The war on drugs initiated by Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has been one of the most controversial policies of his administration. Since Duterte assumed office in June 2016, his government has embarked on an aggressive anti-narcotics campaign that has drawn both strong domestic support and international condemnation. One of the most contentious aspects of this campaign has been the alleged rise in extrajudicial killings (EJKs), which critics claim have been a direct consequence of the war on drugs. This essay aims to examine the key components of Duterte’s war on drugs, the allegations of extrajudicial killings, and the broader implications for human rights in the Philippines.
The War on Drugs: A Bold Promise
Rodrigo Duterte, who campaigned on a platform of cracking down on crime and illegal drugs, promised a tough approach to addressing the nation’s drug problem. Upon taking office, Duterte instructed the Philippine National Police (PNP) and other law enforcement agencies to immediately intensify their efforts to eradicate drug-related crime. His administration set ambitious goals, such as the dismantling of drug cartels, the rehabilitation of drug addicts, and the general reduction of drug-related violence.
Duterte's rhetoric has been characterized by harsh language, and he has repeatedly declared that he would rather have criminals dead than alive. In speeches, he has encouraged police officers to shoot suspects who resist arrest, and he has even suggested that citizens take matters into their own hands by killing drug dealers. This "shock and awe" approach gained immediate popularity among many Filipinos who were frustrated with rising crime rates and the perceived inefficacy of previous administrations.
Despite its popularity with certain segments of the population, the war on drugs has faced fierce criticism from various human rights organizations, local activists, and international bodies. The central issue is the apparent disregard for due process, the rule of law, and human rights, particularly with regard to extrajudicial killings (EJKs).
Extrajudicial Killings: Allegations and Evidence
Extrajudicial killings refer to the killing of individuals by government forces or other groups without legal process or a fair trial. Under Duterte’s administration, there have been widespread reports of police involvement in unlawful killings, especially in the context of the drug war. The government’s stance has been that the deaths of alleged drug offenders are the result of "legitimate operations" where suspects allegedly resist arrest or fight back. However, these claims are frequently disputed, with allegations that many killings were carried out with no clear evidence of resistance, and that they were premeditated executions.
The most alarming aspect of the EJK issue is the apparent lack of accountability. In many cases, families of the victims report that police officers are rarely investigated, and perpetrators are not prosecuted. International watchdogs such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have documented numerous cases where the police seem to have been involved in extrajudicial executions. In addition, there have been reports of so-called "vigilante killings," where unidentified assailants carry out executions, often with the tacit approval of local authorities.
The Philippine government's response to the EJK allegations has been largely dismissive. Duterte himself has openly defended the police and accused critics of undermining the country’s sovereignty. In his public statements, Duterte has repeatedly downplayed the number of extrajudicial killings, suggesting that many of the deaths were either drug dealers killing each other or the result of self-defense during arrests.
In addition to the alleged EJKs, there have been reports of other human rights violations such as torture, arbitrary detention, and forced disappearances linked to the war on drugs. These concerns have led to widespread calls for an independent investigation into the actions of law enforcement agencies.
Human Rights and International Reaction
The war on drugs and the alleged EJKs have drawn heavy criticism from both domestic and international actors. At home, human rights groups and religious organizations have protested the indiscriminate killing of drug suspects, highlighting the impact on vulnerable communities, particularly the poor. Many of the victims are from marginalized sectors, including those living in informal settlements, where police operations are often conducted in a heavy-handed manner.
On the international stage, the United Nations, the European Union, and the United States have expressed grave concern over the human rights implications of Duterte’s drug war. In 2017, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, called for a halt to the killings and urged the Philippine government to ensure justice for the victims. The EU threatened to withdraw trade privileges for the Philippines unless the government took steps to address the violations.
The alleged EJKs have strained the Philippines' relationships with certain international partners. The United States, under both the Obama and Trump administrations, voiced concerns about the drug war’s impact on human rights, although U.S. policy has been inconsistent. While the U.S. government criticized Duterte's tactics, President Trump initially praised Duterte’s war on drugs, even offering U.S. support. This fluctuating stance illustrates the geopolitical complexities surrounding the issue, particularly as the Philippines’ relationship with the U.S. is influenced by broader security and economic interests in the region.
The Domestic Debate: Support and Opposition
Despite the serious concerns raised by human rights advocates, Duterte’s war on drugs has garnered significant public support in the Philippines. According to various surveys, a majority of Filipinos approve of the drug war, viewing it as a necessary step to combat the scourge of illegal drugs and related violence. The success of the policy in lowering street-level drug dealing and improving public safety has been cited by supporters as evidence of its effectiveness.
However, the question remains: at what cost? Critics argue that the war on drugs has disproportionately affected the poor, who often become targets of police operations due to their lack of political power or resources. The publicized killings of high-profile figures involved in the drug trade are often juxtaposed with the silent deaths of ordinary individuals who have no access to due process or legal recourse.
As the drug war continues, debates about the balance between security and human rights remain unresolved. While Duterte's administration insists that it is committed to safeguarding the public from the harm caused by drugs, there is a growing realization that the war has raised significant ethical and legal concerns.
The Future of Duterte's War on Drugs
The war on drugs under Duterte has undeniably reshaped the political and social landscape of the Philippines, bringing issues of crime, public safety, and human rights into stark focus. The alleged extrajudicial killings, whether perpetrated by law enforcement or vigilantes, remain a deeply divisive issue. While the war on drugs has been effective in addressing certain aspects of drug-related crime, its human cost is high, particularly for the vulnerable poor communities. The challenge for the Philippines moving forward will be finding a way to address the drug problem while upholding the principles of justice, human rights, and accountability. Without meaningful reforms to ensure transparency and the protection of civil liberties, the legacy of the war on drugs may remain mired in controversy and division.