‘Come and get me’

Rodrigo Duterte entered the lion’s den last Wednesday, ready for a mauling.

From his initial reluctance to face the quad committee, he surely expected hostility at the House of Representatives.

And yet Duterte faced the House for about 13 hours to deliver his defiant message, which came clear despite many contradictions and the impressive efforts of the quad comm to prevent him from “hijacking” the hearing: yes, I killed people; I did it for the country, and I would do it again. What are you going to do about it?

He dared the International Criminal Court: come and get me before I die.

How authorities respond to his challenge may determine if the kill culture that he promoted will be eliminated or will endure in our weak republic.

“If I am found guilty, I will go to prison and I will rot there for all time,” the former president said.

Will he ever be found guilty of anything?

We have enough laws to prosecute Duterte and his minions for murder, torture, and even for crimes against humanity. The laws aren’t just best-efforts pledges; authorities must show that these can be applied to the fullest extent, swiftly and efficiently.

Apart from prosecuting those responsible for mass killings, the country must address the roots of public support for such short cuts in law enforcement.

Lawmakers can work with the judiciary to compel full compliance with the constitutional mandate, laws and court rules for speedy trial and swift justice.

Judicial reforms must include changes in the system of appointment and promotion in the judiciary and the prosecution service.

Similar reforms are needed in the Philippine National Police so that cops don’t become beholden to politicians, the religious mafia and other shameless influence peddlers.

*      *      *

There were numerous inconsistencies in Duterte’s testimony throughout the marathon hearing, but the picture still came through: as mayor of Davao City, he had personally killed people – mainly (he said) criminals who resisted arrest as well as rogue policemen.

He confirmed stories from his days as mayor, when he would reportedly roam the city on his big bike in the wee hours, on the lookout for criminal elements, and shooting them dead.

It was hard to keep an accurate count of his personal kills in Davao because his statements kept shifting and he wouldn’t be pinned down to specific details.

Asked if he had killed people, he replied: “Ako? Marami. (Me? A lot.) Six or seven.” Four Chinese who were caught in a raid on a drug den, two to three cops involved in ransom kidnapping and rape. He himself carried out the kills, he said.

“Apat na Chinese, pinatay ko talaga… Marami ako pinatay na pulis sa Davao na kriminal… ako mismo ang talagang humirit… mga pulis na gago na mag-kidnap, mag-rape.”

Duterte defended the cash “reward” given to those who carried out his war on drugs as operational funds, with any excess given to the team as bonus or “for the boys.”

Having covered the crime beat for years, I know that such a system exists. But it is different from willfully dangling a reward for any cop who kills a drug suspect, and even setting a quota for the kills – accusations that Duterte the lawyer and ex-city prosecutor denies.

His statements and his unapologetic iron-fist mindset were not new or surprising. Even the issues raised by several of the lawmakers as well as his staunch critics who sat as resource persons – former senators Leila de Lima and Antonio Trillanes – were not new.

De Lima revived the testimony of Arturo Lascañas, who claims to be a former member of the Davao death squad, and who named six other members. When she asked Duterte if the seven were the civilians he was referring to as members of the DDS, Duterte dismissed Lascañas as a lunatic liar. (Another witness against Duterte, Edgar Matobato who claimed to be a hitman for the DDS, was dismissed as an unreliable polluted source in 2017 by then senator Panfilo Lacson.)

*      *      *

Trillanes revived his accusations of secret bank accounts that were first hurled against Duterte during the campaign for the 2016 presidency. Duterte at the time had dismissed the story as black propaganda.

Their exchange during the quad comm followed the same thread as in 2016. And as in 2016, Duterte lost his cool over the issue and nearly hurled his microphone at Trillanes.

Duterte apologized to the quad comm for this. I know people who actually found the incident amusing.

He even managed to elicit laughter from quad comm co-chair Benny Abante when the Manila congressman asked if he was still killing people. Duterte’s reply:“Hindi na ako magpatay, retired na ako eh.”

Having learned its lesson from the Senate Blue Ribbon subcommittee hearing, during which Duterte held court for nearly nine hours, the quad comm set out the ground rules before starting its inquiry. And – except for the mic-throwing attempt at Trillanes, and a fist aimed at De Lima – Duterte largely complied, omitting his PIs and limiting his negative comments to “gago” or a fool.

It was almost comical that the quad comm had to suspend proceedings to decide whether the word should be allowed or deleted from the records.

Duterte lived up to his Dirty Rody moniker when he faced the quad comm, painting a scary portrait of his anti-crime activities particularly when he was mayor of Davao City.

What would be scarier, however, is that after watching him, many Filipinos would still support his hardline approach to criminality, and understand what he said his critics in Congress could not get – that as mayor and then as president, he did what he had to do to keep Filipinos safe, given the inherent constraints in the law and society.