BAGUIO CITY, Philippines 鈥� The Supreme Court has castigated Solicitor General Jose Calida for choosing which police reports on the killings in President Rodrigo Duterte鈥檚 brutal war on drugs to release 鈥渨ithout the knowledge of [or] consent鈥� of the tribunal.
鈥淭he undeniable fact that thousands of ordinary citizens have been killed, and continue to be killed, during police drug operations certainly is a matter of grave public concern,鈥� the high court said in a resolution dated April 2 and obtained by聽 the Inquirer on Wednesday.
In that resolution, the court, meeting here for its summer session, said it would not tolerate the Office of the Solicitor General鈥檚 arrogation to itself 鈥渙f the power to determine which documents鈥� to release to the families of victims of police killings in the drug war and their lawyers.
Release all documents
It again directed the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) to release all case documents it had promised to share with the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG), which challenged the constitutionality of the President鈥檚 controversial war on drugs.
Also entitled to these documents are lawyers from the Center for International Law (CenterLaw), who petitioned the tribunal in 2017 for a writ of amparo (protection) to shield 26 villages in Manila鈥檚 San Andres Bukid district against police drug sweeps.
The Supreme Court said it issued a similar directive to the OSG in 2018, and reiterated that 鈥渟ound factual and legal bases mandate the OSG to comply鈥� with the tribunal鈥檚 resolution.
In December 2017, the Supreme Court ordered the OSG to hand over the police reports on more than 4,000 killings in the war on drugs.
The OSG complied, but Calida opposed making the reports public on grounds of national security.
The court rejected his argument and ordered him to release the reports to the petitioners.
Uniform description
FLAG and CenterLaw received an initial batch of 29 reports, which they found to have a uniform description of the killings: the suspects resisted arrest and were gunned down by officers who had to protect themselves.
The justices鈥� April 2 resolution said Calida sequestered from the Supreme Court and the petitioners what he described as 鈥淐ategory I鈥� documents (covering July 1, 2016, to Nov. 30, 2017) that had serious impact on national security.
But the justices, reiterating their April 3, 2018, resolution, said the court had a mandate to protect and enforce the people鈥檚 right to information.
They said 鈥渢he requested information and documents do not obviously involve state secrets affecting national security.鈥�
The sequestered documents, the court said, 鈥渄o not involve rebellion, invasion, terrorism, espionage, infringement of our sovereignty or sovereign rights by foreign powers, or any military, diplomatic or state secret involving national security.鈥�
鈥淚t is simply ridiculous to claim that these information and documents on police operations against drug pushers and users involve national security matters,鈥� it said.