Another case of ‘do-it-yourself’ justice
In all the stories emanating from the recent decision of the Office of the Ombudsman to revisit and reopen the case of Navy Ensign Philip Pestaño, insufficient mention has been made of the role played by Philip’s parents, Felipe and Evelyn, not only in keeping alive officials’ interest in the case, but also in securing justice for their son.
As Saturday’s editorial in this paper noted, “16 years and four months” have passed since the death of Philip, initially ruled a suicide by his superiors in the Philippine Navy, but which from Day One the older Pestaños had denied, citing credible and reasonable factors.
And yet, despite the many questions and findings that other agencies and the Pestaño family brought to light, casting doubt on the finding of suicide, the Office of the Ombudsman essentially sat on the case. Eventually, then Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez dismissed the case filed against 10 Navy officers, saying it was based merely on “circumstantial evidence.”
Still, despite the evidence of an active conspiracy to conceal the killing of Pestaño, and the indifference of many, the Pestaños continued to seek vindication for Philip. This is not the first time that the family of a victim—or accused—would fight a perceived injustice. Nor will it be the last. But the example set by the Pestaños gives hope to all those fighting on, despite the lack of support and even hostility of the agencies tasked to bring the perpetrators to justice.
The experience of the Pestaños (no guarantees that their fight is over) is a glaring example of what I’ve come to call “do-it-yourself justice” in this country. Although the law-enforcement agencies and the justice system (including the Ombudsman) are tasked primarily to go after criminals and mete out punishment, ensuring that these are done depends a lot on the commitment, gumption and resources of the family left behind.
* * *
Even during the investigation period, the family is often approached by police and detectives who ask for transportation or gasoline money to chase after suspects, or who dangle tantalizing “leads” and then ask for an allowance so they could pursue these leads.
Even if charges are filed, constant follow-up must be made to ensure the process proceeds apace. If the family leaves it up to the police, the case is bound to languish in the files, or else get lost in the shuffle. Sometimes, the family engages the services of a lawyer and even a PR person to keep the case in the limelight and to create the necessary “political will” to keep authorities interested.
It goes without saying, of course, that if the family doesn’t have the resources, or if family members eventually run out of gas (emotional stamina, determination, maybe even interest), then the case of their loved one will either go south or languish indefinitely in the “unsolved” files. This is another way of saying that for the poor, justice is too often elusive, and for reasons not of their own making. In a country of “do-it-yourself” justice, where the bodies we count on to enforce the law and bring the guilty to justice cannot or will not do their jobs, then it’s up to folks like the older Pestaños to keep knocking on doors and storming Heaven with prayers and petitions.
* * *
Reports issued by the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) on the work carried out by both international and local, and government and private agencies working in the “Sendong”-affected areas of North Mindanao illustrate just how complex and difficult the work of post-disaster relief, rehabilitation and rebuilding can be.
According to the latest OCHA report, the current estimate is that nearly 30,000 families in Cagayan de Oro and Iligan need to be provided with alternative shelter, a number which don’t include families “whose houses were not damaged but stand within the government-designated ‘no-build zones.’”
The report also points out an often-overlooked aspect of the disaster—“formal settler families” that likewise lost their homes (or lives of loved ones) but chose instead to stay in rented accommodations or stayed with host families like relatives or friends. They are hardly mentioned at all in official estimates.
* * *
Another overlooked aspect of this period is the need to protect the rights of women and girls and other vulnerable groups (like children, the elderly and the disabled) in evacuation centers and in the planning and implementation of rehabilitation projects.
Some 36,500 “extremely vulnerable” individuals have been identified by the “Protection cluster” and at this stage, efforts have focused on “community-based activities to help decongest evacuation centers, stabilize communities and find durable solutions, particularly those in remote communities, those additionally impacted by the on-going armed conflict and people with specific needs.”
The Child Protection sub-cluster targets another 200,000 vulnerable individuals, with the most glaring need being to “enhance the capacity of DSWD, local government units and others; protect children from abuse, exploitation and trafficking; support and assist in reunifying separated and unaccompanied children; and ensure safe-play and recreation areas are provided them.”
Mention is also made of the need to reduce the risks of gender-based violence in displacement and prospective return areas, particularly in “supporting capacity building within relevant government agencies” to make sure women and girls remain safe and protected even as they seek to cope with the challenges of their situation.
