Does the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) have nothing to do but score the Duterte government, if not Duterte himself?
It certainly looks like it, as the same yellow CHR again cried “human rights” violation against the Immigration Bureau for having deported the Australian missionary Sister Patricia Fox, a foreigner. It also told the government to respect the rights of all people, including foreigners.
The CHR was quoted as saying the move to deport Fox violated her right to due process, noting the Bureau of Immigration (BI) arbitrarily forfeited Fox’s missionary visa last April after she was invited and taken into custody without proper charges.
From which alien planet does the CHR come, for this agency to even allege that Fox’s “human rights” were violated? The Australian nun was granted over and above her right to due process, so much so that it took too long a time for her to be deported as the BI first called her in for questioning and took her into custody overnight while evidence of her politicking — which is not allowed under the law for foreigners — was produced.
It will be recalled that Fox, supported by her Red, Yellow and White defenders, took all the legal steps available to delay her deportation, even when she and her defenders knew that she would have to leave the country, as she violated the terms of her missionary visa. Fox wasn’t talking God. She was talking non-Christian talk, telling the Red-stained protest groups to hit out at Duterte.
In all the years she spent in this country, Fox was so active in joining politically charged rallies against President Duterte and his government. She spoke at clearly red-tinged rallies despite knowing that she was not allowed to participate in such political rallies.
She and her defenders filed a motion for review by the Department of Justice (DoJ), which got her an extra 60 days in delaying her deportation. The DoJ remanded her case to the BI which took additional time for Fox to remain in the country.
Finally, the day came when the BI denied her an extension of her missionary visa. However, the BI even granted Fox a visitor’s visa which gave her additional days’ stay.
How then can the CHR even claim that Fox was denied her due process? Simply because the BI invited her for questioning and took her into custody? This just proves the partiality of the CHR and its members, for this agency to make this Fox deportation a human rights violation.
This also shows the pro-yellow political leanings of the CHR, given that in some other cases before Fox’s deportation case, a foreign parliamentarian was barred entry by the BI and quickly deported on the same day for his having been engaged in political activities against the government in the past. This is against the law in cases of any foreigner’s political actions against government.
That the CHR failed to raise a big howl over the denial of this European parliamentarian’s entry into the country already shows the CHR’s evident selective style of justice which is a characteristic of yellow officials who, fortunately, are no longer in power and position after a change of government.
The following facts prove the CHR’s bias against the Duterte administration:
When Sen. Leila de Lima, then the yellow President’s justice chief, barred former President now Speaker Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo from leaving the country despite the fact that the Supreme Court had granted her plea to leave the country for medical treatment, and worse, Arroyo had not, at that time, been slapped with any case.
And Leila’s illegal barring of a Filipino citizen despite the fact that she had neither authority nor power to stop Arroyo from leaving the country was never even commented on by the CHR.
So where was the CHR’s cry of human rights violation?
Today, this same yellow-stained CHR cries foul over Leila’s detention in prison, claiming, as their human rights comrades here and abroad do, that she is a “political prisoner” yet the CHR never called unconstitutionally ousted President Joseph Estrada’s detention in Camp Crame and later under hospital arrest, a political prisoner. Where was the CHR’s cry? Why, its members were with the yellows, calling for the ouster of Estrada.
Neither, for that matter, did the CHR and its local and foreign local human rights groups raise a cry and hue when three then opposition senators, Juan Ponce-Enrile, Jinggoy Estrada and Bong Revilla, all of whom were charged, arrested and detained for years, even when they were clearly detained on clear political grounds, as the yellow President and his then justice chief Leila, saw them as their political foes and a threat to their elections plan and ambition to hold power for decades.
Yet the CHR, despite its clear bias, stated that it “continues to remind the government of its human rights obligations to all persons in the country, Filipino or otherwise, in line with the human rights conventions it has accepted in the interest of upholding the dignity of all,”
With its history of bias against governments, one can no longer call this local human rights agency anything but hypocritical.