MANILA, Philippines—A looming Supreme Court ruling notwithstanding, former president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo may appeal to the United Nations Human Rights Commission to be allowed to seek medical treatment abroad.
Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago raised this option for the former president on Thursday in the wake of the Department of Justice’s refusal to grant her an allow-departure order (ADO), and President Benigno Aquino’s subsequent offer to fly in specialists of Arroyo’s choice using taxpayers’ money.
Santiago was careful not to tackle the merits of Arroyo’s petition asking the high tribunal to allow her to fly abroad and invalidate the DOJ’s watch-list order against her.
But the senator, a constitutionalist, discussed the constitutional provision on a person’s right to travel, noting “any doubt on the meaning of the provision should be resolved in favor of the right to travel.”
“In Philippine jurisprudence, right to travel is a human right because it is included in the Bill of Rights,” she told the Inquirer.
“Preventing a person to travel might give her the right to petition before the human rights commission of the UN. It allows private petitions from individuals. It is also a human rights issue.”
Senator Joker Arroyo also zeroed in on Arroyo’s “human right” to travel, especially for medical purposes.
“Human rights are akin to Christian charity. The human body is inviolable. The Constitution prohibits cruel, degrading or inhumane punishment,” he said in a statement.
The senator recalled that in 1975, the President’s father, former senator Benigno “Ninoy” Aquino Jr., went on hunger strike to protest “abuses and excesses of martial law,” which was then in effect.
“When his fast was reaching the irreversible point, the martial law rulers got alarmed because Ninoy refused to budge. Ninoy’s military handlers brought the weak and helpless Ninoy posthaste to V. Luna General Hospital where military doctors nourished him back to health,” he recalled.
Senator Arroyo pointed out: “Even the hard-boiled martial law rulers, with blood in their hands, gave way to Christian charity and human rights concerns. No balancing of competing interests, no selective and arbitrary application of rules.”
Santiago noted that right to travel is a “constitutionally protected right,” and a person can be barred to leave only if his or her flight would be a threat to “national security, public safety or public health.”
“Since travel is a constitutionally protected right, the burden of proof is on the party who seeks to prevent travel. Therefore, the burden of proof will be on the solicitor general. He has to prove that if the applicant leaves the country, the Philippines will be endangered in terms of security, health or safety,” the senator explained.
Santiago added: “In the case of a particular applicant, the only way it can be proved that her departure will threaten national security is if it can be proved that while abroad, she might withdraw billions of pesos and fund a national uprising against the administration. That would be proof that the departure would be a threat to national security.”
Both the President and Justice Secretary Leila De Lima used “national interest” to justify the denial of Arroyo’s application to seek medical help abroad for her lingering ailment. Arroyo, 66, now a Pampanga representative, is suffering from cervical spondylosis. She is also afflicted with hypoparathyroidism.
Santiago explained: “You cannot invoke national interest because that is not included in the provision of the Constitution. That is not what the Constitution says.”
In refusing to issue an ADO to Arroyo, De Lima pointed out that most of the countries the congresswoman was planning to visit had no extradition treaty with the Philippines.
But Santiago downplayed the issue of extradition, saying the absence of which would not necessarily prevent the Philippine government from going after a fugitive from justice or a person with a pending case.
“If the applicant is accused of a non-bailable offense and there is no extradition treaty between her state of destination and the Philippines, her mere failure to return might result in a defeat of justice, but it will not be a threat to national security,” she said.
Santiago described an extradition treaty as a contract between nations to turn over a wanted person staying in the other state’s jurisdiction.
“It is not so simple to argue that if the applicant goes to a country that has no extradition treaty with the Philippines, there is no way of getting her back,” she said.
“The matter of extradition can be either contractual or political. This means that even if we have no extradition treaty with another country, if that country wants to extradite the applicant, there is no rule in international law that prohibits a country from extraditing a foreign national as an exercise of state sovereignty.”
“It’s not difficult to get a Filipino, unless, of course, there is an existing conflict between the Philippines and the other country, if the relationship is bad,” she said. “But otherwise, I don’t know what the big fuss is all about.”
Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III also assailed the Aquino administration for preventing Arroyo to leave the country when no charges have been filed against her in court.
A joint DOJ-Commission on Elections committee is still conducting a preliminary investigation into alleged fraud in the 2007 elections. Arroyo is accused of electoral sabotage.
“Before the government underscores the need to deliver justice, (it) should first start by observing due process. How can it accuse the person of such when (it has) not even filed formal charges in court?” Sotto said in a statement.
“It’s obvious that she needs medical attention. Why deprive her (the right to exercise) one of her basic rights, to choose her own doctor and seek the best medical treatment including options available outside of the country? Every person has a right to health and medical care corresponding to his state of health, without any discrimination,” he added.