A UMNS COMMENTARY By the Rev. R. Randy Day
The United Methodist Board of Global Ministries joins with church leaders in the Philippines in the hope that its government will take seriously a report indicating that military personnel are responsible for a wave of political murders in recent years.
Estimates of those killed range from 111 to 724, and many were political activists, including clergy, who have sided with the poor in protesting both government and business policies since President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo came to power in 2001.
The Board of Global Ministries is pleased to take a major role in planning an International Ecumenical Conference on Human Rights in the Philippines set for March 12-14 in Washington. Additional information on the event is available at www.philippinesadvocacy.org.
The matter of human rights in the Philippines is of broad concern within the United Methodist family. We previously have joined with United Methodist and other Christians in the Philippines in calling for a government investigation and action to stop the killings.
Several annual conferences, including California-Pacific and California-Nevada, addressed the matter in resolutions at their 2006 meetings. A delegation from California-Nevada returned in February from a visitation of concern. Protection of human rights was high on the agenda of a group from the Desert Southwest Conference that visited the Philippines in December.
Denominational representatives went to Manila a year ago to stand in solidarity with United Methodist bishops and others calling for an end to the killings.
The report holds members of the Philippine armed forces responsible for the murders. It was drafted by a commission named last August under pressure by President Arroyo and headed by retired Supreme Court Justice Jose Melo.
The report was completed in January, but it took the intervention of the United Nations and demands from Philippine Christian leaders to win its public release on February 23. The Arroyo government at first refused to release the document-the findings of which are strongly rejected by the military.
We commend Dr. Philip Alston, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial Killings, for endorsing the Melo report and his efforts to win its release. We also note that some responses see the report as letting the Arroyo government "off the hook" by putting the responsibility on military personnel alone.
The Melo report leaves open the question of the number of civilians killed by the military. The report itself estimates the number between 111 and 136, but Amnesty International puts it at 244, and the Philippines human rights organization Karapatan says the total is 724.
While the military enjoys broad immunity in the Philippines, the Melo Commission said some officers could be culpable and even brought to trial, singling out retired Maj. Gen. Jovito Palparan as particularly vulnerable to charges. Some military leaders insist, in rejecting the Melo findings, that civilians were inadvertently killed in the process of defense against communist insurgents. The Melo report does not buy that argument.
The United Methodist mission board has watched and prayed as Protestant and Roman Catholic leaders in the Philippines moved to the forefront in demanding that their government protect advocates of economic and social justice. We commend their courage as they now urge government to heed the findings and recommendations of the Melo Commission.
The Melo report makes seven specific recommendations:
* Exertion of a political will "to do what is right however great the cost" on all levels of government * Prompt, impartial and effective investigations, conducted independently of the military, of all the killings * Naming a special prosecution team to handle trials in a safe venue * Effective protection of witnesses * Passage of a strict law on chain-of-command responsibility within the military * Enhancement of the investigative capabilities of the police and other law enforcement units * Proper orientation and training of security forces
The report cites approval of a 2006 Amnesty International report on the Philippines that includes a 14-point program to prevent what is known in legal and diplomatic circles as "extra-judicial executions," better known as "political murders."
These points include official condemnation, chain-of-command control, restraints on use of force, action against death squads, protection against death threats, no secret detention, access to prisoners, legal prohibition of such murders, individual responsibility and investigation of charges. (Day is chief executive of the United Methodist Board of Global Ministries. The report can be read in full ath ttp://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGASA350062006. Ed.mindanaoexaminer.com)
Showing posts with label United Methodist Church. Show all posts
Showing posts with label United Methodist Church. Show all posts
Friday, March 02, 2007
Tuesday, February 06, 2007
United Methodist High Court To Meet In Philippines By Neill Caldwell
The highest court of The United Methodist Church has a relatively short docket of 10 items - including reconsidering its complex decision on General Conference representation for the African nation of Cote d'Ivoire - but its meeting place may be the most significant aspect of this spring's session.
The Judicial Council will convene April 25-28 in Manila, Philippines, in the body's first meeting in history outside the United States.
As The United Methodist Church grows globally, various church bodies have held more meetings overseas. In recent months, for example, both its Council of Bishops and its Commission on Communications have met in Africa.
The upcoming Judicial Council meeting location stems from the 2000 election to the court of Rodolfo C. Beltran, an attorney from Cabanatuan City, Philippines. The first person from outside the United States to serve on the council, Beltran invited his colleagues to meet in the Philippines.
Two items on the spring docket come from the Philippine Central Conference. The first asks about clergy membership in an annual conference as it relates to the Central Conferences, which lie outside the United States. The second concerns the authority of a bishop when serving as a member of the board of a university.
On another international question, the Judicial Council will revisit its fall 2006 decision regarding the number of delegates that the Methodist Church of Cote D'Ivoire (Ivory Coast) can send to the 2008 General Conference, the denomination's top legislative body. Meeting in Cincinnati, the council let stand the 2004 General Conference vote to give Cote D'Ivoire just two delegates to the 2008 General Conference, set for April 23-May 2 in Fort Worth, Texas.
The representation deviates from the formula for representation outlined in the 2004 Book of Discipline which, if followed, would entitle the new African conference to as many as 70 delegates, making it the largest delegation at General Conference. If the General Conference sticks to its ceiling of 1,000 delegates, the size of other delegations would have to be reduced.
That issue remains in the air, however. In Cincinnati, a majority of four of the seven Judicial Council members present voted to hold the General Conference action unconstitutional.
However, Paragraph 2608 of the Book of Discipline requires a minimum of six votes to "declare any act of the General Conference unconstitutional."
In a dissenting opinion, the four council members - Beltran, Dennis Blackwell, Keith Boyette and Jim Holsinger - stated that the 2004 vote "denies a fully functioning annual conference duly created by the actions of the 2004 General Conference and the West Africa Central Conference its proportionate representation amongst the delegates to the 2008 General Conference. The General Conference, and now this Judicial Council, has acted in a way which substantially disenfranchises what statistically is the largest annual conference in The United Methodist Church."
One item left over from the council's fall meeting is a request from the United Methodist Commission on Religion and Race regarding the merger of the National United Methodist Native American Center with the Native American Comprehensive Plan. The commission seeks to reverse that move, which was recommended by the United Methodist Council on Finance and Administration. Its appeal is supported by the board of the Native American Comprehensive Plan.
Also on the spring docket, the council is asked to:
* Review a bishop's decision of law on the constitutionality of the plan of organization for the Baltimore-Washington Annual Conference; * Respond to a request from the Minnesota Annual Conference to define the term "urban center" in Paragraph 2548.7 of the Book of Discipline; * Review a bishop's decision of law in the Pacific Northwest Annual Conference on the authority of a district superintendent to require a pastor to take a leave of absence; * Review a bishop's decision of law in the New York Annual Conference concerning action of the clergy executive session on a pastor on administrative location; * Review a bishop's decision of law in the Rocky Mountain Annual Conference on the suspension of a pastor; * Review a bishop's decision of law in the Detroit Annual Conference concerning a bishop's power to insist that a full-time pastor live in a parsonage.
The Book of Discipline requires all bishops' decisions of law to be reviewed by the Judicial Council.
*Caldwell is editor of the Virginia United Methodist Advocate magazine and covers the Judicial Council for United Methodist News Service.
News media contact: Linda Green, Nashville, Tenn., (615) 742-5470 or newsdesk@umcom.org.
The Judicial Council will convene April 25-28 in Manila, Philippines, in the body's first meeting in history outside the United States.
As The United Methodist Church grows globally, various church bodies have held more meetings overseas. In recent months, for example, both its Council of Bishops and its Commission on Communications have met in Africa.
The upcoming Judicial Council meeting location stems from the 2000 election to the court of Rodolfo C. Beltran, an attorney from Cabanatuan City, Philippines. The first person from outside the United States to serve on the council, Beltran invited his colleagues to meet in the Philippines.
Two items on the spring docket come from the Philippine Central Conference. The first asks about clergy membership in an annual conference as it relates to the Central Conferences, which lie outside the United States. The second concerns the authority of a bishop when serving as a member of the board of a university.
On another international question, the Judicial Council will revisit its fall 2006 decision regarding the number of delegates that the Methodist Church of Cote D'Ivoire (Ivory Coast) can send to the 2008 General Conference, the denomination's top legislative body. Meeting in Cincinnati, the council let stand the 2004 General Conference vote to give Cote D'Ivoire just two delegates to the 2008 General Conference, set for April 23-May 2 in Fort Worth, Texas.
The representation deviates from the formula for representation outlined in the 2004 Book of Discipline which, if followed, would entitle the new African conference to as many as 70 delegates, making it the largest delegation at General Conference. If the General Conference sticks to its ceiling of 1,000 delegates, the size of other delegations would have to be reduced.
That issue remains in the air, however. In Cincinnati, a majority of four of the seven Judicial Council members present voted to hold the General Conference action unconstitutional.
However, Paragraph 2608 of the Book of Discipline requires a minimum of six votes to "declare any act of the General Conference unconstitutional."
In a dissenting opinion, the four council members - Beltran, Dennis Blackwell, Keith Boyette and Jim Holsinger - stated that the 2004 vote "denies a fully functioning annual conference duly created by the actions of the 2004 General Conference and the West Africa Central Conference its proportionate representation amongst the delegates to the 2008 General Conference. The General Conference, and now this Judicial Council, has acted in a way which substantially disenfranchises what statistically is the largest annual conference in The United Methodist Church."
One item left over from the council's fall meeting is a request from the United Methodist Commission on Religion and Race regarding the merger of the National United Methodist Native American Center with the Native American Comprehensive Plan. The commission seeks to reverse that move, which was recommended by the United Methodist Council on Finance and Administration. Its appeal is supported by the board of the Native American Comprehensive Plan.
Also on the spring docket, the council is asked to:
* Review a bishop's decision of law on the constitutionality of the plan of organization for the Baltimore-Washington Annual Conference; * Respond to a request from the Minnesota Annual Conference to define the term "urban center" in Paragraph 2548.7 of the Book of Discipline; * Review a bishop's decision of law in the Pacific Northwest Annual Conference on the authority of a district superintendent to require a pastor to take a leave of absence; * Review a bishop's decision of law in the New York Annual Conference concerning action of the clergy executive session on a pastor on administrative location; * Review a bishop's decision of law in the Rocky Mountain Annual Conference on the suspension of a pastor; * Review a bishop's decision of law in the Detroit Annual Conference concerning a bishop's power to insist that a full-time pastor live in a parsonage.
The Book of Discipline requires all bishops' decisions of law to be reviewed by the Judicial Council.
*Caldwell is editor of the Virginia United Methodist Advocate magazine and covers the Judicial Council for United Methodist News Service.
News media contact: Linda Green, Nashville, Tenn., (615) 742-5470 or newsdesk@umcom.org.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)