Pubdate: Thu, 28 Jul 2016
Source: Philippine Star (Philippines)
Column: Postscript
Copyright: PhilSTAR Daily Inc. 2016
Contact:  http://www.philstar.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/622
Author: Federico D. Pascual Jr.

6-MONTH DEADLINE UPS PRESSURE TO KILL

RIGHT TO LIFE being inherent in the human person, the many believers 
in the sanctity of life are not likely to withdraw their call that 
suspected users of illegal drugs be given a chance to be heard before 
being silenced on the spot by a bullet.

There are many circumstances that an arresting police officer must 
sort out in his mind a split-second before pulling the trigger on a 
suspected drug-user/pusher who is still presumed innocent under the law.

Unfortunately for the officer and his quarry, that decision to kill 
had been made for him in advance by his superiors acting as God 
handing down a summary last judgment.

Why so, and  if we are not comfortable with the moral issue - what 
can be done about it?

President Rodrigo Duterte said in his State of the Nation Address 
last Monday: "My administration shall be sensitive to the State's 
obligation to promote and protect, fulfill the human rights of our 
citizens, especially the poor, the marginalized and the vulnerable."

We presume our President's bona fides. Despite his tough exterior, 
most of us think Digong is mellow at heart, and means well.

The problem then could be that the Commander-in-Chief, who has 
inspired the extrajudicial killing of suspects now averaging 10 lives 
each day, is rushing to catch a self-imposed deadline based on his 
limited Davao experience. And that pressure is passed on to the 
national police.

Invoking human rights should not be regarded as a pretext to 
frustrate the administration's anti-narcotics drive, or to "destroy 
the country" as Mr. Duterte puts it, but as a plea for putting things 
in proper order and in line with due process.

Having reiterated his promise many times, President Duterte may feel 
compelled to deliver on his pledge to put an end to crime, drug-abuse 
and corruption in "three to six months."

With the targeted evils lurking everywhere nationwide, and with the 
police and the prosecution arm of government sorely handicapped, they 
might have found the six months allotted for the job too short.

Under deadline pressure, many police raiders may be taking the 
short-cut by just shooting dead the main or collateral targets. After 
all, the President has promised them protection, raises and rewards.

Let us then consider giving the police, and the President, reasonably 
more time - like maybe 10 months instead of six - to neutralize 
criminals without violating due process, but making sure that the 
extra time does not upset the momentum of the chase.

The extension will also give the police, social welfare agencies and 
other cooperating entities more time to put up rehabilitation 
facilities for the throngs of drug users who have been surrendering 
or are being caught.

We understand that the desired end is not to kill drugusers but to 
rehabilitate them, as the President implied in his SONA:

"We will increase the number of residential treatment and 
rehabilitation facilities in all regions. The armed forces will 
facilitate the preparation for the use of military camps and 
facilities for drug rehabilitation."  Watch the items on FOI 
blacklist ON FREEDOM of Information, the general rule under the 
Executive Order of President Duterte is that a citizen shall have 
reasonable access to official records of the Executive Department 
unless such files are listed as exceptions in the inventory still 
being drawn up.

While awaiting the list being made by the Department of Justice and 
the Office of the Solicitor General, everything is on hold. It is not 
yet the season for submitting requests for specified records with 
Executive agencies.

In his SONA, the President said: "The Presidential Communications 
Office shall coordinate with the Office of the Executive Secretary 
and the Presidential Legal Counsel in implementing the EO on the 
Freedom of Information." The PCO, OES and the PLC will draw up the 
implementing rules and regulations?

The EO says that requests for records will be submitted to and acted 
upon by the head of the office keeping the files, making the office 
head the gatekeeper. If the citizen is denied access and he 
disagrees, under the EO he can go to court.

In the FOI bill that the previous Congress did not pass because of 
its common fear with Malacanang of being scrutinized, these were some 
of the exceptions:

Information relating to national security or defense, or pertaining 
to foreign relations when its disclosure may weaken the negotiating 
position of the government or compromise diplomatic relations.

Records of minutes, advice given or opinions expressed during 
decision-making or policy formulation, invoked by the Chief Executive 
to be privileged.

Information pertaining to defense, law enforcement and border 
control, when disclosure may compromise or interfere with any 
military or law enforcement operation, or lead to the revelation of 
the identity of a confidential source, or endanger the life or safety 
of an individual, or deprive a person of his right to a fair trial.

Personal circumstances of an individual whose disclosure would be an 
unwarranted invasion of his or her privacy, unless it forms part of a 
public record, or the person is or was a government official.

Trade secrets and commercial or financial information from a natural 
or juridical person obtained in confidence or covered by privileged 
communication, when its revelation would prejudice his/its interests 
in trade, industrial, financial or commercial competition.

Records classified as privileged communication in legal proceedings 
by law or by the Rules of Court.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom