The bodyguards

The title is inspired by the 1992 film “The Bodyguard”, but it bears no relation to the plot or characters portrayed by Whitney Houston and Kevin Costner. Instead, I'm referring to the recent issue involving members of the Philippine National Police who were pulled out from the security detail of Vice President Sara Duterte Carpio.

The vice president has been vocal about it, bringing the otherwise lesser-known PNP chief, Gen. Rommel Marbil, into the limelight for issuing an order to relieve 75 PNP personnel assigned to her protection. It turns out that even after the withdrawal of these 75 PNP members, the vice president still has 389 security personnel from both the military and police in her detail.

We know politics likely played a role in the reassignment of these PNP personnel, but I was surprised to learn that the vice president requires nearly a 400-strong security force to protect her and her loved ones. In a way, something good emerged from this issue because it prompted the PNP to be transparent about the use of public resources --security personnel, in this case-- allowing the public to judge whether the government has been using these critical resources rationally for the public good.

The revelation emerged inadvertently due to Vice President Duterte Carpio’s statements about this issue. I had witnessed up close a public event guesting by then Vice President Leni Robredo in 2019. Though I saw a few stern and serious guards maintaining a secure distance to protect her, there wasn't a swarm of security personnel inside or outside the venue. We hadn’t been subjected to security screening either.

The Office of the Vice President may be the second highest in the land, yet the security detail for such a position should vary depending on the activity she is engaged in, taking into account factors like location, participants, and other potential threats. I’m sure the state’s intelligence forces always conduct threat assessments and extensive background checks on the participants of the activity featuring very important persons (VIPs) as guests. Our security establishment has every right to rationalize the use of its resources, whether in handling our West Philippine Sea conflict with China, counterinsurgency efforts, or in securing VIPs.

Of course, the situation is different for the president of the country, who is always considered to be under threat due to his highly-consequential role. Any harm to him would have real consequences until the succession plan kicks in and stability is restored. Below him, other important officials do not need a battalion to protect themselves.

Either they are really under real threats --which reflects poorly on the peace and order of the country or community they govern-- or they just feel safer and more important than they really are with many personnel in their security detail, which is a waste of public resources and indicative of our entitlement culture among the political elite. I am inclined to think it is more often the latter.

Others have mentioned of threats from communists, given the incessant red-tagging associated with the camp of Vice President Duterte Carpio and her father. But have you noticed any executions attributed to the CPP-NPA since the late 1980s? None, because the communists realized urban hit squads are unpopular among the people. The communists realized that their special partisan units called SPARU (urban hit squads) were a big mistake and only alienated the revolutionary movement from the people.

If a threat ever materializes against our highest public officials, it would likely come from someone irrational or unstable. You don’t need a battalion to protect yourself from a few such individuals. Instead, what is required is effective use of intelligence and confidential funds to conduct a credible threat assessment tailored to each situation, which helps rationalize the deployment of security forces.

My hope really is that in the future, we can follow the example of some Scandinavian countries, where the highest public officials have no qualms about taking public transportation or being seen in public settings with minimal security detail. This would be the greatest testament to their effectiveness to govern, as it would mean the community they nurture and lead is their best security guarantee.

In our country these days, even public officials at the LGU level seem so insecure, as if haunted by their own shadows.