ml-museum


Task Force Detainees of the Philippines
Protecting Women from Enforced Disappearance
Other campaigns
Friday, 08 March 2013 16:55
Joint Statement
International Women’s Day
8 March 2013
Protecting Women from Enforced Disappearance
Women everywhere are deeply affected by the global scourge of enforced disappearance. They are the wives, mothers, grandmothers, sisters, and daughters who are in the abysmal state of uncertainty and in perpetual search for their disappeared loved ones.  They are often left behind to bear the socio-economic and psycho-emotional brunt of enforced disappearance. In cases when women are made to disappear, theyare particularly at great risk of sexual and other forms of violence.
Many of them have been able to transform their personal anguish and sufferings into courage and determination to sustain the arduous struggle for justice. For a long time, the Philippines lacked the specific mechanisms that protect individuals including women and children from enforced disappearance. But the 16 years of uphill battle of victims’ families and human rights advocates to have enforced disappearance criminalized has finally borne fruit in the recent passage of Republic Act No. 10353 or the Anti-Enforced Disappearance Act of 2012. This special penal law officially recognizes not only the gravity of the offense but also the distinct sufferings endured by the victims and their families, especially by women and children.
The Anti-Enforced Disappearance Act of 2012 is without doubt, a major advancement in human rights legislation. Nevertheless,the law is only as good as its implementation. While the speedy crafting and joint promulgation of the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) by appropriate government agencies and organizations of families sought to expedite the Act’s implementation, a strong political will is required to ensure the full realization of the law’s objectives.
While a law defines mandates, translating them into concrete actions lies in the collective will of all stakeholders. It is for this reason that we organized a forum-workshop on the “Effective Implementation of Republic Act No. 10353” with the support of the Embassy of Canada and the UP Asian Center on 6 March, 2013 at the GT Toyota UP Asian Center Auditorium. The forum brought together various stakeholders not only to instill the letter and spirit of the law in their hearts and minds, but most importantly to generate collective action that will ensure the effectiveness of the law, more particularly in strengthening accountability and combating impunity.
We also hope that the new law will facilitate the Philippines’ signing and accession to the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance to complement and reinforce the domestic protection mechanisms.
As we commemorate the International Women’s Day today, we pay tribute to all women who have indefatigably struggled and risked their lives to make our world free from enforced disappearance and other forms of violence. Ending this odious offense will greatly contribute to the liberation of all women in the world from discrimination and violence.
Protecting Women from Enforced Disappearance
AFAD_FIND_ICAEDWomen everywhere are deeply affected by the global scourge of enforced disappearance. They are the wives, mothers, grandmothers, sisters, and daughters who are in the abysmal state of uncertainty and in perpetual search for their disappeared loved ones.  They are often left behind to bear the socio-economic and psycho-emotional brunt of enforced disappearance. In cases when women are made to disappear, theyare particularly at great risk of sexual and other forms of violence.
Many of them have been able to transform their personal anguish and sufferings into courage and determination to sustain the arduous struggle for justice. For a long time, the Philippines lacked the specific mechanisms that protect individuals including women and children from enforced disappearance. But the 16 years of uphill battle of victims’ families and human rights advocates to have enforced disappearance criminalized has finally borne fruit in the recent passage of Republic Act No. 10353 or the Anti-Enforced Disappearance Act of 2012. This special penal law officially recognizes not only the gravity of the offense but also the distinct sufferings endured by the victims and their families, especially by women and children.
The Anti-Enforced Disappearance Act of 2012 is without doubt, a major advancement in human rights legislation. Nevertheless,the law is only as good as its implementation. While the speedy crafting and joint promulgation of the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) by appropriate government agencies and organizations of families sought to expedite the Act’s implementation, a strong political will is required to ensure the full realization of the law’s objectives.
Last Updated on Friday, 08 March 2013 17:07
 
Updates on the Bail Hearing of Temogen “Cocoy” Tulawie case- hrdefender.org
On Political Prisoners
Thursday, 21 March 2013 10:58
Updates on the Bail Hearing of Temogen “Cocoy” Tulawie case
http://hrdefender.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=68%3Aupdates-on-the-bail-hearing-of-temogen-cocoy-tulawie-case&catid=35%3Aupdates&Itemid=56
February 4: Hearing on Continuance of Detention of Mr. Tulawie in Davao
Human rights group (Philippine Alliance of Human Rights, Task Force Detainees of the Philippines, Alliance of Progressive Labor, Kilusan para sa Pambansang Demokrasya, and Balay Rehabilitation Center) assembled outside the City Hall of Manila where the Regional Trial Court is housed to express support to Human Rights Defender Cocoy Tulawie for his petition for bail and motion to allow continuance of his detention in Davao City Jail.
Due to information regarding the threats against the security and life of the Mr. Tulawie, the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP) guarded the City Hall building, placing its personnel at every floor. Mr. Tulawie arrived in a BJMP vehicle, with security escorts and safety gears of bullet proof vest and helmet. Mr. Juhan Alihudin who is detained in Manila City Jail and Mr. Abner Salahi Tahil detained Special Intensive Custodial Area (SICA) in Camp Bagong Diwa, both co-accuses were also in attendance.
Judge Marlo Magdoza-Malagar first discussed the Urgent Motion to Allow Continuance of Accused’s Detention at the Davao City Jail. She raised two salient concerns regarding the urgent motion: First, if Mr. Tulawie is waiving his rights to be present during court hearing if the ruling will favour his continuous detention in Davao City and second, will there be an alternative detention facility other than SICA in case the motion will be denied?
Prosecutor’s private counsel Atty. Wendell Sotto argued that there are no more security risks on Mr. Tulawie considering that the Court of Appeals already issued a Writ of Amparo and the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) is assuring Mr. Tulawie’s safety. These arguments were also stated in the Opposition that the party of Governor Tan filed against the Urgent Motion.
With regards to the alternative detention facility, Atty. Marlon Manuel informed the Court that the CHR will call an Inter-Agency Meeting with PNP, BJMP, AFP and DND to discuss the concern.
In answer, Judge Marlo Magdoza-Malagar ruled that the parties shall put their arguments and defenses in writing and submit them to court. The Defense is given 15 days from February 4, 2013 to answer the Opposition filed by the Prosecution. On the other hand, the Prosecution was given 15 days from receipt of the answer to file its reply. Then, the motion will be submitted for resolution.
On Bail petition, the defense manifested that they have not received Judicial Affidavits as required under the Order of Branch 19 dated December 07, 2012.   Atty. Sotto argued that Judicial Affidavits are not applicable to the case because the Rules state that the same is applicable only to crimes with penalties of less than 6 years. Defense counsel Atty. Marlon Manuel, stated that the rules are applicable if the accused agrees to use the same irrespective of penalty. The accused in this case did not contest the Judicial Affidavit rule. Because of the absence of Judicial Affidavits, the Court reset the bail hearing on March 4 and 6, 2013 and expressed that submission of Judicial Affidavits prior to the hearing is mandatory.
On the hearing of the Motion for Bail filed by Mr. Tulawie last March 4 and 6, 2013, the Prosecutor presented a total of seven witnesses, five from the Military and Police and two self-confessed conspirators of the bombing, Mr. Sali Said and Mr. Mujibar “Bong” Alih Amon. Both witnesses were neither included as accused nor had been mentioned as witnesses on the charge sheet against Tulawie. Initially, the prosecutor informed the Court that they will present 30 witnesses but they only presented seven. The Police and Military testimonies made no mention of Mr. Tulawie’s involvement on the incident but just described the incident and the destructions as a result of the bombing.
Before Sali Said started his testimony, the Judged expressed concern of   the content of his judicial affidavit admitting to his involvement on the bombing incident and other several crimes. She cautioned the Prosecutors that they may be jeopardizing their client with self-incriminating statements. Judge Malagar questioned the witness herself if he understood his predicament but the witness was unfazed.
Sali Said, as witness, executed two Judicial Affidavits dated February 25, 2013 and March 5, 2013. The first affidavit he said was not entirely true because he tried to protect himself from being included in the case or at least lessen his involvement. A week later he executed another affidavit because he said he felt guilty and finally wants to say the truth.
In both of his Judicial Affidavits, he admitted that he is one of those who conspired in the planning and execution of the March 13, 2009 bombing. He also admitted that he is an active member of the Abu Sayaff Group (ASG).
The witness Sali Said, orally admitted in open court and in the presence of the Judge that he is an active member of the ASG. He also admitted that he was one of the persons who kidnapped Ms. Ces Drilon (television network journalist) and Octavio Dinampo in 2008 but proudly stated that he has not been charged at all.  From the records of the prosecution, Octavio Dinampo has executed an affidavit positively identifying Sali Said as one of their kidnappers.
He also admitted that he was arrested last March 2011 in a Port in Jolo, Sulu and detained at SICA, MMDJ Compound, Camp Bagong Diwa, Taguig City in relation to the kidnapping and the beheading of the members of the Jehovah’s Witness/Almeda Group by the ASG. This case is lodged before RTC, Branch 266, Pasig City docketed as Criminal Cases Nos. 128923-H-A-E.
As per testimony of Sali Said, he admitted that the lawyer of Governor Sakur Tan intervened and helped in the facilitation of his release and he was accordingly released from prison last February 15, 2013.  It could be noted that it is not merely coincidental that Sali Said was released barely two weeks before the bail hearing of the Tulawie case.
Said admitted that he is mad at Mr. Tulawie because he alleged that the latter caused the death of his cousin, another accused Sulayman Muhammad Muin.   It can be recalled that Mr. Muin was killed while detained in Sulu Provincial jail by BJMP personnel allegedly for trying to escape. Juhan Alihudin, another co-accused, after the hearing mentioned that Said should have asked him and learned the truth because he was detained with Mr. Muin when the latter was killed in detention.
At one point during his testimony, Mr. Said  excused himself to go to the comfort room and passed by hearing distance of Mr. Tulawie, he said “ Nakahanda na ang mga butas na paglilibingan nating  dalawa sa Sulu” (The holes for both our graves are already prepared in Sulu).
Mujibar “Bong” Alih Amon, another witness for the prosecutor testified that he is a photographer, former driver and errand boy of the Tulawie family who lived for years in the Tulawie home. As a photographer he cannot recall the model of the camera he used, when cross-examined by Atty. Mary Ann Arnado of the defense legal team. As a driver of Mr. Tulawie’s family, he miscounted the cars of the Tulawie. As one who lived in the Tulawie home for years, he cannot recall the features of the house and are not familiar with the members of the family and even miscounted the number of Mr. Tulawie’s children.
He testified that he was hired by Mr. Tulawie to conduct “Plan B” to assassinate Gov. Tan for P3.5 million pesos as the first bombing was unsuccessful.  He mentioned that he recruited tricycle drivers to help him implement the plan.  However Plan B did not pushed through when the accused on the first incident were already arrested. He was also subsequently arrested as suspected member of the ASG involved in the beheading of the Almeda/Jehovah Witnesses members. Mr. Amon is currently detained in MMDJ Compound, Camp Bagong Diwa, Taguig.
Mr. Amon also admitted that he was offered assistance by the Prosecutor’s counsel but that he refused and that he just wanted to tell the truth on the incident. He denied being a member of the Abu Sayyaf group.
After the testimonies of the witnesses, the Defense counsel motioned that the Public Prosecutor should include Said as accused in the Tulawie case because of his admission of involvement in the bombing. The Prosecutor said that there should be a complaint in which the Judge said that it should be motu proprio on their part. But the former is still adamant, thus Judge asked the Counsel to formalize the motion.
The March 6 concluded the bail hearing for Mr. Tulawie. The Judge will issue her decision on or before June 19, 2013 also the scheduled next hearing on the case. For the meantime, Mr. Tulawie will remain in Davao City Jail.
On both hearings, some members of the Free Mr. Tulawie movement observed the proceedings.
Accuser’s activities
A news report in one of the Regional newspaper stated that the Palace (Office of the President) intervention is feared on the Tulawie case. It mentioned that CHR has already declared Tulawie is innocent and that several NGOs are resulting to agitation tactics and lobbying with personalities to campaign for members with cases (see picture of the news clipping at the left).
There is also a regular picket during court hearings of Tulawie of young Muslim people of undetermined persuasions. When they were asked who they are rallying about, they said to stop the bloodshed and have peace in Sulu.  Their placards are stating confusing messages that they condemn human rights violators and at one time stated that bombers and HR violators should be jailed. During their March 4 picket, they were referring to the news clipping. (Source: PAHRA)

Updates on the Bail Hearing of Temogen “Cocoy” Tulawie case

Source: hrdefender.org

February 4: Hearing on Continuance of Detention of Mr. Tulawie in Davao

Human rights group (Philippine Alliance of Human Rights, Task Force Detainees of the Philippines, Alliance of Progressive Labor, Kilusan para sa Pambansang Demokrasya, and Balay Rehabilitation Center) assembled outside the City Hall of Manila where the Regional Trial Court is housed to express support to Human Rights Defender Cocoy Tulawie for his petition for bail and motion to allow continuance of his detention in Davao City Jail.

Due to information regarding the threats against the security and life of the Mr. Tulawie, the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP) guarded the City Hall building, placing its personnel at every floor. Mr. Tulawie arrived in a BJMP vehicle, with security escorts and safety gears of bullet proof vest and helmet. Mr. Juhan Alihudin who is detained in Manila City Jail and Mr. Abner Salahi Tahil detained Special Intensive Custodial Area (SICA) in Camp Bagong Diwa, both co-accuses were also in attendance.

Judge Marlo Magdoza-Malagar first discussed the Urgent Motion to Allow Continuance of Accused’s Detention at the Davao City Jail. She raised two salient concerns regarding the urgent motion: First, if Mr. Tulawie is waiving his rights to be present during court hearing if the ruling will favour his continuous detention in Davao City and second, will there be an alternative detention facility other than SICA in case the motion will be denied?
Last Updated on Thursday, 21 March 2013 11:19
 
Day 1 of TFDP's National Anti-mining Conference
Human Rights Defenders' Activities
Tuesday, 01 December 2009 17:11

IMG_7549IMG_7545

December 1,2009- Day 1 of National Anti-mining Conference held at School of Designs and Arts (SDA) of the De La Salle-College of Saint Benilde at Vito Cruz St., Manila


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Last Updated on Tuesday, 01 December 2009 17:27
 
Ten point human rights agenda on mining
On Mining
Thursday, 11 April 2013 16:39
TEN POINT HUMAN RIGHTS AGENDA ON MINING
Mining has been in the national agenda for more than a decade. The assumption into office of PNoy gave hope for a policy change in mining. Unfortunately, government continues to aggressively promote mining as revenue-generating industry despite continued and widespread protests by mining-affected communities as well as civil society.
The State has the fundamental obligation to respect, protect and fulfill human rights not only for the current generation but for future generations. These trinitarian obligations govern the conduct of the State in relation to its peoples and it is by these that States are weighed and judged for their sins of commission and omission.
As the electoral campaign period provides an opportunity to propagate the peoples issues and concerns on Mining; human rights, environmental, indigenous peoples and women’s’ groups  have come together and developed a 10 Point Human Rights Agenda on Mining. It is a platform to unite all anti-mining groups and individuals during the electoral period. It is an agenda to challenge all candidates to take up and respond to the call for an end to large-scale mining.
10 POINT HR AGENDA ON MINING
1. SCRAP Mining Act of 1995! Enact Alternative Minerals Management Bill. The implementation of RA 7942 (Philippine Mining Act of 1995) continues the mismanagement of our mineral resources.  This law is flawed in as much as it fails to recognize the rights of communities, local governments and indigenous peoples to effectively participate in deciding to accept mining or not.  We need a new mining law that will promote not only the economic rights of Filipinos through a more just sharing of benefits from minerals, but also a rational way of valuing and managing our minerals towards national industrialization.
2. Stop large scale mining. Large-scale mining permanently disturbs the ecological and natural characteristics of an area.  It is the most economical and efficient method for a mining company to earn the most profits, but also introduces a wide array of potential human rights abuses and human rights violations.  Large-scale mining are owned and operated by local and transnational corporations who will use deception, bribery, harassment, violence, para-military forces and even extra-judicial killings to silence and impede resistance against their mining projects. Large-scale mining operations also entail large-scale negative impacts to lives and livelihoods of mining-affected communities, including physical dislocation, unstable jobs, cultural displacement, social disintegration and environmental degradation.
3. Respect, protect and fulfill Indigenous Peoples (IP) Rights to self determination (FPIC). One of the most serious issues against mining is the failure to secure genuine free, prior and informed consent from indigenous peoples (IPs).  Almost two-thirds of titled and claimed ancestral domains are directly impacted by mining applications and operations here in the Philippines.  Several cases of violations of FPIC are documented in Cordillera, Zambales, Aurora-Quezon, Palawan, Mindoro, Romblon, Zamboanga, and South Cotabato, all involving mining projects.  There are numerous cases in CARAGA, where overlaps of mining tenements and ancestral domains are recorded in almost all of the remaining forests in the region.  The traditional customary laws and indigenous governance systems of indigenous communities are threatened as mining companies employ their divide and rule tactics, to falsely secure the FPIC requirement prescribed by the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA).
4. Protect women human rights defenders and IP women in mining areas. Rural and indigenous women are at the forefront in the struggle against mining. They recognize and actually feel the adverse impacts of mining on the lives of their families and communities – food security, economic activities, social values, peace and order among others. Prostitution in the communities is one of the worsening impacts of mining. They see the fight against mining as a task that rural and indigenous women have to take on for the survival of their communities, and of themselves. This is why they have been targets of threats, harassments and killings.  With Juvy Capion, B’laan leader, who was murdered in October 2012, a long list of women human rights defenders from rural and indigenous communities affected by mining has experiences of cases filed against them, receives threats against them and their families, bodily harmed, subjects of malicious gossips to discredit their leadership.
5. Stop exploitation of workers in Mining Sites. The mining industry has not only exploited our natural resources but has continually exploited our workers. Filipino workers are exposed to extreme working conditions in mining areas where there is poor ventilation, dust, fumes and other chemical and biological danger. Aside from these, some mining companies are even using outdated procedures that further aggravate risks to its workers. Unfair labor practice is also common in mining industries. Contrary to the promise that mining in the Philippines will bring in most needed jobs, mining operations hardly translated with employment. And even when it does, jobs it generates are mostly contractual in nature. Workers in mining companies also suffer from low wages. According to the International Solidarity Mission on Mining (ISMM), large scale mining companies earn as much as P36 million for a two day work of a skilled Filipino miner who receives as low as P233 daily wage, sometimes even less than the prescribed minimum wage. Labor unions are also suppressed and prevented to organize, mining companies even organize their own “company union” to compete with the legitimate union.
6. Protect our environment and right to safe, sound and balanced ecology. Numerous mining applications and projects are situated in the remaining forests of the Philippines.  This is problematic as we only have less than 18% forest cover remaining, when an ideal percentage should be at least 50% for a good climatic regulatory function.  Mining contracts currently contain provisions that give mining companies auxiliary rights to timber, water, easement within their mining areas.  The massive cutting of trees and forests, diversion of water resources and intrusive construction of infrastructures imperils the sound ecology of the Philippines, including access to water for irrigation and domestic consumption.  Philippine biodiversity is directly threatened as habitats are destroyed by mining. With decreasing forest cover, the Philippines is made more ill-equipped to face the climate crisis, and the poor are faced with increased risks and vulnerabilities brought by disasters such as typhoons, landslides, floods and erosions.
7. Stop the killings! Protect Human Rights Defenders! The proliferation of mining operations in the country also heralded the killings of Human Rights Defenders (HRDs) in the course of their stand against large-scale mining, advocacy on environment protection and human rights of people affected by the mining operations.  Some of the most prominent HRDs who died were Fr.  Fausto Tentorio  of  North Cotabato and Dr. Gerry Ortega of Palawan but there are less known HRDs who were equally courageous and suffered the same fate, such as Genesis Ambason of Agusan del Sur;  Francisco Canayong  of Leyte;  Armin Marin of Romblon; Gensun Agustin of Cagayan; Datu Roy Bagtikan Gallego of Surigao Sur and many others.  The companies’ private security agencies, the military and para-military groups are directly responsible for the killings but the owners of companies and the government are equally liable and responsible.
8. Stop displacement of rural folks. Protect the right to food, water, housing and access to means of subsistence. Due to lack of consultations and non-disclosure of relevant information, large-scale mining have often led to forced eviction of indigenous peoples and other community residents within the permit area.  Documented cases also showed that mining companies’ clearing operations have caused confusion, instilled fear, and stirred conflict in affected areas.  Once the operation starts, mining poses risks to water sources not only of the impact area but also of downstream communities.  Mining consumes large quantity of water and pollutes water sources which could jeopardize food production and the health of residents. Displacement of rural women renders them vulnerable to sex trafficking.
9. Stop militarization and deployment of investment defense forces. The entry of mining in the communities has militarized the areas. Often the military is deployed and utilized to defend the interests of mining companies and to pacify peoples’ resistance. Mining companies have formed their own paramilitary forces to wreak terror and divide the communities. Militarization has brought numerous deaths and destruction, countless violations of human and peoples’ rights.
10. Justice for all victims of mining related Human Rights Violations. Stop development aggression! Development is development aggression when the people become the victims, not the beneficiaries; when the people are set aside in development planning, not partners in development; and when people are considered mere resources for profit-oriented development, not the center of development . . . . Development aggression violates the human rights of our people in all their dimensions—economic, social, cultural, civil and political.
TEN POINT HUMAN RIGHTS AGENDA ON MINING
10pt_agenda_logo_small2
Mining has been in the national agenda for more than a decade. The assumption into office of PNoy gave hope for a policy change in mining. Unfortunately, government continues to aggressively promote mining as revenue-generating industry despite continued and widespread protests by mining-affected communities as well as civil society.
The State has the fundamental obligation to respect, protect and fulfill human rights not only for the current generation but for future generations. These trinitarian obligations govern the conduct of the State in relation to its peoples and it is by these that States are weighed and judged for their sins of commission and omission.
As the electoral campaign period provides an opportunity to propagate the peoples issues and concerns on Mining; human rights, environmental, indigenous peoples and women’s’ groups  have come together and developed a 10 Point Human Rights Agenda on Mining. It is a platform to unite all anti-mining groups and individuals during the electoral period. It is an agenda to challenge all candidates to take up and respond to the call for an end to large-scale mining.
10 POINT HR AGENDA ON MINING
1. SCRAP Mining Act of 1995! Enact Alternative Minerals Management Bill. The implementation of RA 7942 (Philippine Mining Act of 1995) continues the mismanagement of our mineral resources.  This law is flawed in as much as it fails to recognize the rights of communities, local governments and indigenous peoples to effectively participate in deciding to accept mining or not.  We need a new mining law that will promote not only the economic rights of Filipinos through a more just sharing of benefits from minerals, but also a rational way of valuing and managing our minerals towards national industrialization.
Last Updated on Thursday, 11 April 2013 16:42
 
Golden treasures of a tormented land
Y4R activities
Monday, 07 June 2010 11:47

IMG_1957

“Gintong Yaman ng Sinirang Bayan” is a satirical play about dreams, lives and relationships of families in a community in Northern Luzon that is being affected by the impending mining operation in the area.

The play is set in a barrio in Nueva Vizcaya during the course of a foreign mining company’s application in the province. The residents of the community find themselves with differing stands and opinions regarding the mining operation which poses to offer the residents with a golden opportunity.

IMG_1933IMG_1897

Ruben, in his search for the golden dream and his quest to make it big, grabbed the scholarship grant from the mining company, much to his mother’s dismay.  Other inhabitants of the community engage themselves in heated debates regarding the positive and negative effects the mining operation will bring.  

Ruben must decide.  Will he go after his golden dream despite the disapproval of his loved ones and the destruction of his native land?  What is the truth behind his father’s death and what will its implication be on Ruben’s decision?

Last Updated on Monday, 07 June 2010 12:08
 
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>

Page 5 of 40
Christian Louboutin Bianca platform slingbacks christian louboutin piros boots black Buy Christian Louboutin Shoes in Marseille France Christian Louboutin Sale Chicago Christian Louboutin Sale Discount Shoes Christian Louboutin Ivory Shoes Christian Louboutin Pink Low Heel Christian Louboutin Pink Suede Boots christian louboutin lady peep 150 heel peep-toe pumps dorepi 120 pony skin courts christian louboutin christian louboutin ron ron sale christian louboutin ron ron turquoise ron ron zeppa christian louboutin christian louboutin pigalle plato 140mm Christian Louboutin Pigalle Spikes Replica christian louboutin gabin 140 pumps christian louboutin rolando 120mm christian louboutin rolando hidden-platform pump dark red Christian Louboutin Replica High-Heeled Shoes Christian Louboutin Shoes Fall 2009 Collection