Playing nice

You can’t play nice with lowlifes who don’t play by the rules.

This thinking underpins the approach to law enforcement and public safety of Dirty Harry types in this country, with Rodrigo Duterte just the latest among them.

It’s not an entirely baseless argument in a country with one of the highest levels of armed violence in this region. But the approach is also highly prone to abuse and gross violations of civil liberties. Yet the results of surveys and elections indicate that a significant segment of the population prefers the hardline approach to criminality.

Such folks cite the vicious handiwork of criminally minded psychos in this country. Kidnappers have raped and tortured their victims, and sometimes murdered them even after the payment of ransom.

Carjackers have executed and then burned their victims beyond recognition. Drug traffickers have been particularly notorious in dealing savagely with those who cross them, civilians and lawmen alike.

There are suspicions that similar fates have befallen 34 online cockfighting aficionados who went missing between April 2021 and January 2022. Cockfight game rigging and the consequent loss of enormous amounts of bets by certain violent types is suspected to be the reason for the disappearance of the sabungeros. Some of the suspects are cops.

Can law enforcers play nice with criminals who are capable of such misdeeds?

*      *      *

The problem is compounded by the weakness of the pillars of the criminal justice system. With the glacial pace of Philippine justice, some cops would have already retired from the service before a criminal case is resolved in a trial court. Also, honest and dedicated cops (yes, there are such creatures) have been frustrated when their months of hard work in pinning down a notorious drug trafficker go up in smoke, when a crooked judge – a “hoodlum in robe” – orders the drug dealer freed.

As in the PNP, overhauling the judiciary starts with the recruitment of magistrates. But this aspect is among the most compromised, with qualifications routinely trumped by political connections and membership in religious and other special interest groups.

Law enforcers need more training in criminal investigation and the proper conduct of arrests, searches and seizure of evidence. There are cops who, because of lack of knowledge of the law, find their efforts wasted because their manner of conducting a drug bust was legally flawed.

Cops also need better equipment, including guns, communication and surveillance devices. Organized crime rings are often well funded, and can afford amply equipped arsenals and high-tech gadgets that can be superior to what law enforcement agencies have.

Filipinos have shown, over and over, a preference for an iron fist approach to fighting crime. In March 2012, for example, there was little public outcry when Manila cops shot dead two pedicab drivers, ages 19 and 28, who admitted raping and then strangling to death a seven-year-old girl in Sta. Mesa. The cops claimed one of the suspects had tried to grab the gun of an arresting officer.

Elections and surveys have shown a Filipino preference for persons perceived to be willing and able to do whatever it takes to keep people safe, even if it means doing away with the niceties of the law.

*      *      *

This approach to law and order was not unique to Duterte.

Panfilo Lacson faced accusations of human rights violations in fighting kidnappers targeting mostly the Chinese-Filipino community. But the bloody campaign against kidnapping rings under his supervision as a police officer ended that scourge in the Tsinoy community. Combined with his campaigns against kotong cops and jueteng coddlers, Lacson’s hardline approach to law enforcement undoubtedly helped propel him to the Senate.

Ronald dela Rosa, the jovial architect of the most brutal crackdown ever on the drug scourge in this country, also handily won a Senate seat.

When people have to wait up to 20 years for a criminal case to be resolved with finality, you can understand why shortcuts to justice enjoy public support.

From Day One, Marcos 2.0 made it clear that the hardline approach to crime-busting was over.

Unfortunately, either it’s taking time for the message to sink in among law enforcement agencies, or the crime-busters believe it’s all PR hogwash and the administration, in actual practice, will apply the previous policy.

We can see this from the facial expressions of several of the cops who have been suspended, sacked, forced to resign from their posts or are currently detained and facing criminal prosecution for killing teenagers or for the excessive use of force. The expression is not so much regret or repentance but confusion: You mean we did something wrong? We were just keeping the public safe!

*      *      *

Those behind Tokhang and Double Barrel will probably distance themselves from these recent cases. But some of them have openly lamented that drug dealers are back in business, including several personalities in law enforcement and local government, which is worsening the crime situation.

They also point out that the reasonable use of force is allowed among law enforcers, especially considering the psychos that they have to deal with on a regular basis.

Drawing the line between reasonable and excessive use of force can be complicated, but the PNP will have to make an effort to do so. It has rules of engagement that cover the circumstances when guns can be fired. But the recent incidents indicate that cops are either heedless of or clueless about these rules. Or are there unwritten rules that have superseded those in black and white?

After the recent controversial incidents, there has been growing support for the return of batons and whistles for police use. This is to give cops a less lethal alternative to guns when pursuing or trying to stop suspects. “Less lethal” must be emphasized, because with enough force applied, a baton can also cause death.

For folks who like hardline law enforcement, the worry is that if lawmen go soft on criminal elements, it could spell trouble for public safety.

Dispelling this concern is the challenge faced by Marcos 2.0. In lieu of the iron fist approach to crime fighting, it must present an alternative that the public can trust and support.