessarily implicate
the potential of assaulting citizens, and, if necessary, killing them. None of this changes the
fact that officers are still only potentially liable for the same crime as they would be if
committed outside their duties.

Some states also impose additional affirmative liability on police officers in the form of official
oppression statutes. [17] These are broadly worded laws that make it a crime for a police
officer or other official to knowingly abuse her power. [18] Deriving from the common law,
these misdemeanors statutes historically have been applied to a wide range of police
conduct, from the unlawful detention or mistreatment of citizens to extortion or other
fraudulent acts. [19] A typical statute reads in relevant part: “A person acting . . . in an official
capacity . . . commits a misdemeanor . . . if, knowing that his conduct is illegal, he: (1)
subjects another to arrest, detention, search seizure, mistreatment. . . .” [20]The primary
purpose of these statutes, however, seems to be cases of nonviolent abuse or verbal
harassment—crimes that may not otherwise be covered by traditional criminal
statutes. [21]Nevertheless, these broadly worded statutes would sweep in any unlawful
physical harm caused by police officers. [22] For example, the prosecutor in the Freddie Gray
case also charged the officers with official oppression in addition to the more serious assault
and homicide charges. [23]

The placement of these oppression statutes within typical criminal codes is revealing. These
statutes are not part of the codes relating to crimes against persons—such as assault or
homicide charges—but rather part of sections on offenses relating to public
administration. [24] This placement may suggest that their primary function is to regulate
state actors during the performance of their duties rather than to protect citizens from
unlawful harm.

B. Crimes Against Police Officers

Physical harm against police officers is treated differently than physical harm caused by police
officers. When the victim is a police officer, aggravated charges apply, which carry more
severe penalties than general homicide or assault charges. [25] These statutes are classified
in a variety of different ways, including for example, “aggravated
manslaughter,” [26] “criminal homicide of law enforcement officer” [27] or “assault on a
police officer.” [28] In some states, the intentional killing of on-duty police officers enhances a
homicide charge to a capital offense. [29]

It is important to recognize that these aggravated crimes contemplate the commission of the
underlying assault or homicide. In this way, these crimes share the same elements as
traditional homicide or assault charges, requiring a mens rea together with some physical act
resulting in injury. [30] The only difference is that these aggravated crimes include an
additional element that the officer was acting in her official capacity at the time of the
criminal act. [31] Courts typically paint with a broad brush when determining whether a police
officer was acting within her scope of authority. [32] Some jurisdictions also require that the
defendant know that the victim was a police officer. [33] No additional harm, however, is
necessary for the enhanced charge.

The need for deterrence helps explain a key rationale for these aggravated statutes. Criminal
laws generally seek to regulate citizen behavior by deterring or preventing individuals from
harming one another. [34] But harm to a police officer during an official encounter is more
problematic than when similar harm occurs between private citizens. Only in the former
situation is a citizen interfering with a vital state-sanctioned activity—one that requires an
officer to put herself in harm’s way. Accordingly, states have a special interest in meting out
more severe punishment to protect police officers when they are carrying out these
duties. [35]

There may also be a retributive rationale for these aggravated charges, though its application
depends on the specific circumstances. Retributivism focuses on the defendant’s culpability or
degree of moral wrongfulness to justify criminal liability and the resultant sentence rather
than the good consequences stemming from punishment. [36] Under this theory, a citizen
who targets a police officer and assaults or kills her during the course of her official duties
may be more blameworthy than if the individual targeted a private citizen. One may find that
it is morally worse to assault a state employee sworn to protect others than a private citizen,
thus justifying the enhancement. Intuitions may differ, however, if the individual is being
questioned or detained by the officer at the time of the crime. The citizen may feel stressed
or otherwise agitated given the circumstances. While this certainly would not excuse the
behavior and the resulting criminal charge, it may reduce the relative blameworthiness
compared with the first scenario.

Police encounters may also give rise to the crime of resisting arrest or a related charge of
preventing an officer from discharging her duty. [37] This kind of crime is separate from an
aggravated assault or homicide charge. “A person is guilty of resisting arrest when he
intentionally prevents or attempts to prevent a police officer or peace officer from effecting an
authorized arrest of himself or another person.” [38] Some statutes explicitly require actual
force here, whereas others do not make it an element of the crime. [39]

In one way, these crimes stand as the natural analog to the oppression statutes described
above because they too are classified under crimes against public administration rather than
under crimes against the person. [40] Only this time the aim is protecting the lawful use of
state activity rather than curtailing its abuse.

Aggravated criminal charges and resisting arrest may be brought together depending on the
circumstances. If a person assaults an officer with the intent to prevent her from performing
her duties, the individual could be on the hook for both crimes. [41] However, a person may
physically harm an officer while in the performance of her duties—an instance of aggravated
assault—but may not have a specific intent to interfere with her official duties to justify a
resisting arrest charge. [42] In states where actual force is required for a resisting arrest
charge, the two crimes may merge depending on the circumstances. [43]

Aggravated charges against citizens who harm police officers thus seem to be a hybrid. On
the one hand, these statutes seek to deter physical harm to police officers qua citizens (much
like regular assault or homicide) and, on the other, they seek to deter interference with the
state’s ability to exercise its lawful police authority (much like resisting arrest charges).

What is international humanitarian law? International humanitarian law is a set of rules which
seek, for humanitarian reasons, to limit the effects of armed conflict. It protects persons who
are not or are no longer participating in the hostilities and restricts the means and methods of
warfare. International humanitarian law is also known as the law of war or the law of armed
conflict. International humanitarian law is part of international law, which is the body of rules
governing relations between States. International law is contained in agreements between
States – treaties or conventions –, in customary rules, which consist of State practise
considered by them as legally binding, and in general principles. International humanitarian
law applies to armed conflicts. It does not regulate whether a State may actually use force;
this is governed by an important, but distinct, part of international law set out in the United
Nations Charter.
State Obligations

Under the Article II, Section 3 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution,

“The Armed Forces of the Philippines is the protector of the people
and the State. Its goal is to secure the sovereignty of the State and
the integrity of the national territory.”

Republic Act 6975 also known as Department of the Interior and

Local Government Act of 1990, some of the powers and functions of
the Philippine National Police are the maintenance of peace and order
and taking all necessary steps to ensure public safety and the
enforcement all laws and ordinances relative to the protection of lives
and properties.

These security officers risk their lives just to ensure and secure
peace and order of the community and the lives of their fellowmen.
Their lives are put in danger in fulfilling their oaths. Leaving their
families behind mourning and grieving for their losts.

Philippines: Conflict profile

The Philippines has experienced internal conflict for over four decades. This includes
violence related to two main causes: a communist-inspired insurgency and a separatist
struggle in the southern Bangsamoro region.
Discontent arising from the repression of dissent and foreign interference in the
Philippines led to the formation of the Communist Party of the Philippines after World
War II. It aimed to overthrow the government, and remains active; peace talks between it
and the government have so far been unsuccessful.
The second conflict has primarily taken place in the southern Philippines.The failure of
campaigns in the 1960s to recognise local people’s rights led to the development of
nationalist movements, and various armed groups have since fought the government for
greater autonomy.
In March 2014 a peace deal was signed between the government and the largest of these
groups, the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. However, not all of the rebel groups in
Mindanao and Sulu archipelago have signed the deal, and clashes in early 2015 highlight
the challenges associated with this long and protracted conflict.
It is difficult to know the total number of people who have been affected by the conflicts
in the Philippines, but it is often estimated at 150,000. Natural disasters have contributed
to the displacement of many more.
A central pillar of the national medium-term development plan, Philippine
Development Plan 2011-16, is the peace and security section, which outlines the
importance to the economy and society of tackling internal and external threats,
which include armed conflicts, human trafficking and terrorism.
The plan sets out strategies for finding solutions to these difficult issues via a
twin-track approach combining a negotiated political settlement on the one hand,
and accelerated development to tackle the underlying causes of the issues on the
other. The plan constitutes a new social contract between the state and the
people, with peace and security an important element of this contract. In this, the
government pledges to exert all its efforts towards achieving these aims, with the
peace process aimed at arriving at the negotiated political settlement of all armed
conflicts.

INTERNAL CONFLICT: Parts of the country have been racked with internal conflict
for decades, with the southern part of the archipelago, particularly the region of
Mindanao, a hotspot of fighting between security forces and groups such as the
separatist Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF). Elsewhere, groups such as the
Communist Party of the Philippines-New People’s Army-National Democratic Front
(CPP-NPA-NDF) and the Rebolusyonaryong Partido ng Manggagawa-
Pilipinas/Revolutionary Proletariat Army/Alex Boncayao Brigade (RPMP/RPA/ABB)
have also engaged in armed conflict. Thus, completion of the implementation of
final peace agreements with the Cordillera People’s Liberation Army, an
indigenous separatist group which is aligned with the CPP and NPA in Luzon, is a
key element of the plan, as is completing the tripartite implementation review of
the 1996 final peace agreement with the Moro National Liberation Front, from
which MILF split off in the 1980s. In late 2011, talks resumed between the
government and the MILF in Malaysia, with high hopes of reaching a settlement in
2012.

The root causes of conflict also have to be addressed. The plan calls for the
implementation of corresponding development tracks to address the causes of
armed conflicts via conflict prevention and peace-building initiatives. These
conflicts inflict considerable direct and indirect damage to the fabric of Filipino
society in areas of fighting as well as peace. They negatively affect the delivery of
basic services to the conflict-affected areas (CAAs), and create development
inequality between CAAs and the rest of the country. Widely seen as key to
moving forward here is the Payapa at Masaganang Pamayanan (PAMANA), or
Peaceful and Resilient Communities programme. This aims to focus development
in CAAs by strengthening peace building, reconstruction and development. Under
PAMANA, the government aims to ensure that improved basic services are
delivered to CAAs and that citizens are served by accountable and responsive
governance.

SECURITY IMPROVEMENTS: The plan also looks at external security challenges.

These include terrorism, smuggling and trafficking in humans, drugs and arms.
The strategy calls for greater efforts to safeguard the country’s maritime interests
in particular, with a special focus on the 322-km exclusive economic zone, which
has seen some ongoing disputes with China, in particular, concerning overlapping
claims in the South China Sea, also known locally as the West Philippine Sea. The
Philippines wishes to amplify its maritime security capabilities, while also seeking
a peaceful and negotiated solution. In addition, the plan hopes to address the
issue of human trafficking by implementing more robust policing of the nation’s
borders, which will be improved by strictly enforcing immigration laws and
upgrading the country’s maritime surveillance capacity. Furthermore, the plan
aims to cultivate external security by strengthening bilateral relations with powers
such as the US and Japan, and multilaterally by expanding participation in UN
peace operations.

The year ahead will thus likely see the government continuing to make efforts to
negotiate solutions to armed conflicts at home and head off tensions abroad via
constructive dialogue and development initiatives.

*https://peacekeeping.un.org/en/security-sector-reform

Security means different things to each of us. Transforming security

institutions to prevent and respond to violence requires giving women and
men a voice in articulating security needs, and ultimately fosters popular
trust in state services and sustainable development.

The security landscape in every country is a reflection of history, culture, political, socio-economic
conditions and experiences. The United Nations assists Member States to undertake security sector
reform with a view to achieving effective and accountable security for the State and its citizens, without
discrimination and with full respect for human rights and the rule of law. The United Nations pursues a
coordinated and comprehensive approach to security sector reform, anchored in principles endorsed by
Member States, across the spectrum of peacekeeping, peacebuilding and development settings.
Security sector reform: the vision of Member States

In its first thematic resolution on security sector reform 2151(2014), the United Nations Security Council
reiterates the centrality of national ownership for security sector reform processes. It encourages states to
define “an inclusive national vision”, informed by the needs of their populations and developed through
inclusive national political processes. The resolution calls for the integration of security sector reform into
broader national political processes, notes the importance of strengthening support to sector-wide
initiatives that enhance the governance and performance of the security sector, and calls for improved
monitoring and evaluation of security sector reform.

The resolution is indicative of the broad political support for security sector reform. Member States are
committed to improving the contributions and relevance of security sector reform to the wider
development agenda. Created in 2007, the Group of Friends of Security Sector Reform serves as platform
for Member States to deliberate on what collective actions need to be undertaken to shape and advance
the United Nations security sector reform agenda. The Group is currently co-chaired by Slovakia and South
Africa.

Preventing conflict, sustaining peace, fostering development:

why security sector reform matters

Security sector reform is an integral element of the United Nations sustaining peace and prevention
agendas. Where security sector reform has the necessary political traction and national ownership, it can
serve as an entry point for sensitive rule of law reform efforts, helping to fight impunity and thus restoring
the social contract on which stability depends.

Support for security sector governance and reform is both a preventive measure and a long-term
development goal. The United Nations supports security sector reform not only in peace operations, but
also in non-mission settings, in response to national requests, and in transition settings, where peace
operations are withdrawing but where ongoing security sector assistance is needed. In societies emerging
from conflict, security sector reform is a determining factor for the exit of a peacekeeping operation, early
recovery, sustainable peacebuilding and longer-term development. Security sector reform is a sine qua non
for sustainable economic and political development.

The security-development nexus is widely acknowledged. The reform of the security sector, particularly in
conflict-affected societies, creates an environment conducive to political and socio-economic growth. The
joint United Nations-World Bank study, Pathways for Peace: Inclusive Approaches to Preventing Violent
Conflict, notes that “security and justice institutions that operate fairly and in alignment with the rule of law
are essential to preventing violence and sustaining peace”.
Security sector reform at work

The Security Sector Reform Service, located within the Office of Rule of Law and Security Institutions of
DPKO serves as the United Nations system-wide focal point on security sector reform. Specifically, the Unit
(i) assists field operations and presences with mandates to support national security sector reform efforts,
(ii) develops normative documents and guidance, provides training to other practitioners and organizes
events on themes at the forefront of the security sector reform debate; and (iii) provides advisory support
to senior United Nations leaders, thus streamlining the implementation of a system-wide approach to
security sector reform.

Through the Security Sector Reform Service, the United Nations provides significant support to national
efforts on security sector reform. The complexity and scope of security sector reform mandates has also
evolved beyond “training and equipping” security providers to include interventions that address strategic
governance and management of the sector as whole, but also specific components, such as defense
sector reform.

Our work is organized around core themes set forth during the High-Level Roundtable on SSR and
Sustaining Peace convened by the United Nations Group of Friends of Security Sector Reform, notably
strengthening national ownership, regional engagement, gender-responsive security sector reform,
sustainable financing as well as coherence and cooperation.

The Security Council has issued security sector reform mandates that include a range of complex
undertakings, including the promotion of national dialogue, enhancing civilian oversight and public financial
management (Libya, Guinea-Bissau, Somalia), security sector governance, police reform, prison reform,
defense sector reform (Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Libya), capacity
building, establishment of national security coordination mechanisms (Democratic Republic of the
Congo,Libya, Mali, Somalia) to more context-specific areas such as border management (Mali) or maritime
security (Somalia) as well as cross-cutting issues, such as gender mainstreaming in the security sector.

Peace operations with a security sector reform mandate include:

• United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African

Republic (MINUSCA)
• United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (MINUSMA)
• United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the
Congo (MONUSCO)
• United Nations Integrated Peace-building Office in Guinea-Bissau (UNIOGBIS)
• United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS)
• United Nations Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL)
• United Nations Office for West Africa and the Sahel (UNOWAS)
• United Nations Assistance Mission in Somalia (UNSOM)
The Security Sector Reform Unit is capitalizing on the partnership with the Geneva Centre for the
Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF) to provide - via the International Security Sector Advisory
Team (ISSAT) - more effective and predictable responses to the needs of peacekeeping and political
missions in security sector reform and ensure overall coherence throughout the implementation of United
Nations Security Council Resolution 2151(2014).

Complementarity and integration: United Nations inter-agency

coordination

As part of broader efforts to foster system-wide coherence, the Secretary-General established an Inter-
Agency Security Sector Reform Task Force in 2007 to promote an integrated, holistic United Nations
approach to security sector reform. Its core functions are: developing sector-wide guidance; leading
regional partnerships for security sector reform; maintaining policy dialogue and consultations with
Member States and maintaining a United Nations roster of security sector reform experts.

The Inter-Agency SSR Task Force is co-chaired by the Department of Peacekeeping Operations and
the United Nations Development Programme and consists of 14 UN entities addressing different
dimensions of security sector reform processes in a complementary manner. Achievements of the Task
Force include the Integrated Technical Guidance Notes to assist security sector reform practitioners and
promote a better understanding of security sector reform; conducting assessments and programmes as
One UN and the establishment of the roster of experts.

Building coalitions: the regional dimension of security sector

reform

The United Nations has an important role to play in ensuring security sector reform processes are
nationally-led and adequately coordinated. However, the United Nations is neither the sole provider of
assistance, nor the most equipped actor in terms of capabilities. The legitimacy and effectiveness of the
United Nations approach to security sector reform depends on the extent to which it is informed by and
responsive to regional approaches. Transnational security threats, such as terrorism, organized crime and
trafficking of arms, drugs and people, are better addressed through regional cooperation. The United
Nations is partnering with the African Union, the European Union, the Organization for Security and Co-
operation in Europe and sub-regional organizations to harmonize approaches and improve joint delivery of
security sector reform assistance.