Part 2 of 2 reports

MANILA – Loved ones of the disappeared wait, holding photographs of their missing loved ones. They have long called on the government to ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons Against Enforced Disappearance (ICPED), the only core human rights treaty that the Philippines has not ratified. Yet, their demand has fallen on deaf ears.

“They told us that there is already a law in place. But we have repeatedly told them: it does not work,” said Edith Burgos, mother of disappeared activist Jonas Burgos and the chairperson of International Coalition Against Enforced Disappearances (ICAED), in an interview with Bulatlat. She has been searching for Jonas for almost 20 years.

The Philippine government reported to the United Nations that the ratification of ICPED is redundant. Specifically, it said: “Considering that domestic mechanisms take precedence over international instruments, we deem the ratification of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons Against Enforced Disappearance redundant as its aim is already fulfilled by existing legislations.”

However, the Philippines has also been repeatedly tagged by the international watchdogs as a hotspot for enforced disappearance. In the Southeast Asia, the World Organization Against Torture (OMCT) said that enforced disappearance is a crisis of impunity, citing the Philippines as an example. 

Human rights group Karapatan recorded more than 1,900 cases since the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos Sr. Under the administration of his son, Ferdinand Marcos Jr., there are 15 victims who have not yet surfaced.

Burgos said that the numbers could be conservative estimates since there are more cases unreported and undocumented due to absence of witnesses, the fear of retaliation, and some previous victims have already surfaced.

Most recently, United Nations (UN) Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression Irene Khan recommended in June 2025, during the 59th session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva, that the Philippine government ratify the convention in light of its history and persistent impunity in the country.

“The ratification of the convention, in many ways, compliments the national legislation and in fact, can help ensure its full implementation and strengthen it,” said Signe Poulsen, senior human rights adviser of the UN High Commissioner in Human Rights, in a separate interview with Bulatlat. “The two should not have been seen as redundant.”

Based on the monitoring of the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) the following UN treaty bodies called for the ratification of the ICPED:

• Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in 2025 and 2016.
• Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women in 2023 and 2016
• Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination in 2023.
• Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families in 2023.
• Committee on the Rights of the Child in 2022.
• Committee against Torture in 2016 and 2019.

Aside from these international mechanisms and the families, the Manila-based embassies of Germany and France have also called on the Philippine government to ratify the convention in May 2024 for the government’s failure to utilize the existing law.

Problem with the law

The Anti-Enforced Disappearance Law was enacted in 2012, first of its kind in Southeast Asia, which defines and penalizes the crime of enforced disappearance. However, there has been no conviction yet under the law. In addition, there is still no budget allocated for its implementation.

Read: 13 years on, still no budget for CHR to implement anti-enforced disappearance law

“The law failed to seek justice for the victims and put an end to this vicious practice. There is zero success to this law,” Burgos said. “Yet, on the contrary, they use the presence of this law as an excuse for not acceding to the ICPED.”

In an earlier story of Bulatlat, search and human rights investigations of enforced disappearance do not always result in conviction because there is a problem with the cooperation and due diligence supposedly mandated to state security forces. Bulatlat recorded several cases wherein state forces failed to comply with the certification of inquiry as delineated in the section 8 of the Anti-Enforced Disappearance Law.

Read: Search, investigations of disappeared activists marred by impunity and lack of state cooperation

“Certifications are meant to be urgent for us to immediately cross out areas,” said human rights lawyer Sol Taule, deputy-secretary general of Karapatan. “There were instances when we went to the head office of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and they refused to sign certifications. They should know this law.”

Aside from section 8 of the law, Taule emphasized more sections that are not properly enforced based on the search and fact-finding missions they conducted to find the victims: the right of access to communication (sec. 6), updated list of detention facilities and the list of detainees (sec 10 and 11), prohibition of secret detention places, solitary confinement, and incommunicado (sec. 2), and immediate issuance and compliance of protective writs (sec. 12).

These violations include the abduction of environmental activists Jhed Tamano, Jonila Castro, Eco Dangla, and Jak Tiong. The survivors of enforced disappearance were all held incommunicado and were prohibited to communicate with their families, legal counsel, and human rights organizations. They also experienced physical and psychological torture and terrorist-tagging from the state forces before and after their abduction. They had to fight tooth and nail in the courts just to acquire protective writs. 

Castro and Tamano also experienced legal retaliation from the state security forces through the resolution ordered by the Department of Justice (DOJ) for exposing the lies to present them as rebel surrenderers by the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC). This is ironic since the DOJ is a lead agency of the Administrative Order 35, a government mechanism established to handle cases of extra-legal killings, enforced disappearances, and torture. The Municipal Trial Court of Plaridel Bulacan dismissed the charges last June 4.

Read: Court junks defamation case against 2 environmental defenders

“We have won so many petitions for the writ of amparo. The Supreme Court or Court of Appeals would order the AFP to release the victim. It has been proven that they are in custody of the individuals, but then what?” Taule asked. “Instead of being penalized, we see the opposite. We see them being promoted to higher positions in the office. The impunity is really outrageous in these cases.”

For instance, the current national security adviser of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. is Eduardo Año. He was implicated as responsible for the disappearance of Jonas Burgos. Back then, he was the chief of Intelligence Service Group (ISG) of the Philippine Army. Edith Burgos tried to contest Año’s promotion for many years, but again, it was never recognized. He became the commanding general of the 10th Infantry Division and head of the Armed Forces of the Philippines.

Read: Timeline | The Search for Jonas Burgos

The ratification of ICPED

For Josiah David Quising, program manager of Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances (AFAD), the ratification of ICPED would add another layer of accountability for enforced disappearance. In the Southeast Asia region, only two countries have ratified the convention: Cambodia and Thailand.

“If we look at the Anti-Enforced Disappearance Law, it still depends on the operations of the government; all the authorities have to do is deny. After the denial, that’s it,” said Quising. “If we ratify this, the Philippines will have to report to a higher institution. It carries that level of commitment.”

The Convention is governed by the Committee on Enforced Disappearances (CED), a body composed of experts elected by state parties. The committee wields significant authority: it can scrutinize state-submitted reports (Article 29), carry out country visits to assess compliance (Article 33), and even launch independent investigations into alleged violations (Article 34). 

Quising added that ratification would bind the Philippines to this process, compelling the government to submit regular reports and demonstrate concrete measures taken to uphold the convention: subjecting the state to a level of external scrutiny it has long resisted.

“I would appeal to any administration, but especially one that portrays itself as improving human rights in some ways, that ratification of the ICPED would send a clear message and an important step forward for the Philippines,” said Poulsen in her position as UN senior adviser. “It would signal a commitment to rule of law, not only in the ASEAN region, but even globally.”

She also supports the ongoing call of the families for the enactment of the Human Rights Defenders Protection Act in the legislative chambers. Since victims of enforced disappearance are human rights defenders, Poulsen added there is a need to strengthen the legal recognition and protection of such actors especially that criminal cases filed by the government against human rights defenders is becoming a major concern.

“There is an important role of the human rights defenders here, and that includes environmental defenders, humanitarian workers, faith-based organizations, and journalists. All those are part of the infrastructure of human rights that is needed to raise concerns whey they do emerge,” Poulsen added.

The ongoing impunity and the continuing failure of the Philippine government to enforce the law, as noted by Amnesty International – Philippines, makes it easier for state forces to harass, attack, and red-tag human rights defenders, development workers, and members of the press.

Since 2008, the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) has repeatedly urged the Philippine government to ratify the convention, issuing position papers and holding dialogues to bridge state authorities and civil society groups. Yet progress has stalled. In an interview with Bulatlat, the CHR lamented that “the challenges remain the same, but the cases are increasing. You have the law, but nothing’s really moving.”

“In the legislative, you also need a human rights champion. There are parliamentarians that would like to take this on, but then of course, the political situation has numerous alliances and affiliations. That’s a struggle,” CHR noted. “We have seen that in the Human Rights Defenders Bill in 2019. It lapsed. We have to start almost from scratch again. It’s similar here.” 

In the burden of the families

“I share the same frustration and the same grief of the families,” said Gabrielle “Chuwaley” Capuyan, daughter of disappeared Igorot activist Dexter Capuyan. “It was our family who had to do the investigation. The burden of the investigation had fallen on us. It was us who had gone to several military camps, the families themselves, in search of our loved ones.”

This is not an isolated case. The Burgos family had to do it on their own ever since the administration of Gloria Arroyo. Now, it is still a continuing burden for families: the De Jesus family in search of Gene Roz Jamil “Bazoo” De Jesus, Ruth Manglalan in search of her spouse Elizabeth “Loi” Magbanua, the daughters of Felix Salaveria Jr. in search of his whereabouts, and the brimming courage of Cora Jazmines to find her husband James Jazmines, among many other cases spanning across administrations.

Gabrielle added, “Part of loving my father is continuing to search for him. Part of loving my father is knowing to not let go of hope. One day, those that have loved him will face the consequences.”

The courage of the families to find their loved ones and their transformation as human rights defenders are critical to ensure an ongoing campaign for enforced disappearance. Desaparecidos, a group of families and friends of victims of enforced disappearance, has a different way of seeing justice: To not merely strive for closure and restitution but in transforming grief to act and participate in the fight against social injustice.

“From what we’ve seen and gone through in all the searches, it’s really the families or relatives who, despite the fear, are the bravest when it comes to looking for their missing loved ones,” said Ma. Cristina Guevarra, secretary-general of Desaparecidos. “It is through their courage that we are able to find leads and productive gains in our campaigns.”

Relatives of the missing said that even as the disappearances continue, they hold on to the small hope that one day their loved ones will be found. Guevarra emphasized that at times, there are some stories that reveal a quiet acceptance of never seeing their loved ones again. “But they continue to speak out, not because of their personal loss, but to prevent others from suffering the same fate. They stressed that these cases were carried out by the state, making it all the more urgent to demand accountability and speak out.”

JL Burgos, brother of Jonas Burgos and the film director of Alipato at Muog, renewed his call for the ratification of ICPED right after their documentary won Best Picture and Best Director in the 73rd Filipino Academy of Movie Arts and Sciences (FAMAS) Awards.
“We need your help to amplify the call for the ratification of this convention,” said JL in an open letter. “Enforced disappearance is the gravest human rights violation. Victims are removed from the protection of the law and deprived of liberty, constantly under threat of the worst forms of torture and even death. But it is not only the victims who suffer—their families, friends, and entire communities are left in anguish and despair, enduring a lifetime of pain and torture.” (DAA)

Part 1: Search, investigations of disappeared activists marred by impunity and lack of state cooperation