top of page
Writer's pictureThe Communicator

Justice on Two Fronts

For 14 years, Mary Jane Veloso waited for a chance to return, caught in a tug-of-war between contrasting justice systems. As she navigates between Indonesia’s death row and the Philippine legal system, her story highlights an urgent need for compassion and legal reform—as well as how unprepared our legal system is.


(Cartoon by Timothy Andrei Milambiling/The Communicator)

Veloso’s case has set off a discussion on justice and human rights within both the Indonesian and Philippine legal systems. 


Veloso was arrested in Indonesia in 2010 for drug trafficking, a charge which she firmly denies. She claims she was a victim, duped by her recruiters into unknowingly transporting drugs. Recently, the Indonesian government agreed to transfer her to the Philippines, where she will serve the remainder of her sentence. This decision not only underscores the gross injustices faced by OFWs but also exposes how unprepared our legal system is when handling cases like these. 


From a legal standpoint, Veloso’s transfer to the Philippines presents a unique situation. While Indonesia has given her the death sentence, the Philippines has abolished it back in 2006. This poses a dilemma as her transferral meant she cannot be executed. However, her sentence can be commuted to  life imprisonment. 


But when legal decisions necessitate the need to be enforced across countries, it complicates matters. After all, we follow the principle of sovereignty, allowing each nation to implement its laws within its borders. This brings the challenges of upholding international law while respecting sovereignty. But we believe this case necessitated the need of the balance of principles to maintain diplomatic relations and ensure justice is upheld.


But why are we asking how prepared our Legal and Penal system is for such cases? Historically, the only similar instance that we have encountered is Sara Balabagan’s Case, which did not involve continuing a sentence. Attorney Edre Olalia noted that the transfer is complex, highlighting the need for an understanding of international legal practices, something that our legal system should have a grasp of, but many cases came and went, and we are still back to square one when we are handling these kinds of cases.


From a humanistic perspective, the case highlights an urgent need for compassion and empathy within the justice system. Advocacy groups argue that she is a victim of human trafficking, manipulated by her recruiters. She deserves rehabilitation and reintegration, not the death penalty. This is especially so when Amnesty International raised concerns over the fairness of her trial. Once again, this case exposes the vulnerabilities of OFWs and the systemic issues they face. 


The Philippine legal system's unpreparedness to handle such complex cases is evident. Despite the need for empathy and understanding, the system struggles with navigating the intricacies of international legal standards, the fairness of the judicial process, and providing adequate protection and justice for vulnerable individuals. This underscores a critical need for the Philippines to bolster its legal framework and readiness to address similar cases effectively.


In addition, we must also remember that there is a difference and a disparity between our legal systems: one is punitive in nature, the other rehabilitative. Indonesia’s harsh penalties aim to deter, but Veloso's transfer to the Philippines shifts the focus to rehabilitation, questioning the effectiveness of severe punishment, something that we clearly can learn from.


This is not an isolated incident, Flor Contemplacion and Joselito Zapanta’s cases already highlighted the challenges OFWs face under foreign jurisdictions and the gaps between different legal systems. These cases expose the vulnerability of OFWs, tied to human trafficking, poverty, and inadequate legal protections. And with this, we should call for our government to conduct stronger interventions and cooperation with other nations to address these systemic issues .


As the dust settles, we may think that her transfer back home is a victory, but it is important to highlight that justice delayed is justice denied. 


Remember, it took her 14 years to return, and at times, the case was even forgotten by the public. The blame is not solely on our government, as navigating international jurisdiction made the process long and tedious. However, a silver lining is that Veloso was not executed by a foreign nation; she will return home alive—and not in a freezer.


Clearly, her case serves as a stark reminder that we are unprepared, but still can change. We have our work cut out for us, to protect our migrant workers from another instance like this.


Article: Kyan Miguel A. San Agustin

Comments


bottom of page