In the Philippines, it is a common belief that an iron-fist ruling enforces discipline, obedience, and peace. Filipinos tend to overglamorize this type of approach as they vote for leaders and lawmakers with authoritarian attributes and bloody ways of eliminating crimes.
Over the past few years, thousands of killings have occurred, and cases of mistaken identities, shootings of activists, and even deaths of children and teens linked with drug usage have become rampant.
In 2020, Save the Children Philippines covered the killing of an unnamed 15-year-old girl in Cabugao, Ilocos Sur, after seeking help after experiencing sexual harassment from two police officers. The following year, the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) called out the murder of Antonio Dalit, a 16-year-old boy in Laguna, after allegedly drawing out a weapon against the police while being arrested.
This blatant display of violence and killing of citizens, especially of minors, has become normalized, especially during the term of Rodrigo Duterte, a former Davao mayor turned president who established enormous fame because of his “kamay na bakal”.
Who would forget his infamous war on drugs campaign which killed thousands of people? The operation that allowed the police and military to kill drug users without a warrant of arrest. This is a notable example of an iron-fist ruling that has taken the lives of many people, including the young souls of 14-year-old Reynaldo “Kulot” de Guzman, 17-year-old Kian delos Santos, and 19-year-old Carl Arnaiz.
“Criminals don’t have any humanity, so killing them is not a crime,” Duterte said sometime in 2017. His bureaucratic look and beliefs have been contributing to the glorification of violent and ruthless actions to eradicate crimes and illegal activities in the country.
The daunting question is: what is next for the Philippines?
Now that a new regime has begun, the legacy of the former president continues to strike the country. Amnesty International reported in March this year that 324 drug-related killings were recorded ever since President Bongbong Marcos took office.
In just two weeks in August, the police, who are supposed to serve and protect Filipinos, were once again involved in tragic and unjustified incidents that posed an impactful threat to the safety and security of the country.
On August 2, eight cops inflicted death on a 17-year-old boy, Jemboy Baltazar. Not long after his death, 15-year-old John Frances Ompad was also shot by a police officer, whose actual target was his older brother. During the last week of August, another cop, Wilfredo Gonzales, caused anguish on the road after pulling his gun and physically harassing a cyclist after he bumped into Gonzales’ car. While all the police involved were either dismissed or punished, the trauma they induced towards their victims will be reflected in those in society, and the lives taken away due to their trigger-happy tendencies cannot be brought back.
Apart from killings, impunity is also prevalent in the country. In fact, some cases remain unsolved as the victims are often ignored and silenced, and the suspects, especially the privileged ones, can get away from their crimes and delinquency with ease. The justice system has shown time and time again that it only favors those with money and connections—things that ordinary citizens lack, which allows vigilantism and impunity to foster those in power to commit murders and crimes and incriminate their victims under the protection of the law.
In the case of the Philippines, criticizing these unlawful actions and calling for a just and equitable system sometimes leads to red-tagging, which causes fear and failure to recognize the fight for democracy and safety. Consequently, the relentless dispatch of people, especially minors, and human rights violations might continue to transpire.
With the prolonged presence of bloody and violent operations under the new administration, more than 6,000 police killings during the Duterte and Marcos administrations may continue to increase due to the recent reports of injustices involving the police. The number of fatalities could possibly rise due to the urging of vigilantism, “shoot-to-kill” orders, police aggression, and unnecessary violence until today.
The concerning number of deaths caused by the police raises one question: Is an iron fist ruling ultimately what the country needs to combat crimes rather than focusing on the roots of the problems?
To this day, the efforts of the current president in rehabilitating and preventing the increase of drug users to transform the police response system towards criminal offenses are still far from being humane and lawful. This and the presence of other unlawful acts are clear manifestations of the negative consequences of enforcing authoritarian and iron-fisted policies.
As part of the call to change, transparency, and accountability, Philippine government officials can center their attention on a righteous and compassionate process of eliminating crimes instead of inhumane strategies. By then, the promotion and encouragement of police violence may end, as calls for peace and justice will undoubtedly be heard for those who need it: the children, the innocents, and the Filipino people.