I. United Nations’ mandate to look into the Philippines.

The Philippine Government signed into the Declaration of the United Nations on June 10 1942,
adhering to the policies and mandates of the United Nations in exchange for the benefits that
the United Nations also entails. Moreover, the Philippines has been signatories to various
treaties targeted to protecting the human rights of its citizens. Treaties such as:

Universal Declaration of Human Rights – Adopted December 10 1948

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights – Signed December 19 1966

International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights – Signed December 19 1966

Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment – ratified
June 18 1968.

Thus, entailing that the Philippines be held accountable to the United Nations with regards to
their actions under these treaties.

The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) represents
the world’s commitment to upholding the sanctity of human rights and human dignity. The
OHCHR works with the United Nations Human Rights Council in engaging the Special
Procedures.

The United Nations Human Rights Council is the arm of the United Nations that functions to
promote and monitor human rights worldwide, thus establishing the special procedures. These
special procedures are individuals or groups of independent human rights experts tasked to
report or advise in human rights issues. Special procedures have various mandates that are
categorized under either thematic or country specific mandates, their combined work
encompasses civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights. In the process of carrying out
their mandates, the special procedure may:

 undertake in-person country visits to assess human rights violations,

 communicate directly with States on alleged human rights violation by sending urgent appeals
or letters of allegation,
 make recommendations to States for preventing, ending, or remedying violations,
 convene expert consultations,
 conduct thematic studies,
 raise awareness of human rights issues,
 provide advice for adherence to human rights standards,
 receive information from individuals and civil society,
 engage in advocacy, and
  contribute to the overall development of human rights standards.

After the assessment of the specific human rights situation, the special procedure may report
their finding to the Human Rights Council or the UN General Assembly and release a public
statement to the media. The Philippines, being signatories to various human rights treaties is
also subject to the United Nations’ special procedures.

Mandates of the Special Rapporteur based on the Human Rights Council Resolution 28/16:
  
(a ) To gather relevant information, including on international and national frameworks, national
practices and experience, to study trends, developments and challenges in relation to the right to
privacy and to make recommendations to ensure its promotion and protection, including in connection
with the challenges arising from new technologies;  

(b ) To seek, receive and respond to information, while avoiding duplication, from States, the United
Nations and its agencies, programmes and funds, regional human rights mechanisms, national human
rights institutions, civil society organizations, the private sector, including business enterprises, and any
other relevant stakeholders or parties;  

(c ) To identify possible obstacles to the promotion and protection of the right to privacy, to identify,
exchange and promote principles and best practices at the national, regional and international levels,
and to submit proposals and recommendations to the Human Rights Council in that regard, including
with a view to particular challenges arising in the digital age;  

(d ) To participate in and contribute to relevant international conferences and events with the aim of
promoting a systematic and coherent approach on issues pertaining to the mandate;  

(e) To raise awareness concerning the importance of promoting and protecting the right to privacy,
including with a view to particular challenges arising in the digital age, as well as concerning the
importance of providing individuals whose right to privacy has been violated with access to effective
remedy, consistent with international human rights obligations; 

(f) To integrate a gender perspective throughout the work of the mandate; 

(g) To report on alleged violations, wherever they may occur, of the right to privacy, as set out in article
12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, including in connection with the challenges arising from new technologies, and to draw
the attention of the Council and the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to situations
of particularly serious concern; 

(h) To submit an annual report to the Human Rights Council and to the General Assembly, starting at the
thirty-first session and the seventy-first session respectively.
 Under the Item IV – thematic issues and working methods of the Twenty-third Annual Meeting
of special rapporteurs, representatives, independent experts and chairpersons of working
groups of the Human Rights Council:

During country visits, special procedures mandate holders of the United Nations Human Rights
Council, as well as United Nations staff accompanying them, should be given the following
guarantees and facilities by the Government that invited them to visit its country:

(a) Freedom of movement in any part of the country, including facilitation of transport, particularly to
restricted areas;

(b) Freedom of inquiry, in particular as regards:

(i) Contacts with central and local authorities of all branches of government;
(ii) Private contacts with representatives of civil society, including nongovernmental
organizations, other private institutions and the media;
(iii) Confidential and unsupervised contact with witnesses and other private persons, including
persons deprived of their liberty, considered necessary to fulfil the mandate of the mandate holder;
(iv) Access to all prisons, detention centres and places of interrogation as considered necessary
by the mandate holder to fulfil his or her mandate; and
(v) Full access to all documentary materials relevant to the mandate;

(c) Assurance by the Government that no person or group of persons, whether acting in their official or
individual capacities, who cooperate, seek to cooperate, or have cooperated with the mandate holder
in relation to the mandate, will for this reason suffer intimidation, threats, harassment or punishment,
be subjected to judicial proceedings or to any other kind of reprisals by any means whatsoever;
assurance that any measures that could deter such cooperation or be perceived as such, will be
avoided. These assurances should apply before, during and after the conduct of country visits.
(d) Appropriate security arrangements without, however, restricting the freedom of movement and
inquiry referred to above;

(e) Extension of the same guarantees and facilities mentioned above to the appropriate United Nations
staff who will assist the special procedures mandate holder before, during and after the visit.

II. Complementarity principle

However, the United Nations does not intervene on every situation when a violation arises, the
principle of complementarity allows the UN bodies to work with domestic bodies in achieving a
common good. With this, before a UN body may intervene, the body provides the national
jurisdiction to take actions in holding the violators accountable prior to any intervention.
However, when national jurisdictions are either genuinely unwilling or unable to do so, an
international body may intervene.
The concept of complementarity is highlighted in the preamble of the International Criminal
Court in which the ICC aims to recall that it is the duty of every State to exercise jurisdiction
over those responsible for their crimes and also emphasizing that the International Criminal
Court established under this statute shall be complementary to the national jurisdictions.

This concept was also discussed in the The United Nations’ Press Release L/2771:

19960401   The proposed international criminal court should only exercise jurisdiction over
criminal cases where national jurisdiction was either non- existent or ineffective, the
Preparatory Committee on the Establishment of the Court was told this morning, as it began
considering the question of complementarity between the court and national jurisdictions.
By the principle of complementarity, neither the national nor the international criminal
jurisdiction is meant to be subservient to the other. The principle is set out in the preamble of
the proposed court's draft statute, which states that the court "is intended to be
complementary to national criminal justice systems in cases which those systems cannot
resolve".