Must Be Based on Facts, Not Political Convenience
The debate surrounding extrajudicial killings (EJKs) in the Philippines has long been shaped by political climate of the country, such as victims' narratives and politically colored handling of events. While unlawful killings must never be condoned, it is equally important to approach it with clear evidence, lawful, just considerations, and fairness.
The inclination to attribute every death labeled as an EJK to a single political figure must be handled carefully, in this case, the accusation hurled at Rodrigo Duterte of literally all the murders during his term as president. The truth of the matter is that, this type of 'extra judicial killings' even predates his administration and even extends beyond his term.
Historical Context of Violent Crime
Long before Duterte assumed the presidency, the Philippines was no stranger to violence, vigilantism, and drug-related murders.
Vigilante-style killings had already been documented in multiple regions, including Cebu and Manila. “Riding-in-tandem” attacks, gang rivalries, and criminal syndicate executions were persistently featured in the news outlets and social media. Some killings attributed to drug-related motives occurred independently of any national anti-drug campaign.
Even during Duterte’s tenure as mayor of Davao City, allegations about organized death squads widely circulated. Yet similar patterns of violence were observed in various areas around Philippines beyond his political control.
The Challenge of Attribution
When Duterte became president and launched an aggressive war-on-drugs campaign, these type of crimes persisted. And such crimes should not be taken solely as state-initiated actions.
Distinguishing between police operations, retaliatory killings among criminal groups, and independent vigilante acts, should not be singled out to just one individual. There is a so-called principle in law that says, "guilt is personal". The question therefore is not whether unlawful deaths occurred, but whether all such deaths can reasonably be attributed to a single directive, in this case, no less than the commander in Chief or the president.
More so, even anti-Duterte groups tend to implicate the former president to the case of missing sabungeros linked to a wealthy tycoon Atong Ang. This is simply insane.
Political Narratives vs. Factual Accountability
Public discourse often compresses complex social phenomena into simplified political narratives. This tendency carries consequences. It can undermine serious investigative efforts, reduce accountability to partisan conflict, and encourage selective outrage depending on who occupies Malacañang.
Democratic systems require that public officials be held accountable. Yet accountability must rest on verified evidence and legal standards, not ideological alignment or political convenience.
Linking EJKs to Crimes Against Humanity
The International Criminal Court (ICC) faces a substantial legal burden in assessing whether alleged extrajudicial killings rise to the level of crimes against humanity. Such a charge requires demonstrating not only the occurrence of unlawful acts, but also the existence of a widespread or systematic policy directed by state authority.
If proving direct participation to individual EJK incident is difficult, how much more in establishing coordinated state orchestration to those killings.
Conclusion
The issue of EJKs in the Philippines demands a thorough investigaion, not acknowledging emotional narratives as facts, but actual proof supported by verifiable evidence. The seriousness of the allegations demand truthfulness beyond reasonable doubt, not just mere assumptions, or politically motivated, or retaliatory actions.
Basic to a democratic country, every citizen should be entitled to right of due process, in which the president is also a citizen of this republic.