I.

Introduction

This paper will enlighten readers what is enforced disappearances and why is it one of the major
problem in International Law as violation of Human Rights. The crime of enforced
disappearances is making a massive impact in the society not just here in the Philippines but
worldwide. What is enforced disappearances? According to Article 2 of ICAED (International
Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance), For the
purposes of this Convention, "enforced disappearance" is considered to be the arrest, detention,
abduction or any other form of deprivation of liberty by agents of the State or by persons or
groups of persons acting with the authorization, support or acquiescence of the State, followed
by a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty or by concealment of the fate or
whereabouts of the disappeared person, which place such a person outside the protection of the
law.1 When people hear the term enforced disappearances they dont have that care at all, maybe
because enforced disappearances is not known by everyone, but this crime is absolutely serious.
Even I, it was my first time to know deeply what is enforced disappearance in my Human Rights
Class.
How does enforced disappearance emerge? Enforced disappearances was first recognized as a
human rights problem in the 1970s, when human rights lawyers in Chile noted that some of the
prisoners they were representing had dropped from sight and contact even though ostensibly they
continued to be held in custody by Chilean security forces. Disappearance is commonly
associated with the Latin American dirty wars of the 1970s and 1980sand especially with the
Southern Cone countries of Argentina and Chilebut the phenomenon is not limited to that
geographic region or that unique period of time. Guatemalan authorities disappeared political
opponents in the 1960s, and such geographically diverse countries as Philippines, El Salvador,
Sri Lanka and Syria have engaged in the practice. In 1980 the UNs Human Rights SubCommission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights set up a Working Group on
Disappearances as its first thematic human rights mechanism with a universal mandate. In 1992
the UN General Assembly approved a declaration on enforced disappearances and in 2006
finalized the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced
1 Committee On Enforced Disappearances, ICAED, available at
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/CED/Pages/ConventionCED.aspx

Disappearance. The 1998 indictment of Chiles General Augusto Pinochet revolved around
charges of enforced disappearance.2
In Chile, the systematic practice of disappearances lasted from 1973 to 1977, with about
1,300 people disappeared. That is in addition to the 2,000 people who were killed outright in
extra-judicial executions. The practice of disappearances was also taken up in Argentina at a
much larger scale and likewise lasted for four years, from 1976 to 1980. What was the rationale
for this practice? In both countries I believe the stance of the military rulers went more or less
like this: Our countries are sufficiently mature, and public opinion sufficiently sensitized, that
we cannot afford a parade of coffins or firing squads. Yet, these people are internal enemies. The
Cold War has moved into our backyard, and we are fighting an internal enemy. They are fighting
a dirty war, and we have to fight back with a dirty war. That was the feeling among the military.
In their view, the younger, the more intellectually prepared, and the more militant, the worse.
Such opponents were seen as irredeemable. Yet, because society would not accept a parade of
coffins, the rulers felt they had to kill those deemed as dangerous opponents and bury them in
secrecy, thinking that eventually their relatives would forget. Of course they had themselves
forgotten to read Antigone In fact, relatives never give up searching for their loved ones. And
especially mothers, from the essay of Jos (Pep) Zalaquett.3
Until now this enforced disappearance remains rampant and is hard to solve. States primary
responsibility is to protect its national from any kinds of violation on its rights. However, in the
case of enforced disappearance the State is the one liable if such violation is proven. The very
reason is that base on the definition of the convention the person in authorized by the State or the
agents of State are the perpetrator. The State and its government is the one being respected and
trusted by us, citizens but due to these kinds of violations people are more scared and lose trust
to the government and its agents. Political Conflict is one of the very reasons why enforced
disappearance cannot be eliminated. Due to political clash, self-interest of the people to be part
2 Human Rights Advocacy and the History of International Human Rights Standards, available
at http://humanrightshistory.umich.edu/problems/disappearances/
3 Proceedings of a Research Workshop Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy University of Michigan
October 2010, The Emergence of Disappearances as a Normative Issue Presentation by Jos (Pep)
Zalaquett

of the governing class, they tend to do things that will result to a violation of human rights in
order to protect their own self vested interest.
II.

Body

The United Nations has denounced the alarming number of acts tantamount to enforced
disappearances. As of 2014, the UN has been actively considering 43,250 cases of enforced
disappearance in 88 countries. Let me lay down cases of enforced disappearance in the world and
what really is the reason behind such crime. In 2014 report of Tunisia, since the time when
Tunisia ratified the International Convention on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced
Disappearance, no cases of enforced disappearance in the sense intended by the Convention have
been recorded. Moreover, as of the date of submission of this report, no decision had been
handed down by the Tunisian courts in three pending cases where the victims are suspected of
having been subjected to enforced disappearance under the former regime.4
The victims in these cases are:
Kamal Al-Matmati, disappeared since 26 November 1991;
Fathi Al-Wuhayshi, disappeared since 26 November 1996;
Walid Hasani, disappeared since 30 September 2009.5
In Mexico, The cases of Rosendo Radilla Pacheco v. United Mexican States before the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights and of Jess ngel Gutirrez Olvera before the InterAmerican Commission on Human Rights are among the most prominent cases of enforced
disappearance which have been reviewed in judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings by
international bodies.6
4 Consideration of reports submitted by States parties under article 29, paragraph 1, of the
Convention, Reports of States parties due in 2013 Tunisia, 25 September 2014, United Nations
ICAED
5 Ibid.
6 Consideration of reports submitted by States parties under article 29, paragraph 1, of the Convention,
Reports of States parties due in 2012 Mexico, 11 March 2014, United Nations ICAED

(a) The case of Rosendo Radilla Pacheco v. United Mexican States

This case concerns the enforced disappearance of Rosendo Radilla Pacheco, committed by
military personnel in August 1974 in the state of Guerrero. Following lengthy proceedings at
the national and international levels, this case was submitted to the Inter-American Court of
Human Rights, which decided in 2009 that Mexico was internationally responsible for
violations of the human rights of the victim and his family. The judgement involved three
fundamental issues: enforced disappearance, the jurisdiction of military courts and
conformity with treaties. Mexico is currently complying with that judgement and most of the
reparation measures have already been implemented. These include the public recognition of
the States responsibility, the publication of the judgement in the media, the holding of
ongoing courses and programmes to analyse the jurisprudence of the inter-American system
of protection of human rights in relation to the limits of military jurisdiction, the publication
of a brief biography of Rosendo Radilla Pacheco and the payment of compensation. That
judgement has served as a model for Mexico, providing the basis for structural reforms both
to combat enforced disappearances and to limit military courts strictly to offences against
military discipline not involving civilians.7
(b) The case of Jess ngel Gutirrez Olvera
Jess ngel Gutirrez Olvera was arrested on 14 March 2002 and his whereabouts are still
unknown. The case was submitted to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in
2003. The national authorities continued to investigate the case in parallel with the
international proceedings and on 30 June 2010 a person was proved to be criminally
responsible for the enforced disappearance of Jess ngel Gutirrez Olvera. It is noteworthy
that the criterion used by the national judge in considering the criminal offence of enforced
disappearance in this case was that, regardless of the legality or illegality of the detention, the
truly important aspect was that the offender intended to conceal the victims fate or
whereabouts. On 4 May 2012, when the merits of the case were being considered by the
Commission following discussions with the petitioners, an amicable settlement was reached.
Mexico undertook to provide reparations to the victims family in accordance with
7 Ibid.

international standards. The actions which have been carried out by Mexico include the
public recognition of its responsibility, the provision to the victims of prompt and free access
to health programmes and State programmes of psychological support and the payment of
compensation.8
Examples of case law where violations of the Convention were identified, the reasons for such
violations and the measures taken to remedy the situation. Through statements of case-law
doctrine (tesis jurisprudenciales), the Supreme Court of Justice has established that, in
accordance with article 8 of the Convention, the offence of enforced disappearance is a
continuing or permanent offence as long as the whereabouts of the victim remain unknown. It
has also decided that the period during which the prescription of the offence may occur begins
once the victim has reappeared or his or her fate has been established. The Court has decided that
the appropriate criminal proceedings and the penalty to be imposed on the perpetrator shall not
be subject to prescription. In other words, in cases of enforced disappearance, no authority may
decide that the period during which the offender may be brought to trial or certain proceedings
may take place has expired. Regarding the deprivation of liberty as a component of the definition
of the offence of enforced disappearance, the Supreme Court of Justice has stated that this
offence is committed at the moment when the victim is illegally detained and throughout the
period during which the detention continues. This was also in accordance with the provisions of
the Convention. The Supreme Court of Justice has reaffirmed the jurisprudence of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights, stating that the offence of enforced disappearance constitutes
a manifold human rights violation which makes the victim totally defenceless and that it is a
particularly serious offence when committed as part of a systematic pattern or is a practice
tolerated by the State. The Court further established that, since it is a serious violation of human
rights, family members must be given access to the results of preliminary inquiries and that the
confidential nature of the information may not be invoked to prevent this. It has also been
established that the victim or complainant is entitled to bring amparo proceedings against any
final not-guilty verdict in favour of the accused. The purpose of this is to enable the victim or
complainant to contest the constitutionality of the decision. In considering the Radilla Pacheco
case, the Supreme Court of Justice undertook to analyse the obligations arising out of the verdict
8 Ibid.

of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and decided that federal courts are required to
ensure compatibility with treaties ex officio. It also decided to implement administrative
measures, including the training of officials, to ensure that cases of enforced disappearance are
dealt with appropriately, with particular emphasis on the legal, technical and scientific elements
necessary for the comprehensive assessment of the phenomenon of enforced disappearance and
in the use and assessment of certain forms of evidence. Subsequently, the Supreme Court of
Justice stated that the offence of enforced disappearance affects not only the person deprived of
his or her liberty but also the victims family. It thereby complied with international standards in
this area, recognizing the legitimate interests of the family of the disappeared person.9
Statistical data on complaints and verdicts in cases of enforced disappearance: At the federal
level, the Office of the Attorney General of the Republic began a total of 99 preliminary inquiries
into cases of enforced disappearance between 2006 and 2013. Attorney Generals offices at the
state level initiated a total of 192 preliminary inquiries during the same period.10
In the Philippines, around 2,300 people remain missing since the 1970s when martial law was
declared in the country, according to the Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearance
(AFAD). In the past five years, 26 people were reported to have gone missing in the Philippines,
the first country in Asia to enact an anti-enforced disappearance law. But no perpetrator has been
convicted under the law. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon appealed to all member states to
ratify or accede to the legal instrument prohibiting enforced disappearances. The International
Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance affirms
unequivocally that the use of enforced disappearance is illegal under any circumstances,
including war, internal political instability or any other public emergency.11
9 Ibid.
10 Consideration of reports submitted by States parties under article 29, of the Convention, Reports of
States parties due in 2012 France, 21 December 2012
11 UN alarmed over increasing number of enforced disappearances, By Pia Lee-Brago (The
Philippine Star) | Updated September 1, 2015 - 12:00am,
http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2015/09/01/1494621/un-alarmed-over-increasing-number-enforceddisappearances

In the past year alone, the UNs Committee on Enforced Disappearances and the Working Group
on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances received 246 requests from family members across
the world to take urgent action. This figure is just a fraction of the thousands of cases that are
never reported either because of security conditions or because of a lack of knowledge of the
existence of international mechanisms that can help, Ban said. The Committee on Enforced
Disappearances and the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances called on
states to establish and activate protocols for the immediate search of disappeared persons, in a
systematic way, across the world. Experts from the two UN committees explained that the 246
recent cases of enforced disappearances that they had been working on over the past year are a
clear indication that this heinous practice is still used in a number of countries. Those cases are
only the tip of the iceberg of thousands that are never reported either because of fear of
reprisals or because of prevailing security conditions, they added. The lack of resources and the
insufficient awareness of existing international mechanisms are other reasons many cases of
enforced disappearances are never reported to the UN. The experts called on governments to take
action as soon as a case of disappearance is reported to the authorities and to implement all
necessary measures to seek and find the disappeared person and to avoid irreparable harm. UN
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon appealed to all member states to ratify or accede to the legal
instrument prohibiting enforced disappearances.12

HONG KONG MISSION FOR HUMAN RIGHTS & PEACE IN THE PHILIPPINES
Following reports of widespread and continuing killings of persons in the Philippines, concerns
have been growing around the world, including in Hong Kong. The information reaching the
international community concerning these events alleges that the killings, which appear to
specifically target left-leaning political activists, human rights defenders, members of the clergy,
students, lawyers and journalists, have caused hundreds of casualties in recent years, with the
problem continuing unabated at present. These reports have given rise to increasing concern on
the part of individuals and organizations in Hong Kong, leading to a desire to better understand

12 Ibid.

the problem and to inform Hong Kong society about these events, in order to lend a hand in
doing whatever is possible to bring about an end to these killings.13
Fact finding mission should be conducted by members of Hong Kong's civil society. The factfinding mission, which was held on 23 to 28 July 2006, and was entitled the Hong Kong Mission
for Human Rights and Peace in the Philippines, was designed to be multi-sectoral--comprising of
representatives from the various sectors that are being targeted by the killings, as listed above.
The mission was organized in order to add to efforts already being made by the growing global
campaign to stop the extrajudicial killings in the Philippines.14
The purpose of the Hong Kong Mission was to gather information on the extrajudicial killings
and abductions in the Philippines. The Hong Kong Mission spent the week travelling in Central
Luzon to conduct interviews with various government departments and officials, different nongovernmental organizations, and victims or the families of the victims who have been abducted,
killed or subjected to controversial prosecution by the State.
There was consensus among the NGOs that the killings were part of the government plan to rid
itself of the opposition parties or those considered to be in opposition to the Arroyo
administration. NGOs report that there is a pattern of a sharp increase in the number of killings
where there are military detachments.15
The civilian interviewees consistently described the perpetrators as having worn ski masks, and
camouflage or green garments. The killings described by the family members of victims or
witnesses were committed by using guns. Some interviewees were able to confidently state that
military men were responsible for the killings. All interviewees stated that those killed or

13 Extrajudicial killings & human rights abuses in the Philippines, Asian Human Rights Commission,
Hong Kong Mission for Human Rights & Peace in the Philippines, available at
http://www.humanrights.asia/resources/journals-magazines/article2/0505/extrajudicial-killings-humanrights-abuses-in-the-philippines

14 Ibid.
15 Ibid.

abducted had affiliations with parties or organizations that were labelled by the government as
communist or thought by the perpetrators to be associated with the New Peoples Army (NPA).16
The killings appear to be targeting anyone suspected of being a member of the NPA illegal armed
group. These suspicions, however, in many cases seem to be arbitrarily leveled against persons
from the legal 'leftist' political spectrum, without credible substantiating evidence being available
to confirm their involvement in any illegal and/or armed insurgent activities. It has been
suggested that these killings are being perpetrated in an effort to eradicate both the armed
resistance to the government as well as its legitimate political opposition. The implementation of
this alleged policy, which amounts to a grave violation of democratic principles as well as human
rights, is, according to many sources, attributable to Armed Forces General Palparan, who is also
known as 'the Butcher' in certain circles.17
While it was not possible for the fact-finding mission to ascertain beyond all possible doubt that
the state is responsible for many or all of the killings in the Philippines, as it cannot replace the
state institutions that are meant to conduct investigations and deliver justice, it must be said that
the problem of extrajudicial killings is continuing unabated and that the perpetrators are not
being brought to justice. The state is therefore, at the very least, failing to protect its citizens.18

The disappearance of Sherlyn Cadapan, Karen Empeo & Manuel Merino

Two student activists from the University of the Philippines, Sherlyn Cadapan and Karen
Empeo, were reportedly forcibly disappeared along with a farm-worker on 26 June 2006. The
two students were staying at a house in Purok 6, Barangay (village) San Miguel, Hagonoy when
armed men, believed to be from the military, forcibly abducted them. Sherlyn Cadapan was
pregnant at the time of the incident. One witness related that during the abduction Cadapan was

16 Ibid.
17 Ibid.
18 Ibid.

kicked in the stomach by one of her abductors. Empeo was reportedly blindfolded using her
own shirt after it had been taken off her by one of the abductors.19
When farm-worker Manuel Merino confronted the attackers to help the victims during their
abduction, he was also bound and abducted along with the two students. Witnesses relate that the
victims were seen being taken away by the perpetrators in a service vehicle bearing license plate
number RTF 597 in the direction of a nearby town in Iba, Hagonoy. The whereabouts of the
victims remain unknown to date.20
After reports of the incident surfaced, a local human rights group Alyansa ng mga Mamamayan
para sa Pantaong Karapatan-Bulacan (Peoples Alliance for Human Rights-Bulacan) immediately
formed a quick response team in an effort to locate the victims. They proceeded to the
headquarters of the 56th Infantry Battalion of the Philippines Army in Iba, Hagonoy, Bulacan
where they saw the getaway vehicle that had reportedly been used by the perpetrators. The quick
response team however was refused entry inside the headquarters. While they were outside, a
vendor asked them, Are you looking for the women? referring to the victims they were looking
for. The vendor, however, keep silent when the group said they are indeed looking for three
missing persons, of whom two were women.21
The military denied having the three persons in custody. However, the various witness
testimonies, which have identified military personnel as having abducted the three persons in
question, along with the presence of the vehicle used to carry out this act within the military
headquarters, point to the militarys involvement.22
A person whom the military allegedly illegally arrested but later released on 28 June 2006,
Alberto Ramirez, has claimed that Manuel Merino is being used by the military as a guide. The
service vehicle used in transporting Ramirez following his arrest had the same license plate
19 Ibid.
20 Ibid.
21 Ibid.
22 Ibid.

number as the vehicle used in abducting the three victims. Ramirez was reportedly taken to an
army detachment in Barangay (village) Mercado, Hagonoy, Bulacan. Upon his arrival at the
army detachment, Ramirez was asked whether he knew Cadapan and Empeo, which he
denied.23
On July 12, the UP Diliman University Council passed a resolution expressing concern with
regard to the abduction and disappearance of two of their students. Department of Interior and
Local Government Secretary, Ronaldo Puno, and Department of National Defense Secretary,
Avelino J. Cruz, were requested by the school authorities to help locate the two students.24
Despite these requests and concerted activities on the part of the families of the victims and
several human rights groups to find the three disappeared persons, their whereabouts and fates
remain unknown.25
The military has since reportedly stated that the two students were members of the NPA,
however the administration of the University of the Philippines has denied any such accusations
and confirmed that they were both students on its register. The Supreme Court of the Philippines
has also released an order for the military to release Empeo and Cadapan, but the military has
thus far taken no action concerning this order.26
The Conclusion of the fact-finding mission present in the Philippines for five days, In this
relatively limited time it was able to speak with a significant number of different actors in the
country, including members of the authorities as well as members of groups that are being
targeted by the killings. The purpose of the mission to the Philippines was to attempt to conduct
an impartial and unbiased investigation into the killings in order to establish the reality of the
situation first-hand.27

23 Ibid.
24 Ibid.
25 Ibid.
26 Ibid.

1. It is clear that there is a serious and continuing problem of politically-motivated

extrajudicial killings and forced disappearances in the Philippines
2. These killings are targeting persons from the left of the political spectrum and those
working in favour of human rights and the poor or marginalized sections of society;
3. The killings are being perpetrated in a fairly consistent manner, by armed, typically
unidentifiable men using similar modus operandi;..28

EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLING AND ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCE IN SOUTH

AND SOUTHEAST ASIA
In 1983, a group of prominent human rights personalities in Southeast Asia made a collective
plea to the Association of the Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) that in addressing public
emergencies the:29
Government

shall

not,

under

any

circumstances,

resort

to

or

authorize:

(a) Violence to life, health and physical or mental well-being of persons who are not or are no
longer combatants in armed conflict, in particular, murder, political assassination or extra legal
executions, kidnapping or unexplained disappearances, torture, mutilation or any form of
corporal punishment, use of so-called truth serums and other drugs, and slavery or other forms of
involuntary servitude. (Article XI [4] Public Emergencies)30
This statement, among others, reflected the prevailing situation in a number of countries in
Southeast Asia in the 1970s and 1980s. What were then known as political assassinations or extra
legal executions and unexplained disappearances are now termed by the United Nations as
extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances respectively. In the Philippines, extrajudicial
27 Ibid.
28 Ibid.
29 Extrajudicial Killing and Enforced Disappearance in South and Southeast Asia, Munty Khon, available
at http://www.hurights.or.jp/archives/focus/section2/2011/12/extrajudicial-killing-and-enforceddisappearance-in-south-and-southeast-asia.html

30 Ibid.

killing has been known as salvaging since the 1970s or during the period when the country was
under martial rule. A decade later, in 1993, Asian human rights organizations appealed to the
Asian governments to take urgent and effective action on a number of issues including
political repression by means of killings, disappearances, and torture.31
While changes in the political situation in many countries in South and Southeast Asia occurred
during the recent years, the overall situation of extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances
has hardly changed. Some reports illustrate the seriousness of the situation during the last
decade.32
Statistics from the Philippine Commission on Human Rights covering 2001 to 2010 period,
Graphs 1 and 2, show increased number of cases during the last five years.
Graph 1. Extrajudicial killings (Philippines)

Graph 2. Enforced Disappearances (Philippines)33

31 Ibid.
32 Ibid.
33 Ibid.

In Sri Lanka, the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances has
transmitted 12,230 cases to the Government; of those, 40 cases have been clarified on the basis
of information provided by the source, 6,535 cases have been clarified on the basis of
information provided by the Government, and 5,653 remain outstanding. In most countries in
South and Southeast Asia, extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances have been linked to
internal armed conflict or the anti-terrorism campaign. The 2011 report of the Commission of
Human Rights of the Philippines refines the list of perpetrators by identifying them in Table 5.34
Table 5. Perpetrators of extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances (2001 to mid2010)35

Perpetrators

Extrajudicial Enforced
killings

disappearances

Police

25%

13%

Military

38%

31%

Public Officials

---

1%

37%

6%

Civilians

---

14%

Unidentified

---

35%

Other armed
groups/insurgents

The 2010 report of the National Human Rights Commission of Nepal identified the perpetrators
of extrajudicial killings as security forces, members of the Communist Party of Nepal, and
others. The victims of extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances include a variety of
people including suspected members of rebel or insurgent groups, journalists, suspected
criminals, members of minority groups, political activists and ordinary people. In a number of

34 Ibid.
35 Ibid.

cases, human rights defenders have become victims, and also people suspected of being related
to the drug trade (in the case of Thailand).36
The cases of extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances have been reported in places
where active campaigns against terrorism or insurgency exist. This is seen in Balochistan in
Pakistan, southern Thailand, southern Philippines and other regions of the country with
communist insurgency, several regions in Indonesia (Aceh, Maluku, Papua and West
Papua), Punjab and Manipur states in India, and places where the Maoist movement was strong
in Nepal. But cases have also been reported along borders of countries like India and
Bangladesh, and other places where criminal acts are alleged to exist (as in the anti-drugs
campaign in Thailand).37
National counter-insurgency and anti-terrorism policies along with the culture of impunity
among state agents, weak laws, weak judicial system, and weak National Human Rights
Institutions (NHRIs) combine to create an environment for the perpetration of extrajudicial
killings and enforced disappearances. In many cases, enemies are identified and targeted for
disappearances (2001 to mid-2010) police or military action. However, the enemies are not
merely rebel or insurgent groups but also leftist organizations, trade unions and civil society
organizations (including human rights organizations), and journalists.38
As clearly seen, extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances are widespread in many Asian
countries due to both political and non-political reasons. Despite varying national contexts and
factors, extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances were most likely perpetrated by state
agents under the pretext of national security in an attempt to eliminate real and perceived
enemies,

and

intimidate

oppositionists

and

the

general

public.

Such systematic human rights violations can only be deterred by the political will of
governments in taking resolute action against them at all levels.39

36 Ibid.
37 Ibid.
38 Ibid.

ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCES REMAIN MAJOR PROBLEM IN ASIA

"Asia has the most number of cases of enforced disappearances around the world," said Mary
Aileen Bacalso, secretary general of the Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearance
(AFAD), on the occasion of this year's observance of the International Week of the
Disappeared.40
Among Asian nations, Sri Lanka accounts for 5,676 "reviewed and outstanding" cases of
enforced disappearances, while Nepal has 458, Timor-Leste has 428, India has 353, Indonesia
has 162, Pakistan has 99, Thailand has 71, China has 30 and North Korea has 20. "This is just the
tip of the iceberg because people are not reporting for fear of reprisals from authorities," said
Bacalso. A total of 43,250 cases of enforced disappearance in 88 countries were under active
consideration by the United Nations as of 2014. She added that "the biggest problem" in
monitoring disappearance cases is that governments frequently deny that the trend even exists.41
III.

Conclusion

Base on the cases and facts presented above, it is clear the crime of enforced disappearances in
the world is increasing. It is becoming one of the major problem in the International arena in
which the United Nations and other groups is trying to pursue that States should ratify and
become state parties to the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons of
Enforced Disappearance. Different study shows that state itself cannot do much on implementing
and making the law on enforced disappearance effective in their territory or jurisdiction. State
has a responsibility of protecting its nationals within and outside its national jurisdiction.
However, states, instrumentality and its agents becomes the one violating the law and causing
suffering to its people. Enforced disappearance cases prove that more and more persons in the
State authority who are trying to manipulate the circumstances by killing and capturing
individuals if it is in contrary to what they want and they believe in. Political conflicts are one of
39 Ibid.
40 Enforced disappearances remain major problem in Asia, available at
http://www.ucanews.com/news/enforced-disappearances-remain-major-problem-in-asia/73692
41 Ibid.

the major reasons why enforced disappearance worldwide occurs. As we see on the presented
studies and research of different people in the world, political issues plays important part in this.
It is hard to pursue and try to solve enforced disappearance because even the people in authority
in a State are the bad guys. Instead of approaching them for help, if you know that you are not on
its side better think twice, because this people in the government are the people trying to
command military, army, police by virtue of their office as higher ups to abduct, detain, kidnap
individuals usually activists, those belonging to parties not theirs, those organizations formed
with different belief and opposing belief with the government and persons trying to stop them
from monopolizing and stop them from doing harm due to their self-vested interest. I hope this
convention of enforced disappearance will be pursued and one day become legally binding in
order defeats the evil behind this enforced disappearance. The State authority must bear in their
minds that it is their job to protect their people; they are the ones bringing complaints to the
International Court if one of its nationals rights is violated by other states or other legal
personality. An individual cannot protect itself alone it needs these big entity which is the State
to make him feel secure or safe. The police, military or armies must be the agents of the State
that is tasked to safeguards people rights and not to violate such. Enforced disappearance as
major problem before and still growing today.

WORD COUNT PER PAGE:

Page 1

374

Page 2

435

Page 3

311

Page 4

380

Page 5

419

Page 6

397

Page 7

350

Page 8

379

Page 9

343

Page 10

314

Page 11

282

Page 12

261

Page 13

141

Page 14

257

Page 15

324

Page 16

378

TOTAL WORD COUNT = 5,345