Você está na página 1de 4

About the Commission

Who we are

The Commission on Human Rights (CHR) is an independent National


Human Rights Institution (NHRI) created under the 1987 Philippine
Constitution, established on 05 May 1987 by virtue of Executive Order No.
163.

The Commission is mandated to conduct investigations on human rights


violations against marginalized and vulnerable sectors of the society,
involving civil and political rights.

CHR is an “A” accredited NHRI, fully complying with the Paris Principles
adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1995. As an NHRI, the
Commission upholds six fundamental characteristics — independence,
pluralism, broad mandate, transparency, accessibility, and operational
efficiency.

The Commission commits to deliver prompt, responsive, accessible, and


excellent public ser vice for the protection and promotion of human rights
in accordance with universal human rights principles and standards.

HISTORY
The CHR was created as a response to the atrocities committed during
Martial Law. When the 1987 Philippine Constitution was drafted, Article
XIII on Social Justice and Human Rights clearly defined the creation of the
Commission.

“There is hereby created an independent office called The Commission on


Human Rights...
(to) investigate, on its own or on complaint by any party, all forms of
human rights violations involving civil and political rights ...”
(Sec. 17-18, Art. XIII, Philippine Constitution)

“I, Corazon C. Aquino, President of the Philippines... do hereby (declare)


the Commission on Human Rights as provided under Article XIII of the
1987 Constitution to be now in existence...”
(Executive Order No. 163)

The 1987 Philippine Constitution primarily gave CHR the mandate to


protect and promote the rights and dignity of every human being in the
country. The State values the dignity of every human person and
guarantees full respect for human rights.
(Sec. 11, Art. II, Philippine Constitution)

The Congress shall give highest priority to the enactment of measures


that protect and enhance the right of all the people to human dignity,
reduce social, economic and political inequalities, and remove cultural
inequalities by equitably diffusing wealth and political power for the
common good.
(Sec. 1, Art. XIII, Philippine Constitution)

VISION | MISSION | MANTRA


VISION
A just and humane Philippine society of persons equal in opportunity,
living a life of dignity, and forever vigilant against abuses and oppression.

MISSION
As conscience of government and the people, we seek truth in human
rights issues. As beacon of truth, we make people aware of their rights,
and guide government and society towards actions that respect the rights
of all, particularly those who cannot defend themselves — the
disadvantaged, marginalized, and vulnerable.

MANTRA
CHR: Dignity of all

Section 1(2), Article IX-D of the 1987 Constitution states:

(2) The Chairman and the Commissioners shall be appointed by the


President with the consent of the Commission on Appointments for a
term of seven years without reappointment. Of those first appointed,
the Chairman shall hold office for seven years, one Commissioner for
five years, and the other Commissioner for three years, without
reappointment. Appointment to any vacancy shall be only for the
unexpired portion of the term of the predecessor. In no case shall any
Member be appointed or designated in a temporary or acting capacity.
(Emphasis supplied)

The words without reappointment appear twice in Section 1(2) of Article IX-D, the
first time in the first sentence and the second time in the second sentence.

The counterpart provision in the 1935 Constitution uses the phrase may not be
reappointed and the phrase appears only once. Section 1, Article XI of the 1935
Constitution provides:

Section 1. There shall be a General Auditing Office under the direction


and control of an Auditor General, who shall hold office for a term of ten
years and may not be reappointed. The Auditor General shall be
appointed by the President with the consent of the Commission on
Appointments, and shall receive an annual compensation to be fixed by
law which shall not be diminished during his continuance in office. Until
the Congress shall provide otherwise, the Auditor General shall receive
an annual compensation of twelve thousand pesos. (Emphasis supplied)

To repeat, while the first sentence of Section 1, Article XI of the 1935 Constitution
contains the words may not be reappointed, the succeeding sentences do not. In
contrast, the words without reappointment appears in the first and second sentences
of Section 1(2), Article IX-D of the 1987 Constitution. This difference is pivotal in the
resolution of the present case.

The framers of the 1987 Constitution deliberately disallowed a situation where, in the
words of Commissioner Vicente Foz, the appointee serves only for less than seven
years, (and) would be entitled to reappointment, which was the case of Visarra v.
Miraflor, to the effect that x x x in cases where the appointee serves only for less
3

than seven years, he would be entitled to reappointment. To specifically implement


the rejection of the Visarra ruling, the framers intentionally added the words without
reappointment in the second sentence of Section 1(2), even though the same words
already appear in the first sentence of the same Section. This is the reason why the
words without reappointment appear twice in Section 1(2). Thus, the 1987
Constitution has an additional safety valve compared to the 1935 Constitution.
Thus, the framers of the 1987 Constitution added the words without
reappointment in the second sentence of Section 1(2) of Article IX-D precisely to
overturn Visarra, in particular the concurring opinion of Justice Bautista. The
foregoing exchange between Commissioners Davide and Foz clearly proves that the
framers specifically added the words without reappointment twice precisely to
foreclose the possibility of an appointee, who has served for less than seven years,
being reappointed to complete a seven-year term.

This Court can no longer resurrect Visarra because the 1987 Constitution itself has
rejected Visarra, particularly, in the words of Commissioner Foz, the concurring
opinion of Justice Angelo Bautista. In his concurring opinion, Justice Bautista
concluded that the appointment of Associate Commissioner Garcia to Chairman of
the Commission is valid. This Court has no power to undo what the framers have so
clearly written in the Constitution. To repeat, the framers of the 1987 Constitution
expressly rejected the Visarra ruling, in particular the concurring opinion of
Justice Bautista, and instead adopted the dissenting opinions of Justices Roberto
Concepcion and JBL Reyes.