Read on Twitter
A breakdown of (some) of the articles, legal documents, and research papers that may or may not apply to the current situation; #JusticeForWinstonRagos
a long thread;
a long thread;
DISCLAIMER: this is a thread made by someone with little to no legal experience, which is why there are only a few statements of interpretations here. take these how you want to take it.
!!! the hashtag is used for purposes of visibility.
!!! the hashtag is used for purposes of visibility.
DISCLAIMER: the documents do not take sides, but my interpretations will. read carefully.
*own interpretations/reiterations are denoted by ^^
this thread will also not outline the specifics.
*own interpretations/reiterations are denoted by ^^
this thread will also not outline the specifics.
Looking at the official online documents of the Philippine National Police (PNP), we would be able to dig out a PDF copy of their Chief of Police (COP) Manual, linked below:
http://www.pnp.gov.ph/images/manualsandguides/DHRDD/Chief-of-Police-COP-Manual.pdf
http://www.pnp.gov.ph/images/manualsandguides/DHRDD/Chief-of-Police-COP-Manual.pdf
The 8th Chapter titled "Miscellaneous Rules and Guidelines", outlines the Rules of Engagement in the very first listing, Listing A. There are 5 items in this listing that may apply, namely 1, 2, 3, 6, and 8. Item 5 may also be mentioned for thoroughness.
Item 1;
"The use of force/firearms is justifiable only by virtue of the Doctrines of Self-Defense and Defense of a Stranger."
"The use of force/firearms is justifiable only by virtue of the Doctrines of Self-Defense and Defense of a Stranger."
This means that using firearms shall be justified as a means of self-defense (or, irrelevantly, in the defense of a stranger). Some reading material on the details of this doctrine:
https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2562&context=facpub https://www.academia.edu/19410792/THE_DOCTRINE_OF_SELF_DEFENSE_IN_CRIMINAL_LAW_AN_ANALYSIS
https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2562&context=facpub https://www.academia.edu/19410792/THE_DOCTRINE_OF_SELF_DEFENSE_IN_CRIMINAL_LAW_AN_ANALYSIS
As stated in the 2nd Chapter of the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines which I shall simply refer to as "Justifying Circumstances", self-defense may only be claimed when three conditions are met:
src:
https://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/en/ph/ph034en.pdf
src:
https://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/en/ph/ph034en.pdf
This is further explained by the NDV Law Firm, which stated that the aggression shall only be unlawful if there is ACTUAL imminent physical force or ACTUAL use of a weapon.
src: https://ndvlaw.com/self-defense/
src: https://ndvlaw.com/self-defense/
^^
This does in fact mean that an individual SHOULD WAIT for an ACTUAL and CONCRETE usage of a weapon, and not act on mere speculation.
I will cut it short here; for a more thorough understanding, read through the documents.
This does in fact mean that an individual SHOULD WAIT for an ACTUAL and CONCRETE usage of a weapon, and not act on mere speculation.
I will cut it short here; for a more thorough understanding, read through the documents.
Item 2;
"The use of force/firearms shall be applied only as a last resort, when all other peaceful and non-violent means have been exhausted."
"The use of force/firearms shall be applied only as a last resort, when all other peaceful and non-violent means have been exhausted."
This item is self-explanatory; apprehending authorities shall only use firearms when ALL other peaceful and non-violent means have proven to be ineffective.
This is further documented in the Basic Principles of the Use of Force and Firearms (BPUFF):
https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/UseOfForceAndFirearms.pdf
This is further documented in the Basic Principles of the Use of Force and Firearms (BPUFF):
https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/UseOfForceAndFirearms.pdf
Item 3;
"Only necessary and reasonable force shall be resorted to and applied under the following circumstances:
a. self-defense
b. defense of a stranger
c. to subdue/overcome a clear and imminent danger"
"Only necessary and reasonable force shall be resorted to and applied under the following circumstances:
a. self-defense
b. defense of a stranger
c. to subdue/overcome a clear and imminent danger"
This is reiterating the previous concepts discussed, now only emphasizing that only the NECESSARY amount of force shall be applied. This is also further explained in the BPUFF:
Item 6;
"The police siren/megaphone shall be used to influence/warn offenders/suspects to stop and peacefully give up."
"The police siren/megaphone shall be used to influence/warn offenders/suspects to stop and peacefully give up."
^^
This is also self-explanatory; apprehending authorities are expected to warn the accused to stop and peacefully give up, most likely not necessarily through the siren or megaphone if unavailable.
This is also self-explanatory; apprehending authorities are expected to warn the accused to stop and peacefully give up, most likely not necessarily through the siren or megaphone if unavailable.
Item 8;
"Human rights shall be strictly observed and respected at all times."
"Human rights shall be strictly observed and respected at all times."
This is not a topic that someone like me is qualified enough to explain, even with research. If you'd like to know more about the human rights law, read these articles by the United Nations:
https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/
https://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/human-rights/
https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/
https://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/human-rights/
Mental Illness and Criminal Law; some reading material:
https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5749&context=uclrev
https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7406&context=jclc
^^
These documents attempt to define mental illness/disorders in the context of the law.
https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5749&context=uclrev
https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7406&context=jclc
^^
These documents attempt to define mental illness/disorders in the context of the law.
According to the Cornell Law School, Insanity Defense (ID) is a type of "excuse defense" that a defendant may plead to assert a lack of culpability or liability based on mental illness.
src:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/insanity_defense
src:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/insanity_defense
Another definition of ID comes the NCBI, deriving it from the idea that certain mental illnesses may interfere with an individual's capability to form "mens rea" - the intent to commit an act and have a desired consequence - as required by law.
src: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2993532/
src: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2993532/
Definition of Schizophrenia, according to the NCBI:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4159061/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4159061/
Other definitions of Schizophrenia:
https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/schizophrenia/index.shtml https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/schizophrenia/symptoms-causes/syc-20354443
https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/schizophrenia/index.shtml https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/schizophrenia/symptoms-causes/syc-20354443
If anyone else knows of good documents or articles for reading material, please feel free to share them. DO NOT reference social media posts that do not show analytical capability. If the articles/documents prove to lack liability, please tell me and attach proof. Thanks!
