{"id":143241,"date":"2018-01-03T00:16:15","date_gmt":"2018-01-03T05:16:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=143241"},"modified":"2018-01-03T00:16:15","modified_gmt":"2018-01-03T05:16:15","slug":"roque-slams-callamard-shes-not-an-expert-in-extrajudicial-killings","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2018\/01\/03\/roque-slams-callamard-shes-not-an-expert-in-extrajudicial-killings\/","title":{"rendered":"Roque slams Callamard: She\u2019s not an expert in extrajudicial killings"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"FILE:<\/a>
FILE: Harry Roque (PCOO PHOTO)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Presidential Spokesman Harry Roque on Tuesday questioned the qualification of Agnes Callamard as a\u00a0special rapporteur on extrajudicial killings for the United Nations (UN) when her expertise was on freedom of expression.<\/p>\n

\u201cItong si<\/em> Agnes Callamard hindi ko nga maintindihan kung bakit siya ay naging<\/em> expert on against illegal killing kasi kakilala ko iyan. Ang larangan talaga niya iyong<\/em> freedom of expression. So sige aaminin ko eksperto iyan sa<\/em> freedom of expression (This Agnes Callamard, I don\u2019t understand why she is an expert on against illegal killing because I know her; her expertise is on freedom of expression. So sure, I will admit that she is an expert in freedom of expression),\u201d Roque said in an interview with Super Radyo dzBB.<\/p>\n

\u201cDapat ang kinuha niyang puwesto<\/em> special rapporteur on freedom of expression dahil mayroon namang ganoon \u2018no. Pero para maging<\/em> special rapporteur siya ng<\/em> extrajudicial killing, hindi ko alam kung ano ang kaniyang<\/em> special qualification \u2018no <\/em>(She should have gotten the position of special rapporteur on freedom of expression since it exists. But being a special rapporteur on extrajudicial killing, I don\u2019t know her special qualification),\u201d<\/em> he added.<\/p>\n

Roque said it is Callamard\u2019s shortcoming that she could not go to the Philippines to conduct a probe on President Rodrigo Duterte\u2019s war on drugs.<\/p>\n

\u201cSiyempre iyong hindi siya makapasok ngayon sa Pilipinas para mag-<\/em>conduct ng<\/em> investigation, iyan ay patunay na palpak siya sa trabaho niya kasi inaway niya nang inaway ang gobyerno <\/em>(The fact that she cannot enter the Philippines to conduct an interview, that is a proof that she failed in her job because she keeps on fighting the government),\u201d<\/em> the spokesperson explained.<\/p>\n

\u201cHindi tuloy siya maka-imbestiga dahil kinakailangan magkaroon ng<\/em> invitation ‘no bago ka makapag-imbestiga<\/em>\u00a0(She can\u2019t conduct a probe because she needs to have an invitation before she can do so),\u201d he added.<\/p>\n

Last December 2016, Duterte invited the UN rapporteur to the Philippines for a probe but imposed some conditions: a public debate between the two; Duterte should be able to ask his own questions; and Callamard should be questioned under oath. The special rapporteur, however, refused to accept these conditions as it would break UN protocol.<\/p>\n

Roque also questioned Callamard\u2019s experience in the courts, as well as her research materials on extrajudicial killings. He said that Callamard did not appear before a court regularly to prosecute crime and murder cases, and that she doesn\u2019t have special research on extralegal killing.<\/p>\n

The Palace official unleashed a diatribe against Callamard after she defended fellow UN special rapporteurs Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, an expert on the rights of indigenous peoples, and Cecilia Jimenez-Damary, an expert on internally displaced people.<\/p>\n

Roque earlier told the two rapporteurs not to use their position to \u201cembarrass\u201d the Philippine government before the international community when they warned that the ongoing militarization in Mindanao had a \u201cmassive\u201d impact on the human rights of some Lumads.<\/p>\n

Callamard, for her part, retorted, \u201cI commend my fellow Special Rapporteurs, Victoria Tauli-Corpuz and Cecilia Jimenez-Damary, for implementing their mandates independently, impartially, accurately, and courageously. We will not be silenced by lies nor intimidated by anyone\u2019s bully pulpit.\u201d<\/p>\n

She also said that special rapporteurs are appointed by the UN Human Right Council as independent experts on the basis of their proven expertise and experience, stressing that they are not UN staff but volunteers who serve in their personal capacity and receive no remuneration.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe take on our roles with a pledge to uphold independence, efficiency, competence and integrity and to act with probity, impartiality, honesty and in good faith. When public officials choose fiction over fact, you can be sure they have much to hide,\u201d Callamard said.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Presidential Spokesman Harry Roque on Tuesday questioned the qualification of Agnes Callamard as a\u00a0special rapporteur on extrajudicial killings for the …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":33,"featured_media":131481,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1145,16,95],"tags":[12649,11147,31681,41458],"class_list":["post-143241","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-headline","category-news","category-news-ph","tag-agnes-callamard","tag-extrajudicial-killings","tag-presidential-spokesman-harry-roque","tag-qualifications","mauthors-joanna-belle-deala","mauthors-philippine-canadian-inquirer"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/143241","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/33"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=143241"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/143241\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/131481"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=143241"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=143241"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=143241"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}