Republic of the Philippines

TARLAC STATE UNIVERSITY

G. Romulo Boulevard, Tarlac City 2300
School of Law

BALANCING HUMAN RIGHTS WITH THE DRUG WAR

OF PRESIDENT DUTERTE: AN ANALYSIS

In Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the course LAW 214
Human rights Law

Presented By:

Ray John A. Dorig

Presented To:

Judge Regina B. Laxa

 Table of Contents

I. Introduction …………………………………………………………………………… 1

II. Related Literature ……………………………………………………………….. 2

III. Discussion and Analysis …………………………………………………………. 6

IV. Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………9

V. References ………………………………………………………………………...10
 I

INTRODUCTION


On May 9, 2016, Rodrigo Roa Duterte was elected president of the Republic of the

Philippines. Amassing thirty-nine percent of the total votes cast, the former mayor of

Davao city now holds one of the most, if not the most, essential seat in the Philippine

government. 


Some of the notable accomplishments of the Duterte Administration are the passage

of the Bangsamoro Basic law, the passage of the Tax Reform for Acceleration and

Inclusion law which would support the administration’s “Build Build Build Program” and

environmental programs which would develop the country’s natural resources without

compromising its sustainability.

However, during his campaign, one of the most noteworthy and controversial

promise is his vow to end the Philippines’ drug problem. He vowed to kill every single

drug users and dealers in the country. Upon his election, “the war on drugs” was

immediately implemented which in turn sparked not only the interest and opposition of his

critics, but also those of various human rights organizations. According to the Philippine

Drug Enforcement Agency, 4,948 suspected drug users and dealers were killed during this

war dated from July 2016 to September 2018. This number does not include those killed

and identified as drug dealers by unknown gunmen also known as extrajudicial killings.

The exact number of deaths still cannot be ascertained because such information were

considered as classified information by the government and the release of the same would

allegedly impede the apprehension of drug syndicates. 
 


1
 Duterte’s war on drug has become the centerpiece of the administration. The

operation was named “Oplan Tokhang”. The campaign has taken the lives of drug

protectors, users, pushers and also caused the seizure and destruction of numerous drug

facilities and equipment. Beyond all the violence, the campaign also established drug

rehabilitation facilities for those thousands who voluntarily submitted themselves over to

the authorities.

Its purpose is indeed noble, the elimination of illegal drugs in the Philippines, but

the execution of the operation has brought fear and unease even to those who are innocent.

II

Related Literature

This chapter presents the articles and literatures related to the present position paper.

These gave the author of this paper a broader perspective which aid him in coming up with

a conclusion towards the analysis of the Duterte Administration’s War on drugs.

According to Rappler.com, the Philippine National Police (PNP) released new

guidelines for the implementation of Oplan Tokhang projects. The new guidelines

allegedly insure that there will be no space for possible abuse.

The instruction manual may be broken down into three stages. First stage is “Pre-

tokhang” or the creation, updating of the drug watchlist. Under the new rules, only names

validated by the PNP's Directorate for Intelligence can be added to the list. Names not

validated should be queued for further validation. The tokhang teams shall also be

2
subjected to specialized training specifically for drug operations. Aside from the tactical

squad, there should also be a PNP Human Rights Office representative present in the squad.

Second stage is the “tokhang stage” or during the operation itself. The squad should

first knock on the drug suspects’ homes then ask them to surrender. The team cannot enter

a house without the owner’s permission and the officers are encouraged to wear body

cameras for the documentation of the operation. If the person surrender, the same shall be

referred to the nearest barangay hall, ADAC office, or police station for documentation.

Should the suspect intend to be rehabilitated, he shall be referred to the local government

unit or to any concerned agency. However, if the suspect refuses to surrender, Tokhang

teams are tasked to alert local drug enforcement units, who will then begin a case buildup

that may lead to another anti-drug operation. The operation is conducted only from

Mondays to Fridays from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.

Lastly, after an operation, an After Activity Report (AAR) must be submitted to

regional police higher-ups for consolidation. If any of the procedures are not followed,

Tokhangers and their station commanders, and possibly even regional police chiefs, would

be punished. The new guidelines emphasize command responsibility – the idea that the

fault of subordinates can be traced to the negligence of their leader. Also, the new rules set

up a “one strike policy rule” to weed out negligent and corrupt officers of the PNP.

According to The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica, War on Drugs, the effort in

the United States since the 1970s to combat illegal drug use by greatly increasing penalties,

enforcement, and incarceration for drug offenders. The War on Drugs began in June 1971

when U.S. Pres. Richard Nixon declared drug abuse to be “public enemy number one” and

3
increased federal funding for drug-control agencies and drug-treatment efforts. In 1973 the

Drug Enforcement Agency was created out of the merger of the Office for Drug Abuse

Law Enforcement, the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs, and the Office of

Narcotics Intelligence to consolidate federal efforts to control drug abuse.

The War on Drugs was a relatively small component of federal law-enforcement

efforts until the presidency of Ronald Reagan, which began in 1981. Reagan greatly

expanded the reach of the drug war and his focus on criminal punishment over treatment

led to a massive increase in incarcerations for nonviolent drug offenses, from 50,000 in

1980 to 400,000 in 1997. In 1984 his wife, Nancy, spearheaded another facet of the War

on Drugs with her “Just Say No” campaign, which was a privately funded effort to educate

schoolchildren on the dangers of drug use.

However, according to Clair Suddath of content.time.com, Catchy slogans are no

match for chemical addictions, however, and study after study showed that programs such

as Drug Abuse Resistance Education — no matter how beloved — produced negligent

results. And while the Bush administration's 2002 goal of reducing all illegal drug use by

25% led to unprecedented numbers of marijuana-related arrests, pot use only declined 6%

(and the use of other drugs actually increased). Drug trends tend to wax and wane, and a

dip in the use of one type of drug might lead to a rise in another, causing officials to play

a never ending game of narcotic whack-a-mole.

As far as Mexican attempts to halt trafficking, a newly elected President Felipe

Calderón declared open season on drug cartels just days after being sworn into office in

2006 when he sent 6,500 troops to quash a rash of execution-style killings between two

4
rival drug gangs. The following year, Calderón's public security minister Genaro Garcia

Luna removed 284 federal police commissioners — all suspected of corruption — and

replaced them with a hand-selected group of officers who successfully arrested several

drug kingpins. The gangs have responded with what seems to be an endless stream of

violence; 5,300 people were killed in drug-related crimes in 2008 and over 1,000 have

already died this year.

According to the interview of Michelle Xu to Josh Gershman, The dominant drug

in the Philippines is a variant of methamphetamine called shabu. Consistent with a United

Nations Office on Drugs and Crime Report (2012), among all the countries in East Asia,

the Philippines had the highest rate of methamphetamine abuse. Estimates showed that

about 2.2 percent of Filipinos between the ages of sixteen and sixty-four were using

methamphetamines, and that methamphetamines and marijuana were the primary drugs of

choice. In 2015, the national drug enforcement agency reported that one fifth of the

barangays, the smallest administrative division in the Philippines, had evidence of drug use,

drug trafficking, or drug manufacturing; in Manila, the capital, 92 percent of the barangays

had yielded such evidence.

The only question left to answer is “whether the effects of drugs would warrant the

killing of drug dealers or users”. As stated by Dr. Des Corrigan in his essay, “Physical

Impact of Drugs, Misuse and Abuse” (1995) , drug addiction defined as the continuous

compulsive use of a specific substance in order to experience the psychoactive effects it

provides and to further avoid the symptoms of discomfort in its absence. However, it

should be noted that addiction is not merely limited to dangerous drugs; addiction can take

on various forms other than dependence on addictive narcotics. It can be inferred that an

5
individual who has fallen to addiction will more or less find extreme difficulty in

addressing the problem that has arisen from continued use of these addictive substances;

being able to break free from the cycle of addiction is not a task easily attainable especially

considering that the brain itself is afflicted. The body of the afflicted is effectively

reprogrammed by the chemical imbalance brought about by these addictive drugs.

According to the study “Family and Environmental Factors of Drug Addiction

Among Young Recruits (2005)” written by Marian Jêdrzejczak Ph.D as part of Military

Medicine, the emergence of drug addiction that has to do with familial and

community background has three (3) primary factors: (1) The effect of pathological

families on an individual’s behavior at a young age and eventual influence unto adulthood;

the term “pathological family” refers to a family with parents who suffer from mental

illness and/or alcoholism that commonly leads to an abusive parent-child relationship. (2)

The availability of easy to access drugs; addiction commonly starts at the first instance of

exposure of an individual to the addictive substances; it is further exemplified when these

aforementioned drugs are easy to access primarily due to the community environment that

a person is subjected to. (3) The influence of people of the same age group and culture;

peers are a common factor to influencing individuals to take up certain habits, as humans

are beings that seek out social interaction and to gain peer approval.

III

Discussion and Analysis

The intention of elimination is unquestionably noble. However, is the vow to

eradicate illegal drugs justifies the death of numerous Filipino citizens.

6
 Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings regardless of nationality, place

of residence, sex, color religion language or any other status. Humans are equally all

entitled to such rights without discrimination. These right are all interrelated,

interdependent and indivisible.

The prohibition in extrajudicial killings or summary killings is expressly lodged in

the Section 1 Article III of the1987 Constitution, to wit: “No person shall be deprived of

life, liberty, and property without due process of law nor shall any person be denied the

equal protection of the laws”. In Secretary v. Manalo, it has been held that extralegal

killings are “killings committed without due process of law, i.e., without safeguards or

judicial proceedings.” Thus extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances are blatant

violation of the constitutional rights to life, liberty and property. In his statement, President

Duterte encouraged the public to kill those involved in drug crimes which in turn prompted

vigilantes and unknown gunmen to take matters of law into their own hands.

To allow extralegal killings would deprive an accused drug user or pusher his right

to be heard and have his day to court. The vow to eradicate illegal drugs has produced

various problems. Not only the problematic murderous operations but also overcrowding

of jails, and the harassment and prosecution of drug war critics has caused a steep decline

in respect for basic rights since Duterte’s inauguration on June 30, 2016.

Despite these unenforced killings, the administration boasts numerous

accomplishments done within the past years. One of which is the “internal cleansing”

which is aimed to dismiss public officials who are directly involved in illegal drugs. “316

law enforcers were dismissed from the service for drug use, while 145 were removed for

other drug-related offences. In addition, 292 government employees, 262 elected officials

7
and 67 uniformed personnel were arrested in anti-drug operations.” A special police unit,

was formed to go after erring law-enforcers. Jail guards were also replaced after finding

out that jails or prisons cells are being used as facilities for drug operations.

It is worth noting that Philippine Jurisprudence provides that if there is a conflict

between the private interest of a citizen and the public interest, the latter should be

protected. President Duterte has labeled the drug war as “a fight to preserve peace and order

and a crusade to save the country’s youth against illegal drugs”. The Philippines is not the

only country who has waged war against illegal drugs. Many of the Philippines’ neighbour,

including Vietnam, Indonesia, China, Malaysia, and Singapore, have waged onslaughts to

exterminate drugs and impose the death penalty for drug-related crimes.

In spite of these problematic drug problems, a number of countries has resorted to a

more liberal way to face the drug situation. Croatia, Ecuador, Jamaica, Argentina, Uruguay,

Czech Republic, Mexico, Netherlands, Portugal and Cambodia have resorted to

decriminalizing possession of drugs for personal use.

Portugal aside from decriminalizing possession, it also increased funding to help

expand and improve government programs focused on prevention, treatment, harm

reduction, and social legislation.

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime said that the results of Portugal’s

policies included a decrease in the number of drug-related problems. From 44% in 1999,

the percentage imprisoned in Portugal for drug law violation decreased to 24% in 2013.

8
 In view of the foregoing there are still questions left unanswered: Are the

extrajudicial killings justified? Should the administration be held liable for these deaths?

IV

Conclusion

In light of what has been said, the drug war is still a viable option to end or eradicate

the illegal drugs problem of the Philippines. However, there should be proper safeguards

to avoid offending constitutional right of the accused and the due process clause of the

1987 Constitution.

The war against criminality should not be a war against the human rights of every

person. The government, as parens patriae of the citizens, should promulgate measures to

maintain public order without compromising basic human rights of those who they vow to

protect. Fighting drugs and criminality should go hand in hand with the observance of the

substantive and procedural due process of the constitution. It should not even be a war at

this point because a war without a tangible enemy cannot be won.

President Rodrigo Roa Duterte encouraged the public to “go ahead and kill” drug

addicts. Such statement has been widely understood as the grant to kill those involved in

drug crimes. There are no trials, so there is no evidence that the people being killed are in

fact guilty of drug crimes. The system is indeed fallible. These series of killings in the

country is in contravention of the supreme law of the land, the Philippine Constitution. It

is ironic that the very official who is in charge of the faithful implementation of the law

would be the one who would encourage the violation of the same.

9
 Basic is the rule that every person should first be heard before the fall of the hammer.

The right to life is not just inherent but also right that needs the utmost protection from the

government.

IV

References

The above opinions and statements are based and grounded form the following links

and articles:

1. https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/145004-drugs-best-practices-countries

2. https://www.topteny.com/top-10-countries-drugs-legal/

3. https://www.mic.com/articles/110344/14-years-after-portugal-decriminalized-all-

drugs-here-s-what-s-happening

4. https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/07/20/human-rights-consequences-war-drugs-

philippines

5. https://www.cfr.org/interview/human-rights-and-dutertes-war-drugs

6. https://www.equaltimes.org/the-war-on-drugs-is-ineffective#.XanR9pMRe_U

7. https://amp.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/asia/article/2187144/other-side-

dutertes-war-drugs-rehabilitation-rescue-and

8. Britannica.com

9. 1987 Philippine Constitution

10. Secretary of Defense v. Manalo, G.R. No. 180906, Oct. 7, 2008

11. https://www.maximumyield.com/definition/4833/war-on-drugs

10