What has been happening in the
Philippines when Pres. Duterte sits in power is a phenomenon that calls each
citizen to reflect on the idea of democracy as a system of government and a way
of life. War on drugs is the center stage
of controversies in Pres. Duterte’s campaign.
To date, more than 2000 drug-related deaths of personalities allegedly
connected to illegal drug trade.
For Pres. Duterte, it’s a matter
of principle to sustain his campaign against drugs. Illegal drug is a menace to Philippine
society, especially to the young who are addicted to it. It will make the young generation
unproductive and dangerous to public safety. Likewise, it will cost the
government for their rehabilitation and prepare them again to be part to the
society’s mainstream. It’s a matter of
principle because, by hook or by crook, Duterte’s administration is resolved to
crack down the drug trade and the syndicate behind it to its bitter end. Pres. Duterte is unstymied even biting
oppositions are stoned against him by different groups advocating human
rights.
This controversy raises concern
over human rights abuses and violations.
Likewise, this concern poses some kind of crisis the way Duterte’s
administration observes democratic ideals embodied in the constitutional
mandate of his office. This crisis lurks
between the political power legitimized in the office of the President and
human rights embodied in the New Constitution.
As the Chief Executive of the
land, Duterte is mandated to execute the laws of the land such as “Dangerous
Drugs Act of 1972” and “Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.” If he fails to fulfil this mandate, then he
is negligent of his duties as the Chief Executive. To fulfil his mandate, Duterte shall mobilize
all elements of the PNP and AFP. He even
“encouraged” armed forces of the NPA (mentioned in one of his TV appearances)
and local elected officials to apprehend any activities related to drug use and
trade. On the other hand, in the process
of enforcing the laws, questions regarding violations of constitutional rights
of suspects are popping out since some lapses in police operation are observed,
as critics would claim, like absence of any of these rights: due process, right
to be heard, or right to have a counsel.
President Duterte has the
political will to crackdown illegal drugs.
But the question is, “Is his political will too much so as to intrude
the safeguards of human rights embodied in the constitution?” Or, shall we ask, “Does the idea of human
rights become the “constitutional shield” of those personalities behind the
drug trade?” Because of this
“constitutional shield,” these drug personalities have immunity in the
persecutions.
