investigates human rights violations and/or provides legal assistance to migrant workers and their families. Investigating Human Rights Violations. From January 2009-January 2014, the Commission, through its fifteen (15) regional field offices handled twenty four (24) cases pertaining to migrant workers. Majority were from migrants deployed in middle-east countries: Riyadh, Kuwait, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Doha Qatar, Lebanon, and Oman. Most problems referred for assistance were complaints in contract modification, illegal recruitment involving changes in the nature of work to be performed, non-payment of wages, maltreatment, withholding of passports/travel documents by employers. Majority involve women OFWs. In these cases, the Commission has sought the assistance of the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) as well as the Embassy/Consulate involved. 96 While Commission appreciates the prompt assistance and action on referred cases, the importance of addressing concerns of OFWs as they occur: at the Embassy or consular level, at the POEA, OWWA or the NLRC, cannot be overemphasized. It has been the experience of the Commission that OFWs and their families resort to the Commission only when the National Agencies fail or refuse to address their concerns. The Pending CHR Charter and ‘Limited Fiscal Autonomy’. While the 1987 Constitution explicitly mandates the Commission “to provide appropriate legal measures for the protection of human rights of all persons within the Philippines, as well as Filipinos residing abroad97” the inadequate budget and resources of the Commission limits the fulfilment of the latter mandate. Without any presence in Philippine embassies/consulates abroad, the responses of the Commission with respect to migrant complaints are limited. In instances where victims of alleged human rights violations are located abroad, and where the complaints are filed by their relatives in their behalf, the Commission proceeds by coordinating with the DFA, the Philippine Embassy involved or with the OWWA or POEA. The Commission has likewise coordinated with counterpart NHRIs in addressing human rights complaints involving migrant workers. With the passage of the proposed CHR Charter, it will be enabled to fully perform its mandate to respond to the needs of Filipino migrant workers.98 Fiscal Autonomy has been greatly affected with the decision of the Supreme Court on CHREA vs. CHR99. Since its promulgation, the Commission has been experiencing great difficulty in claiming its full fiscal independence, which was adduced in the said Supreme Court Ruling as ‘limited’.100 Succeeding this decision, the General Appropriations Act (GAA) of 2007 and 2008 had veto messages on the Commission’s use of savings, citing the Supreme Court ruling and conditioning this on guidelines that since 2007 have yet to be issued by the Department of Budget and Management (DBM). In 2014, the budget of the Commission for maintenance and other operating expenses have been reduced while the item on personnel services has not been fully released, citing that full release will be granted upon filling up of vacant positions. This portion of the 96 In the ordinary course, complaints of migrant workers fall within the jurisdiction of the Philippine Overseas Employment Agency (POEA) for license cancellations of recruitment agencies, the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) in cases of money claims, and with the regular Courts in criminal cases such as trafficking and illegal recruitment. 97 Section 18, Article XIII, Philippine Constitution 98 One of the proposed versions of the CHR charter in the House of Representatives requires certain conditions to justify creation of CHR desks or designation of Human Rights Attaches. This include the prevalence/incidence of human rights violations and presence of a national human rights institution in the country of deployment. 99 G.R. No. 155336 COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION (CHREA) Represented by its President, MARCIAL A. SANCHEZ, JR., petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, respondent. 100 A reading of the said decision reveals that the ‘limited fiscal autonomy’ only pertains to the issue of implementing an upgrading and reclassification of personnel positions without the prior approval of the Department of Budget and Management. 105