HUMAN RIGHTS AS A UNIVERSAL CONCEPT: A
CONTRADICTION ON STATE’S RESPONSIBILITY TO
PROTECT HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE CASE OF
EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLING IN “WAR ON DRUGS”
CAMPAIGN UNDER DUTERTE’S ADMINISTRATION
(2016-2018)
BY:
ATLINDO RIZKY PUTRANTO
016201400024
A Thesis presented to the Faculty of Humanities President University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Bachelor Degree in
International Relations Major in Diplomacy
2018
i
THESIS ADVISOR
RECOMMENDATION LETTER
This thesis titled “Human Rights as a Universal Concept: A
Contradiction on State’s Responsibility to Protect Human Rights in the
Case of Extrajudicial Killing in “War on Drugs” Campaign Under
Duterte’s Administration (2016-2018)” prepared and submitted by
Atlindo Rizky Putranto in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of Bachelor of Arts in International Relations in the Faculty of
Humanities has been reviewed and found to have satisfied the
requirements for a thesis fit to be examined. I therefore recommend this
thesis for Oral Defense.
Cikarang, Indonesia, May 2018
Hendra Manurung, S.IP., MA.
ii
DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY
I declare that this thesis, entitled “Human Rights as a Universal
Concept: A Contradiction on State’s Responsibility to Protect Human
Rights in the Case of Extrajudicial Killing in “War on Drugs”
Campaign Under Duterte’s Administration (2016-2018)” is, to the best
of my knowledge and belief, an original piece of work that has not been
submitted, either in whole or in part, to another university to obtain a
degree.
Cikarang, Indonesia, May 11, 2018
Atlindo Rizky Putranto
iii
PANEL OF EXAMINERS APPROVAL SHEET
The panel of examiners declare that the thesis entitled “Human Rights as
a Universal Concept: A Contradiction on State’s Responsibility to
Protect Human Rights in the Case of Extrajudicial Killing in “War on
Drugs” Campaign Under Duterte’s Administration (2016-2018)” that
was submitted by Atlindo Rizky Putranto majoring in International
Relations from Faculty of Humanities was assessed and approved to have
passed the Oral Examinations of May 14th, 2018.
Drs. Teuku Rezasyah, M.A., Ph.D.
Chair – Panel of Examiner
Natasya Kusumawardani, S.IP., MProfStuds (Hons)
Examiner
Hendra Manurung, S.IP., MA.
Thesis Advisor
iv
ABSTRACT
Thesis Title: Human Rights as a Universal Concept: A Contradiction on State’s
Responsibility to Protect Human Rights in the Case of Extrajudicial Killing in
“War on Drugs” Campaign Under Duterte’s Administration (2016-2018)
Human Rights as a universal concept has been declared by the United Nations (UN)
on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). However, Human Rights as
a Universal concept has been debated by the concept of Cultural Relativism. The
contradiction between both concept has influenced the perception toward Human
Rights as well as the state‟s obligation to promote and protect Human Rights.
In the case of “War on Drugs” campaign by Duterte, the Cultural Relativism concept
of Human Rights can be found. Whereas, the extrajudicial killing practice inside the
campaign has been implemented and supported by the Philippine‟s citizens. In which
the extrajudicial killing has considered as a violation of Human Rights as according
to UDHR. Meanwhile, Philippines has ratified the Human Rights documents as a sign
of state‟s willingness to promote and protect Human Rights universally. However, by
the implementation of extrajudicial killing in “War on Drugs” campaign Philippines
has violated the Human Rights and fail to fulfil state‟s responsibility to protect
Human Rights.
This thesis concludes that the construction reason behind the support on extrajudicial
killing that lead to the failure of state‟s responsibility to protect Human Rights, is the
culture of killing as the cultural fault-lines. Focusing on the practice of death penalty
colonialization era that drive to a practice of killing as a hardened culture. Therefore,
the practice of killing has become common thing on Philippines
Keywords: Philippines, Human Rights violation, extrajudicial killing, Cultural
Relativism, State’s responsibility to protect Human Rights
v
ABSTRAK
Thesis Title: Human Rights as a Universal Concept: A Contradiction on State’s
Responsibility to Protect Human Rights in the Case of Extrajudicial Killing in
“War on Drugs” Campaign Under Duterte’s Administration (2016-2018)
Hak Asasi Manusia telah dideklarasikan sebagain konsep universal oleh Persatuan
Bangsa-bangsa (PBB) dalam Deklarasi Universal Hak Asasi Manusia. Namun, HAM
sebagai konsep universal telah dibantah oleh konsep relativisme budaya. Kontradiksi
antara kedua konsep telah mempengaruhi persepsi terhadap HAM dan kewajiban
negara untuk mendukung dan menjaga HAM.
Konsep relativisme budaya dapat ditemukan dalam kasus “Perang anti Narkoba” oleh
Duterte. Dimana masyarakat Filipina mendukung pembunhan di luar proses hukum
dalam kampanye tersebut. Yang mana pembunhan di luar proses hukum merupakan
bentuk pelanggaran terhadap HAM menurut Deklarasi Universal Hak Asasi Manusia.
Sementara itu, Filipina telah me-ratifikasi perjanjian HAM, sebagai tanda ke-relaan
negara untuk turut mendukung dan menjaga HAM. Namun, dengan pelaksanaan
Pembunhan di luar proses hokum di dalam kampanye “Perang anti Narkoba”,
Filipina telah melanggar HAM dan telah gagal untuk menjaga HAM.
Penelitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa budaya membunuh di Filipina adalah alasan
yang mengkonstruksi tingkah laku masyarakat Filipina untuk mendukung kampanye
tersebut dan menuntun kepada kegagalan negara untuk menjaga HAM. Penelitian ini
akan di fokuskan kepada praktek dari hukuman mati yang terjadi saat zaman kolonial.
Yang mana Prakter dari hukuman mati tersebut telah mandarah-daging sehingga
menjadi budaya membunuh. Oleh karena itu praktek bunuh-membunuh telah menjadi
hal yang biasa di Filipina.
Keywords: Filipina, Pelanggaran HAM, Pembunhan di Luar Proses Hukum,
Relativisme budaya, Kewajiban Negara untuk Menjaga HAM
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First of all, I would like to thank the Creature that dwell within the soul, the Lord of
all mankind, Allah SWT. I am very blessed for all the thing that You have gave to
me. Thank you for teaching me the lesson to surrender, then You give me more than I
desired. Surely, I am nothing without His Greatness.
I also would like to thank my Mother, Erawati Endang Sriwahyuni and my Father,
Kristianto Setyo Lelono. Thank you for always support me until this second. I am
really sorry that there are a lot of Family time that being waste because I have to work
on my thesis, but you always understand me and forgive me, thank you. I hope this
thesis will make you proud of me. Also, to my brothers Renaldy Wahyu Putranto and
Tridanu Simbarjoyo Putranto. Thank you for becoming a good brother that always
ask me to play in the middle of my thesis construction. But then I realize, it is a way
that you guys have done to refresh my mind.
This thesis will never be done without the guidance and suggestion from my advisor,
Mr. Hendra Manurung and Miss. Natasya Kusumawardani. Thank you for all the
guidance and suggestion in my thesis writing process. I am sorry that I made a lot of
mistakes in the process, but I know in every suggestions and every criticism will
make me stronger. Thank you, a lot, for being patience in guiding me. and for Ms
Natasya, I do not forget to mention you this time, and thank you for the wonderful
experience in my thesis consultation.
This paragraph is dedicated for the one that always accompany me, for the one that
always support me, for the one that always cheer me up in every word of give up that
come out of my mouth, I am really grateful to be with you, Dibyana Galih Prakasita.
No one understand me and know my struggle except you. And thank you for always
remind and support me to finished my thesis, but you also not forget to remind me to
take a rest. Above all, thank you that you have introduce me to the Cat! So now I also
vii
love them. And is still cannot believe I can write your name in my thesis, thank you.
And I am really blessed to have you Sita, I really am.
I also would like to expressed my thank you to the hood without the name. To my
very best friend, yet we never take a photo for the three of us, because we know that a
real friend does not need those kinds of things. To Bambang and Ausap. Honestly,
I‟m lazy to make this paragraph for you, because I think it would not make any
different, I don‟t think your heart will be touched because of this. But anyway, thank
you for, wait, I don‟t even know what to thank for. Let just put it this way, just wait
for the stories okay? And thank you for everything.
I also would like to say a lot of thank to my friends in University life that will not be
forgotten. To David, Naufal, Rifqi, Elji, Dicko, Pipiw, thank you for the moments
that we always share and thank you for the lesson you guys have teach me, I learn a
lot of things from you guys. To Jaja, Paksi, Adit, and Dicky thank you for always
listening to my stories and thank you for bring me the joy. To Sultan, Arvin, Sam,
thank you for always become a joker to me and always make me laugh. And also, for
the girls, Fiqa, Amel, Vena, Fanny, Kalya, Ratih, thank you for being annoying and
thank you for becoming a very good friend of mine. Last, thank you for all of you
guys that has made my university life brighter.
Last, thank you for Puhaba Café‟s family, Bang Ebi, Taro, Mas Fano, Mas Wahyu,
Mba Rika and Bang Thomas. Thank you for the nice environment you guys have
shared to me. Thank you Bang Ebi, for providing me a really good quality of coffee,
and a very nice ambience so that I feel comfortable to finished my thesis on Puhaba
Coffee.
Cikarang, May 11, 2018
Atlindo Rizky Putranto
vii
Table of Contents
THESIS ADVISOR ................................................................................................................... i
RECOMMENDATION LETTER ............................................................................................. i
DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY ..................................................................................... ii
ABSTRACT ..............................................................................................................................iii
ABSTRAK ................................................................................................................................ v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ........................................................................................................ vi
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................. ix
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................................................x
CHAPTER I .............................................................................................................................. 1
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background of Study ................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Problem Identification............................................................................................. 10
1.3 Statement of the Problem ........................................................................................ 15
1.4 Research Objectives ................................................................................................ 15
1.5 Significance of The Study ....................................................................................... 16
1.6 Theoretical Framework ........................................................................................... 16
1.6.1 Universalism ................................................................................................... 17
1.6.2 State‟s Responsibility to Protect Human Rights ............................................. 18
1.6.3 Cultural Relativism ......................................................................................... 20
1.6.4 Constructivism ................................................................................................ 23
1.7 Framework of Research ................................................................................................ 27
1.8 Research Methodology ........................................................................................... 28
1.9 Scope and Limitations of the Study ........................................................................ 29
1.10 Thesis Structure ...................................................................................................... 29
1.11 Literature Review .................................................................................................... 30
1.11.1 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) Document ........................ 31
1.11.2 Wendt, A. (1995). Anarchy is What States Make of it: The Social Construction of
Power Politics (1992). International Theory ................................................................... 32
viii
1.11.2 Relativism and Human Rights (Claudio Coradetti) ........................................ 33
1.11.4 Baylis J., Smith S., Owens P. (2008). The Globalization of World Politics : An
Introduction to International Relations ........................................................................... 34
1.11.5 Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights ............................................... 35
1.11.6 Human Rights Watch: License to Kill ................................................................. 36
1.11.7 Johnson, D. T., & Zimring, F. E. (2009). The next frontier: National
development, political change and the death penalty in Asia. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press
........................................................................................................................................ 37
CHAPTER II ........................................................................................................................... 38
AN OVERVIEW OF EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLING AS A VIOLATION OF HUMAN
RIGHTS .................................................................................................................................. 38
2.1 Extrajudicial Killing on “War on Drugs” decision as a Violation on Ratified Treaties of
Human Rights ..................................................................................................................... 38
2.2 Extrajudicial Killing on “War on Drugs” Campaugn as Violation of R2P ................... 46
2.3. International Responses Toward “War on Drugs” Campaign ..................................... 49
CHAPTER III ......................................................................................................................... 54
AN OVERVIEW OF “WAR ON DRUGS” CAMPAIGN BY DUTERTE‟S
ADMINISTRATION .............................................................................................................. 54
3.1 The Background of “War on Drugs” Campaign. .......................................................... 54
3.2 The Implementation of “War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration .... 58
3.3 The Support toward the “War on Drugs” campaign ..................................................... 62
CHAPTER IV ......................................................................................................................... 69
CULTURAL RELATIVISM ON EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLING IN “WAR ON DRUGS”
CAMPAIGN ........................................................................................................................... 69
4.1 The History of Death Penalty on Philippines ................................................................ 70
4.1.1 Spanish Colonialization Era ............................................................................ 71
4.1.2 America Colonialization Era ........................................................................... 74
4.2. Death Penalty as the Cultural Fault-lines ..................................................................... 76
4.2.1 Practice of Death Penalty as Hardened Culture ......................................................... 77
4.3 Case of Extrajudicial Killing Before Duterte‟s Administration .................................... 82
4.3.1 Marcos administration (1965 - 1986) ..................................................................... 82
4.3.2 Arroyo administration (2001 - 2010) ..................................................................... 83
4.3.3 Benigno Aquino Administration (2010 - 2016) ..................................................... 84
ix
4.4 Human Rights as a Relativism Concept on Philippines ................................................ 87
CHAPTER V .......................................................................................................................... 91
CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................................... 91
BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................... 93
APPENDIX ........................................................................................................................... 99
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Conceptual Framework……………………………………………....27
Figure 2.1 Ratification of 18 Human Rights
Treaties………………………………………………………………………………40
Figure 3.1 Drugs Users in Philippines…….…………………………………….56
Figure 3.2 Duterte Satisfaction Rate….…………………………………………65
Figure 3.3 Filipinos Perception of Change in Number of Drugs
addicts……………………………………………………………………………...66
Figure 4.1 Death Penalty Case During Spanish Colonialization….…………….72
Figure 4.2 Death Penalty Case During American Colonialization……………...75
Figure 4.3 Conceptual Framework………………………………………….......76
Figure 4.4 Case of Death Penalty During Colonialization Era on Philippines….80
Figure 4.5 Extrajudicial Killing on Arroyo Precedency………………………...83
Figure 4.6 Extrajudicial Killing Case on Aquino‟s Administration…………….85
Figure 4.7 Conceptual Framework……………………………………………...87
x
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
CAT Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman
Degrading Treatment or Punishment
DDB Dangerous Drugs Board
HRW Human Rights Watch
ICCPR International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
ICESCR International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights
OHCHR Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
PNP Philippine National Police
PDEA Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency
R2P Responsibility to Protect
SWS Social Weather Stations
UN United Nations
UDHR Universal Declarations of Human Rights
UNODC United Nations on Drugs and Crime
xi
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of Study
The existence of Human Rights is basically aim to protect the dignity of all
human being regardless their status or their condition in life.1 As according to
United Nations (UN), Human Rights is a right inherent to all human beings,
regardless of race, sex, nationality, ethnicity, language, religion, or any other status.
Human rights include the right to life and liberty, freedom from slavery and torture,
freedom of opinion and expression, the right to work and education.2 Human Rights
and Human dignity are cannot be separated, as according to David P. Forysthe, on
the book of “Human Rights in International Relations”, he emphasizes that Human
Rights are considered as a fundamental moral right of a person to live with human
dignity.3 As explained by Jack Donnelly, Human Rights basically exist since the
human being as well as its nature become the construction of Human Rights itself.4
So that the existence of Human Rights cannot be denied since, the sense of
humanity itself is attached with the Human Being.
The conceptual of Human Rights that emphasize on rights inherent to all
human being, as well as has been brought by the sense of humanity which been
attached with the human itself, has make the Human Rights as a Universal Concept.
It has been Universal since it is applied to all people regardless of nationality,
status, religion, gender, race and so on and so for, besides, Human Rights also can
1 Ibid, p-3-7
2 Human Rights. (2017, October 31). Retrieved from http://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-
depth/human-rights/ 3Forsythe, D. P. (2018). Human rights in international relations (pp. 3-7)
4 Donnelly, J. (2013). Universal human rights in theory and practice. Ithaca: Cornell University
Press.
2
be found on the fundamental principles of culture, religion, and traditions.5 Not
only by the sense of humanity that makes human rights as a universal concept, but
the United Nation has also declared the Universalism of human rights. The
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was proclaimed by the United
Nations General Assembly in Paris on 10 December 1948 on General Assembly
resolution 217 A. it is aim as a standard of achievements for all peoples and all
nations, and as a fundamental to be protected universally by member state.6 The
universal concept of human rights is basically means as a concept that has to be
accepted and obeyed universally by the international system. Human Rights as a
Universal concept also emphasized in this article in some points,
THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION
OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples
and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society,
keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and
education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by
progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal
and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of
Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their
jurisdiction.7
The establishment of Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) also
followed by the establishment of two important documents, the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). Those documents become the
international law on 1976, and also known as the International Bill of Human
Rights.8 Both of the covenants are promoting a different scope of Human Rights
which not specifically declared on the UDHR. Although both of them have
different scope, but their preamble and article 1, 3, and 5 is identical, in which
5 New Zealand. (2008). The New Zealand handbook on international human rights (p. 9).
6 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (2018, January 29). Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/ 7 Ibid
8 United Nations Universal Declaration, International Covenant: United for Human Rights. (n.d.).
Retrieved from http://www.humanrights.com/what-are-human-rights/international-human-rights-
law/international-human-rights-law-continued.html
3
recall the obligation of States under the Charter of the United Nations to promote
human rights; remind the individual of his responsibility to strive for the promotion
and observance of those rights; and recognize that, in accordance with the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the ideal of free human beings enjoying
civil and political freedom and freedom from fear and want can be achieved only if
conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy his civil and political rights, as
well as his economic, social and cultural rights.9 Which indicates the purpose of
both covenants is the same. As has been stated on Article one,
―All peoples have the right of self-determination, including the right to
determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and
cultural development.‖10
The differences between The ICESCR and ICCPR can be seen from the
issues that they put their focused on. The ICESCR are mostly discussed on the
scope of economic, social, and cultural rights. In general, ICESCR are includes the
rights for Work, Enjoyment of just and favorable conditions of work, form and join
trade unions, social security, protection and assistance for family, an adequate
standard of living, education and participation in cultural life, as accordance to
article 6 to 15 of ICESCR.11
On the other hand, ICCPR put focused on the rights in
the scope of Civil and Political Rights. In general, as according to some points from
article 6 to 27, ICCPR are focusing on the rights of living, freedom from torture
cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, freedom from slavery,
freedom from imprisonment for failure to fulfil a contractual obligation, freedom
from retroactive criminal laws, the right to recognition as a person before the law,
and freedom of thought, conscience and religion.12
Human Rights has a Universal concept should be promoted internationally
and be applied to all states. As an action of promoting the Universalism of Human
9 Fact Sheet No.2 (Rev.1), The International Bill of Human Rights. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FactSheet2Rev.1en.pdf 10
Manual on Human Rights Education with Young People – Council of Europe 11
New Zealand. (2008). The New Zealand handbook on international human rights (p. 47-48). 12
Fact Sheet No.2 (Rev.1), The International Bill of Human Rights. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FactSheet2Rev.1en.pdf
4
Rights, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) were
established to promote the Human Rights itself. OHCHR leads global human rights
efforts speaks out objectively in the face of human rights violations worldwide.13
To promote the Universalism concept of human rights, OHCHR provides assistance
to Governments, such as expertise and technical trainings in the areas of
administration of justice, legislative reform, and electoral process, to help
implement international human rights law standards on the ground.14
However, Human Rights as a universal concept is still debatable. in reality,
Human Rights as a Universal concept is not fully implemented and acceptable for
some states. the relativity of culture could be one of the factor for states which not
accept the concept of Human Rights. The existence of Cultural Relativism has
become a contradiction for the concept of Universalism in Human Rights. Both
Universal and Relative are obviously have a different concept towards Human
Rights. Universalism perceive Human Rights as a universal concept since the
human nature that has been brought from the very beginning of human being lead
to a sense of humanity. Meanwhile Cultural Relativism perceive human nature
itself is a kind of relative concept, which depend on the culture that construct
them.15
So that the concept of Universalism and Relativism did not match each
other.
In this thesis, to explain the debate between the concept of Universalism and
Cultural Relativism, Philippines will be taken as the case study. Philippines is
currently having such a case of human right violations regarding its domestic
campaign of “War on Drugs” under Rodrigo Roa Duterte administration. The drugs
problem has become a serious problem in Philippines, According to 2016 report of
the Dangerous Drugs Board (DDB) of Philippines, there are at least 1.7 million
13
OHCHR | What we do. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/AboutUs/Pages/WhatWeDo.aspx 14
Ibid 15
Donnelly, J. (2013). Universal human rights in theory and practice. Ithaca: Cornell University
Press.
5
drugs users, it is almost 1.7% of its populations.16
The DDB also reported that the
range of age among 1.7 million drugs users, are from age 10 until 69 years old, and
44.69% of them are unemployed which means has covered a wide range of ages,
from children to adult.17
On the other hand, Duterte has claimed that there are 4
million drugs users on Philippines as quoted from his speech.18
It is such a big gap
number between DDB‟s report ad Duterte‟s itself claimed. Despite all the contrast
between DDB‟s report and Duterte‟s claim, the Philippines drugs prevalence global
rate is still under United Nations standard. The United station has stated that the
global prevalence of drugs user is 5.2, while Philippines drugs prevalence rate is
2.3, which is still categorized as an urgent drugs abuse problem in a country.19
The “War on Drugs” campaign is established since the drugs problems on
Philippines has become a serious problem. Rodrigo Duterte perceive the drugs
problem in Philippines is the main obstacle to the Philippine‟s social and economic
progress.20
The intention to eradicate the drugs abuser has started before Duterte
elected as the president of Philippines, it has been started from his campaign during
the presidential election.
―If by chance that God will place me there, watch out because the 1,000
[people allegedly executed while Duterte was mayor of Davao City] will
become 100,000. You will see the fish in Manila Bay getting fat. That is
where I will dump you.‖ – Rodrigo Duterte21
16
Dangerous Drugs Board. (n.d.). 2016 Statistics. Retrieved from https://www.ddb.gov.ph/research-
statistics/statistics/45-research-and-statistics/329-2016-statistics 17
Ibid 18
Ranada, P. (2017, May 6). Is Duterte's '4 million drug addicts' a 'real number'? Retrieved from
https://www.rappler.com/rappler-blogs/169009-duterte-drug-addicts-real-number 19
Punongbayan, J. C. (2017, May 26). Why Duterte's ?4 million drug users? is statistically
improbable. Retrieved from https://www.rappler.com/thought-leaders/170975-duterte-drug-users-
statistically-improbable 20
Xu, M. (n.d.). Human Rights and Duterte's War on Drugs. Retrieved from
https://www.cfr.org/interview/human-rights-and-dutertes-war-drugs 21
'License to Kill? | Philippine Police Killings in Duterte's 'War on Drugs? (2017, July 13).
Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/03/02/license-kill/philippine-police-killings-
dutertes-war-drugs
6
Duterte‟s “war on Drugs” campaign or also known as Oplan Tokhang in
Philippines language, where the police of the Philippines directly arrest the drugs
abusers from door to door, as state below,
―OPLAN TOKHANG is a visayan word which means Tok-tok Hangyo.
Where police personnel knock the doors of an alleged drug user or pusher,
asking him/her that he/she will surrender to the police in order that they
will be monitored for further assessment.‖22
The “War on Drugs” campaign has been regulated by the Philippine Drug
Enforcement Agency (PDEA). PDEA was created for the efficient and effective
law enforcement of all the provisions on dangerous drugs and/or precursors and
essential chemicals.23
The regulation of punishment on drugs abusers has been
regulated on the Republic Act 9165 of Philippines,
―Should any dangerous drug be the proximate cause of the death of a
person using the same in such den, dive or resort, the penalty of death and a
fine ranging from One million (P1,000,000.00) to Fifteen million pesos
(P15,000,000.00) shall be imposed on the maintainer, owner and/or
operator.‖24
The PDEA also has to be in-line with the current President‟s program, in which
“War on Drugs” also one of the campaign of Duterte. As the agency that focusing
on drugs enforcement PDEA has already promoting Duterte‟s “War on Drugs”
campaign, as has been stated on the PDEA‟s website,
“Unity is strength, let us all stand and be counted active community
participations in essential in President Rodrigo Roa Duterte‘s war against
Drugs‖25
The “War on Drugs” campaign also called by a Double-Barrel Project by
the Philippines police.26
The campaign is originally aim to reduce and eradicate the
drugs abuser on the country, unfortunately, the War on Drugs campaign has been a
22
Ibid 23
User, S. (n.d.). Laws and Regulations. Retrieved from http://pdea.gov.ph/laws-and-
regulations#executive-order-218 24
Ibid 25
Ibid 26
Ibid
7
controversial issue since the implementation of the campaign has consider as an
extrajudicial killing.27
In accordance to Command Memorandum Circular NO. 16 –
2016 of the Philippine National Police (PNP), with the subject of PNP Anti-illegal
Drugs Campaign Plan Project: “Double Barrel” stated that the campaign is a
Pronouncement of Duterte to get rid of illegal drugs.28
The purpose and mission of
the campaign are quoted as below.29
―PURPOSE:
This Command Memorandum Circular sets forth the general guidelines,
procedures and tasks of police offices/units/stations in the conduct of the
Philippine National Police (PNP) Anti-Illegal Drugs Campaign Plan -
PROJECT: "DOUBLE BARREL" in support to the Barangay Drug Clearing
Strategy of the government and the neutralization of illegal drug
personalities nationwide.
MISSION:
The PNP shall implement the PNP Anti-Illegal Drugs Campaign Plan —
PROJECT: "DOUBLE BARREL" in order to clear all drug affected
barangays across the country, conduct no let-up operations against illegal
drugs personalities and dismantle drug syndicates‖
The drugs personalities as according to the memorandum are including the drugs
Lords, warehousemen, Finance/Admin Officer and their protector, handler,
financier, supporter.30
Duterte‟s intention to reduce the drugs abusers in Philippines by killing
them are not only a gimmick to frighten the drugs abuser, when Rodrigo Duterte
said “to kill the drug abuser” it is literary means by killing them. Rodrigo Duterte
27
Xu, M. (n.d.). Human Rights and Duterte's War on Drugs. Retrieved from
https://www.cfr.org/interview/human-rights-and-dutertes-war-drugs 28
PNP ANTI-ILLEGAL DRUGS CAMPAIGN PLAN - PROJECT: "DOUBLE BARREL" (16).
(2016). Retrieved from Republic of the Philippines NATIONAL POLICE COMMISSION
NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF,
PNP website: https://didm.pnp.gov.ph/Command%20Memorandum%20Circulars/CMC%202016-
16%20PNP%20ANTI-ILLEGAL%20DRUGS%20CAMPAIGN%20PLAN%20–
%20PROJECT%20DOUBLE%20BARREL.pdf 29
Ibid 30
Ibid
8
often said the word of “kill” to the drugs abusers in his speech, since he perceived
that drugs will destroy the young generation, as quoted below.
―Do not destroy my country because I will kill you. Do not destroy the young
or the youth because that is our only asset.‖31
According to Human Rights Watch report, Duterte‟s war on drugs campaign
has killed over 7.000 people that assumed as a drug abuser in Philippines, without a
legal procedure.32
Moreover, by some of the report, the implementation of the killing
itself were done not only by the Police of the Philippines but also by the unidentified
gunman, where also has been justified by Rodrigo Duterte itself.33
To assigned an
unidentified gunman which also known as Duterte‟s death squad, has shown really
well how the procedure of “War on Drugs” campaign not implemented through a
legal jurisdiction. Besides, Duterte also repeatedly said the word of “Kill” as a part
of his anti-drugs campaign, which indicates his intention to kill the drugs abusers
through his death squad and ignored he existence of legal jurisdiction.
―I will kill you, I will kill you. I will take the law into my own hands… forget
about the laws of men, forget about the laws of international law whatever.‖
– Rodrigo Duterte.34
The radical action by Duterte regarding the extrajudicial killing as well as
his controversial statement has trigger some International organization to react. In
June 2016, Ban Ki-moon as the secretary General of United Nations, strongly
disagree with the act that done by Duterte, as his statement below,
“I unequivocally condemn his apparent endorsement of extrajudicial killing,
which is illegal and a breach of fundamental rights and freedoms. Such
31
Media Interview with President Rodrigo Roa Duterte during his Visit to Marawi City –
Presidential Communications Operations Office. (2017, September 21). Retrieved from https://pcoo.gov.ph/media_interview/media-interview-president-rodrigo-roa-duterte-visit-marawi-
city/ 32
World Report 2017: Rights Trends in Philippines. (2017, January 20). Retrieved from
https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2017/country-chapters/philippines 33
Human Rights Consequences of the 'War on Drugs? in the Philippines. (2017, July 31). Retrieved
from https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/07/20/human-rights-consequences-war-drugs-philippines 34
'License to Kill? | Philippine Police Killings in Duterte's 'War on Drugs? (2017, July 13).
Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/03/02/license-kill/philippine-police-killings-
dutertes-war-drugs
9
comments are of particular concern in light of ongoing impunity for serious
cases of violence against journalists in the Philippines.‖35
– Ban Ki-Moon
On the other hand, the United Nations on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) also urged the
Philippines to respect human rights and issued a strong rejection on the extrajudicial
killing by Philippines president. As according to Yuro Fedotov, the executive
director of the UNODC,
―UNODC stands ready to further engage with the Philippines and all
countries to bring drug traffickers to justice with the appropriate legal
safeguards in line with international standards and norms, and promote
prevention, treatment, rehabilitation, and reintegration approaches based in
evidence, science, public health and human rights.‖36
Despite all of the pressure from International Organizations, here the
president of Philippines still actively implementing the extrajudicial killing in the
name of “War on Drugs”. Moreover, in some statement of Duterte, he emphasizes
that the killing will still going on for those who still become a drugs abuser in
Philippines. In 6th
August 2016, Duterte also stated a statement as a rejection of
pressure that stated by International Organizations.
―My order is shoot to kill you. I don‘t care about human rights, you better
believe me,‖ – Rodrigo Duterte37
The killing that done by Duterte is not an unusual thing for the Filipinos,
since killing has its own history on Philippines. It has started from colonialization
era by the Spanish on 1521 by Ferdinand Magellan, which brought the medieval
Europe‟s penal system which include the death penalty. The Death penalty during
the Spanish colonialization on Philippines were including burning, decapitation,
35
Ban disturbed by remarks made by President-elect of the Philippines on extrajudicial killings.
(2016, June 8). Retrieved from https://news.un.org/en/story/2016/06/531752-ban-disturbed-remarks-
made-president-elect-philippines-extrajudicial-killings#.WH44jRsrKUk 36
'License to Kill? | Philippine Police Killings in Duterte's 'War on Drugs? (2017, July 13).
Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/03/02/license-kill/philippine-police-killings-
dutertes-war-drugs= 37
Ibid
10
drowning, flaying, garrote, hanging, shooting, stabbing and others.38
The death
Penalty was implement towards Filipinos who challenged the authority of the
colonizers, and it has been running for over 300 years until 1898.39
Not only during
the Spanish period that implement death penalty as a punishment, but during the
American period as well. America has colonialized Philippines since 1898, and
America has adopted the Spanish penal system in which including the death penalty
as well. Moreover on 1932 the Spanish penal system that adopted by the America
has being revised, the revision including the target of the death penalty, which
before only imposed on those who challenged the colonizers, and after the revision
the death penalty also imposed on seven category of crimes which includes
Treason, parricide, piracy, kidnapping, murder, rape, and robbery with homicide.40
Since then, the killing thing on Philippines has become a usual thing and it has been
happen until the Duterte‟s administration.
1.2 Problem Identification
The extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign that done by Rodrigo
Duterte is obviously violating the Human Rights. It is considered as a violation of
Human Rights since the action of extrajudicial killing is considered as an action of
cruel as well as because it is considered as an action of taking the human‟s
freedom.41
Extrajudicial killing itself can be defined as an unlawful killing, or an
action of killing without a legal process that done by government (or with their
complicity) which are not adequately investigated and prosecuted by the
authorities.42
Meanwhile, Extrajudicial killing has become a popular term, which
38
Johnson, D. T., & Zimring, F. E. (2009). The next frontier: National development, political
change and the death penalty in Asia (pp. 105-108). (Next frontier.) Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. 39
Ibid, p-105-108 40
Ibid, p-105-108 41
Disappearances" and extrajudicial executions as violations of international human rights. (n.d.).
Retrieved from https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/188000/act330051993en.pdf 42
Gould, L. A., & Pate, M. (2016). State fragility around the world: Fractured justice and fierce
reprisal (p. 31).
11
Ban Ki-Moon also used the term to condemn Duterte‟s action, as has been stated
above.43
On the other hand, United Nations by the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights (UDHR) also considered extrajudicial killing as a violation of Human
Rights. It is clearly stated on one of the covenant of UDHR, which is the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). ICCPR as a covenant
that focused on civil and political rights issue, emphasize the rights for person to
life as stated on the Article 6 and 7 of the declaration.
Article 6: Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall
be protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life
Article 7: ―no one is to be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment44
The violation of Human Rights in the case of extrajudicial killing also
elaborate on the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman Degrading
Treatment or Punishment (CAT). CAT established to emphasize the obligation UN
members to promote the universal concept of Human Rights especially in the case
of torture and other cruel action. In which CAT remind the states members
obligation that no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment.45
CAT clearly emphasizes the state‟s obligation
to promote anti-torture action on the Article 2 of CAT46
,
Article 2:
1. Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial
or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its
jurisdiction.
43
Ban disturbed by remarks made by President-elect of the Philippines on extrajudicial killings.
(2016, June 8). Retrieved from https://news.un.org/en/story/2016/06/531752-ban-disturbed-remarks-
made-president-elect-philippines-extrajudicial-killings#.WH44jRsrKUk 44
Fact Sheet No.2 (Rev.1), The International Bill of Human Rights. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FactSheet2Rev.1en.pdf 45
OHCHR | Convention against Torture. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CAT.aspx 46
Ibid
12
2. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a
threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency,
may be invoked as a justification of torture.
3. An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked
as a justification of torture.
As can be seen on the Article 2 of CAT, that the state should have a responsibility
to set up a measurement to prevent the acts of torture, in which emphasize the
obligation of state to take a judicial process of such kind of torture or cruel action.
Besides CAT as according to Article 2 also emphasize that there is no single reason
as a justification of action of torture.
Universal Declaration of Human Rights that established as a common
standard of Human Rights, has proofed as a Universal concept by the ratifications
which indicates the agreement by the states member of United Nations. Philippines
as the main actor of this thesis, actually in favor to the UDHR on the voting that
held on December 10 1948.47
Besides, according to United Nations Human Rights
Office of the High Commissioner (OHCHR), Philippines has ratified 14 treaties of
Human Rights from totally 18 treaties.48
Among 14 treaties, Philippines has ratified
the ICCPR document on 1989 as well as CAT on 2012, which indicate Philippine‟s
agreement to promote the Human Rights as a universal concept, in which
promoting an anti-torture and cruel action. Since both documents are emphasizing
on the issue of civil and political rights as well as agreement to against torture and
cruel, which related to an extrajudicial killing action.
Even though Philippines has ratified Human Rights treaties that against
extrajudicial killing, however in reality, the action of President Rodrigo Duterte
goes on the other way around. When Philippines ratified the agreement that against
torture, Philippines should implement it to its citizens as well. In reality, the
implementation of “War on Drugs” campaign has led to the action of extrajudicial
killing towards the drugs suspects. Besides, Duterte will continue the killing for the
47
-OHCHR Dashboard. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://indicators.ohchr.org/ 48
Ibid
13
drugs abusers in Philippines, as Duterte guaranteed on his statement regarding
Oplan Tokhang or “War on Drugs” campaign that will be keep going on, ―Droga
(drug war) is a nonissue to me. It will be a policy until the dying days of my
presidency or my life,‖ – Rodrigo Duterte49
Above all the radical action that done by Duterte, here that become the main
question is, whether Duterte implement the “War on drugs” campaign on behalf of
the citizen‟s prosperity or on behalf of his own interest. According to some reports,
most of the Filipino are satisfied with Duterte‟s administration regarding the anti-
drugs campaign. One of the parameter of citizen‟s satisfactions toward Duterte‟s
administration, is the survey that held by the Social Weather Stations (SWS), SWS
is a non-profit and private institution that dealing with social research in
Philippines.50
According to the SWS‟s survey that held on September 2016, 7 from
10 Filipinos were satisfied with Duterte‟s action regarding anti-drugs campaign.
From 1,500 respondents, 77% said they were satisfied, 14% were unsatisfied, and
9% were undecided, and the percentage of satisfaction were declining on 2017,
from 77% to 63%, despite the decreasing percentage of satisfied citizen, however it
is still above 50%, which indicates that mostly the Philippines citizens were
satisfied with Duterte.51
The question that arise after knowing the Filipinos satisfaction toward
Duterte‟s anti-drugs campaign which reach up around 70% is whether the Filipinos
are only satisfied with Duterte‟s anti-drugs campaign, or the Filipinos are also
supporting Duterte‟s anti-drugs campaign? Shockingly, as according to Social
Weather Stations (SWS) survey, there 63% of Filipinos that agreed that the drugs
49
Tubeza, P. C., & Orejas, T. (2017, December 9). Duterte: War on drugs to continue until 2022.
Retrieved from http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/950878/rodrigo-duterte-war-on-drugs-drug-killings-
extrajudicial-killlings 50
Social Weather Stations. (n.d.). Social Weather Stations | Home Page. Retrieved from
https://www.sws.org.ph/ 51
Social Weather Stations. (n.d.). Social Weather Stations | Second Quarter 2017 Social Weather
Survey: Pres. Duterte's net satisfaction rating a new personal record-high of "Very Good" +66.
Retrieved from https://www.sws.org.ph/swsmain/artcldisppage/?artcsyscode=ART-
20170706173742
14
suspects still have to be killed even after they surrender themselves.52
The survey
that held on June 2017, with 1,200 respondents, with the statement of “There are
suspects in the illegal drug trade who already surrendered, yet were still killed”
stated that 9% were strongly disagree, 11% were disagree, 17% were undecided
yet, 32% were agree, and 31% were strongly agree.53
The data that given has shown
well that the Filipinos itself are supporting the anti-drugs campaign, not only
supporting the anti-drugs campaign, moreover 63% of them are agree if the drugs
suspects still have to be killed after surrender, by this mean, the Filipinos are
supporting the extrajudicial killing itself.
By ratified the Human Rights treaties, Philippines should have
implemented the to its citizens, as an action to promote Human Rights. Since the
ratification of the Human Rights treaties indicates the state‟s agreement to take a
role to protect the Human Rights. The ratification of Human Rights documents that
done by Philippines has shown Philippine‟s commitment to protect and promote
Human Rights universally. Besides, the ratification of Human Rights documents by
Philippines also shown its obligation to respect Human Rights under International
Law, as quoted below:
―By becoming parties to international treaties, States assume obligations
and duties under international law to respect, to protect and to fulfil human
rights. The obligation to respect means that States must refrain from
interfering with or curtailing the enjoyment of human rights. The obligation
to protect requires States to protect individuals and groups against human
rights abuses. The obligation to fulfil means that States must take positive
action to facilitate the enjoyment of basic human rights.‖54
However, in fact, Philippines cannot implement it well by violating the Human
Rights by the action of extrajudicial killing to the drugs abusers on the country.
52
Ibid 53
Ibid 54
The Foundation of International Human Rights Law. (2017, October 31). Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/en/sections/universal-declaration/foundation-international-human-rights-
law/index.html
15
On the other hand, the citizens of Philippines reaction towards Duterte‟s action
shows very well that the extrajudicial killing it is not only because of Rodrigo
Duterte‟s personality that tend to use a radical approach, but also supported by
Filipinos itself. In the case of Philippines “War on Drugs” campaign, it has shown
clearly that Human Rights is not recognized as a Universal concept, since the
President of Philippines did not recognize the existence of human rights itself in the
case of extrajudicial killing, as well as the Filipinos itself that being supportive to
the extrajudicial killing that done by their own leader.55
The act of Duterte as well
as the support that given by his citizens has lead to a question of what kind of
things that construct Philippines people on doing such kind of things. This research
will continue the discussion on analyzing the factor behind the implications
extrajudicial killing under “War on Drugs” campaign by Duterte as well as the
support that given by Philippines citizens that lead to the ignorance of state‟s
responsibility to protect Human Rights.
1.3 Statement of the Problem
As have been explain above, the question for this research is stated as follow:
Question: Why did the extrajudicial killing in “War on Drugs” campaign
under Duterte’s administration gain mass approval by the society, but fail
to fulfil state’s responsibility to protect Human Rights?
1.4 Research Objectives
The research objectives in this research are classified based on the type of
research: descriptive research. The aims of the research are following:
55
'License to Kill? | Philippine Police Killings in Duterte's 'War on Drugs? (2017, July 13).
Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/03/02/license-kill/philippine-police-killings-
dutertes-war-drugs
16
1. To identify the reasons of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs”
campaign under Duterte‟s administration
2. To identify the debate on the concept of Universalism and Cultural
Relativism of Human Rights in the case of extrajudicial killing on “War
on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration.
3. To find out the constructing reasons of Philippine‟s people on
implementing and supporting extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs”
campaign under Duterte‟s administration.
1.5 Significance of The Study
As the country that ratified the documents of International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights (ICCPR) and Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,
Inhuman Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), Philippines should accept
and promote Human Rights as a universal concept. However, on the other hand,
Philippines under Duterte administration cannot implement and promoting Human
Rights as a universal concept. it can be seen through the implementation of “War
on Drugs” campaign that lead to an action of extrajudicial killing, in which
obviously considered as a violation toward Human Rights, as according to
Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This research will become a case study to
understand the debate on the concept of Universalism and Cultural Relativism of
Human Rights. The significant study in the case of the chosen topic aims to
understand that culture is become the driving factor that construct Philippine‟s
people idea towards the implementation and support on extrajudicial killing on
“War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration.
1.6 Theoretical Framework
To have a better understanding toward the thesis, the author will use several
International Relations that related with the case of Human Rights violation on the
17
practice of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s
administration. Therefore, the author will use Universalism theory as a basic for
Human Rights that considered as a universal concept, Cultural Relativism theory as
a contradiction toward the Universalism of Human Rights, and Social
Constructivism by Michael Barnett. The theories will be used to analyze the case
further and will be explained on the next chapter.
1.6.1 Universalism
Universalism theory can be interpreted from the terms of “Universal” itself.
Universalism as also called by moral objectivism is a perception toward some
system of ethics that should be applied universally to all people regardless culture,
sex, religion, race and so on and so for.56
As Noam Chomsky emphasize the
example of universalism concept,
"if we adopt the principle of universality: if an action is right (or wrong) for
others, it is right (or wrong) for us. Those who do not rise to the minimal
moral level of applying to themselves the standards they apply to others—
more stringent ones, in fact—plainly cannot be taken seriously when they
speak of appropriateness of response; or of right and wrong, good and
evil."57
The definition of universalism has shown clearly on how the Human Rights
were constructed as a universal concept. Besides, Claudio Corradetti also
emphasize on the mechanism of universalism concept, he emphasizes on his book
“Relativism and Human Rights a Theory of Pluralistic Universalism” that the
Universalism theory establish since the establishment of agreement should be
supported by a pattern of mutual understanding, which proceed to justification.58
By this mean, the conceptual of Human rights has been through a pattern of mutual
understanding that agreed and should be applied universally. In this case, the
pattern of mutual understanding shown by the ratification of Human Rights treaties.
56
Kemerling, G. (2011). A Dictionary of Philosophical Terms and Name. 57
Chomsky, N. (2002). Terror and Just Response. Retrieved from https://chomsky.info/20020702/ 58
Corradetti, C. (2009). Relativism and human rights: A theory of pluralistic universalism.
Dordrecht: Springer.
18
On the other hand, the universalism of human rights cannot be denied since
the source of Human rights itself is human nature that already been brought since
born of every human being.59
As according to Jack Donnelly, the source of Human
Rights is moral nature which been brought from human nature, meanwhile, moral
nature itself is universal as so called by “Moral universality”. As Jack Donnelly
explain,
“If Human Rights are the rights one has simply because one is a human
being, as they usually thought to be, then they hold ―Universally‖ by all
human being‖60
In conclusion, the existence of Human Rights is simply understood as a universal
concept since it has to be applied to all human being regardless of their status,
gender, race and so on and so for.
In the case of extrajudicial killing by Duterte under his “War on Drugs”
campaign, the conceptual of Human Rights as a universal concept just simply
contradict towards the action that done by Duterte. Since the pattern of mutual
understanding that shown by ratification of Human Rights treaties has been signed
by Philippines itself. by singing the treaties of Human Rights, Philippines has
accepted and agreed to the Universal concept of Human Rights. As also according
to Universalism, Human Rights is a universal concept that should be accepted and
applied to all human being simply because the human nature that brought from the
born of each person, meanwhile the extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs”
campaign that done by Duterte as well as the support by Filipinos is obviously did
not match the concept of Universalism on Human Rights. Therefore, the
Universalism theory will support this thesis in which become a common standard of
Human Rights.
1.6.2 State’s Responsibility to Protect Human Rights
59
Donnelly, J. (2013). Special Features of Human Rights. In Universal human rights in theory and
practice (2nd ed., pp. 10, 11). Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 60
Ibid, p-10-11
19
The State‟s Responsibility to Protect or also known as R2P, is a concept
emphasizing on the responsibility or obligation of state to protect Human Rights.61
The establishment of R2P was followed by the failure of state that unable to protect
of Human Rights is huge scale, then „the world community‟ has a responsibility to
step in and ensure that these rights are protected.62
The state‟s responsibility to
protect Human Rights cannot be separated with the value of Universalism of
Human Rights which make it become International Human Rights, that is why, here
the International Human Rights Law has become the foundation of the
establishment of R2P.63
The State‟s responsibility to protect also called as a
collective responsibility to protect the Universalism of Human Rights.64
The concept of R2P has being supervised under United Nations Human
Rights bodies. By the supervision of the UN Human Right bodies, the state that
having such kind of problem on Human Rights are being directly supervised. Since
then, the UN are required the accountability or report by each state regarding the
Human Rights cases on the country.65
The accountability report by each state to the
UN has considered as a form of contribution by UN to the Human Rights
enforcement, put focused on emphasizing the state‟s obligation to protect Human
Rights.66
The encouragement to enforced the protection of Human Rights shown by
the declaration by UN to remind states that having a Human Rights problems.
There are several examples of the encouragement of R2P that declared by the UN,
on of them is the UN declaration on Human Rights and Transitional Justice, that
declared on 30 September 2016 on the document number A/HRC/RES/33/19,
which stated that,
61
Miller, D. (2006). The Responsibility to Protect Human Rights. 62
Ibid 63
Cohen, R. (2016, July 29). The Responsibility to Protect: Human Rights and Humanitarian
Dimensions. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/on-the-record/the-responsibility-to-protect-
human-rights-and-humanitarian-dimensions/ 64
Ibid 65
Miller, D. (2006). The Responsibility to Protect Human Rights. 66
Ibid
20
―Calls upon States to work to prevent potential situations that could result
in gross violations and abuses of human rights and serious violations of
international humanitarian law, in particular genocide, war crimes, ethnic
cleansing and crimes against humanity, and, in relevant contexts, to timely
and efficiently address the legacy of past atrocities in order to prevent their
recurrence, including through cooperation with the Office of the Special
Advisers of the Secretary-General on the Prevention of Genocide and the
Responsibility to Protect…‖67
With concept of R2P, the case of extrajudicial killing practice inside the
“War on Drugs” decision has clearly violated the concept of Responsibility to
Protect Human Rights. Furthermore, Rodrigo Duterte as the main actor of the
decision are being ignorance towards his responsibility to protect Human Rights as
well as ignored the response from International community. The concept of R2P
will be useful to analyze the violation of responsibility to protect Human Rights by
Philippine‟s government regarding the case of extrajudicial killing on “War on
Drugs” decision by Duterte.
1.6.3 Cultural Relativism
Cultural relativism simply could be defined as a cultural based theory,
which perceives culture as a fundamental aspect of the rules and norms.
Meanwhile, culture itself can be considered as a relationship among individuals
within groups, among groups, and between ideas and perspectives. Culture is
concerned with identity, aspiration, symbolic exchange, coordination, and
structures and practices that serve relational ends, such as ethnicity, ritual, heritage,
norms, meanings and beliefs.68
In the context of International Human Rights,
cultural relativism may be defined as the position according to which local cultural
traditions that properly determine the existence and scope of civil and political
67
R2P REFERENCES IN UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS.
(n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.globalr2p.org/media/files/hrc-resolutions-r2p-10-april.pdf 68
Rao, V., & Walton, M. (2009). Culture and public action.
21
rights enjoyed by individuals in a given society.69
By this mean, the Cultural
Relativism perceive that human rights standards are vary among different cultures,
moreover it can reflect the national identity.70
Some of the scholars of International Relations that put focused on Human
rights cases believe that the relativity of culture is an undeniable fact, which can be
seen from moral rules and social institutions evidence an astonishing cultural and
historical variability. Jack Donnelly emphasize that there are two kinds of Cultural
relativism, the first is Strong Cultural Relativism and the second one is Weak
Cultural Relativism. The Strong Cultural Relativism perceive culture as a
fundamental source of rules and norms, since the culturalism focused on culture as
the source of rules and norms, it is automatically affecting to the validation of rules
and norms that should be accordance to the culture itself. In the other words, the
assumption of rights such as social practices, moral, and values are culturally
determined, which mean the norms and rules that exist should be based on culture.
Meanwhile, here the Weak Cultural Relativism perceive culture is an important
aspect of the validity of moral and rule. By that, the Weak Cultural Relativism point
of view, there is a weak assumption on the universalism of rights.71
Those perception
toward culture has affecting each perception toward the concept of universalism of
rights. It can be seen that the perception of Strong Cultural Relativism is strongly
contradict which the concept of universalism of rights. Meanwhile the Weak Cultural
Relativism still assume the existence of universalism of rights, but the relativism of
human nature, and its rights exist as a potential excess of universalism itself. By this
mean, still both of the Strong Cultural Relativism and Weak Cultural Relativism, still
in the same path of perception towards culture and the concept of universalism.
As has been stated above the conceptual of relativism is strongly contradict
with the concept of universalism, especially on the case of human rights. As the
69
Tesón, F. R. (1985). International Human Rights and Cultural Relativism. Retrieved from
https://ir.law.fsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1038&context=articles 70
Ibid 71
Donnelly, J. (1984). Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights. Human Rights
Quarterly, 6(4), 400-402. doi:10.2307/762182
22
scholars of cultural relativist disagree with the concept of universalism of human
rights, here that become the main question for cultural relativist is, if human rights
are based in human nature, on the simple fact that one is a human being, and if human
nature is universal, then how can human rights be relative? Here as according to Jack
Donnelly, the simple answer is that the human nature itself is relative. It becomes
relative since the beginning of human itself, which is their own biological factor that
could lead to a construction of various culture. It can be said simply that each culture
has different norms and value that attached with themselves from the very beginning,
since then the universalism concept could not match in every culture that exist.72
The importance of culture on shaping the state‟s behavior could be seen from
the effect that given from culture towards individuals at first. As explains by Jack
Donnelly,
―The impact of culture on the shaping of individuals is systematic and may
lead to the predominance of distinctive social types in different cultures.
There can be little doubt that there are important, structurally determined
differences, for example, between the modal "natures" of men and especially
women in modern western and traditional Islamic societies. In any
particular case, "human nature," the realized nature of real human beings,
is a social as well as a "natural" product.‖73
Based on that statement, Jack Donnelly try to emphasize that how each individual‟s
behavior as well as perception toward something are determines by the natural
culture that has been brought by each individual from they were born. In which
those natural culture was constructing the individual to perceive to some certain
phenomenon differently.
The Cultural Relativism is become such a suitable theory to be used on this
research. Cultural Relativism will be used as a contradiction towards universalism
concept of Human Rights, in which as accordance to cultural relativism the Human
Rights itself is considered as a relative concept. In the case of extrajudicial killing
72
Donnelly, J. (1984). Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights. Human Rights
Quarterly, 6(4), 403-406. doi:10.2307/762182 73
Ibid, p-403-406
23
on Philippines under “War on Drugs” campaign by Duterte, Cultural Relativism
theory will give a better understanding on analyzing the role of culture on shaping
the human nature of each human being which produce a different standard of
Human Rights. Constructivism will have the writer regarding analyzing culture as
the main construction of the extrajudicial killing that done on Philippines as well as
being supported by its citizens.
1.6.4 Constructivism
The theory of Constructivism established to emphasize social and relations
construction of what states are and what they want all these approaches might be used
to focus on power politics, cooperation, conflict, or any other substantive
phenomena.74
The constructivists believes that identity, interest, culture, norms, and
idea establish as a leading factor of a state to act differently towards the relations to
another state, by this means the constructivist believe on the importance of idea and
norms as a main factor to construct state‟s behavior. As added by Michael Barnett in
the book of “The Globalization of World Politics”, he emphasizes on the role of
Constructivism perspective as a main core of the path of states.
―Constructivist believes that ideas define the international structure, how
this structure shapes the identities, interests and foreign policy of states and
how state and non – state actors reproduce that structure – and at times
transform it.‖75
The construction of state‟s behavior has been explained very well by the
constructivist. Since the constructivist believe that idea and norms as a main factor
of state‟s construction, here the constructivist emphasizes on two main points as the
construction of state‟s behavior, which are the relations between “Structures” and
“Agents”.76
“Structures” as according to Ian Hurd is some factors that influenced
the International action, such as ideas, and rules, meanwhile “Agents” is the actor 74
Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics.
International Organization 75
Baylis J., Smith S., Owens P. (2008). The Globalization of World Politics : An Introduction to
International Relations, p. 164 Oxford University Press, England. 76
In Reus-Smit, C., & In Snidal, D. (2012). The Oxford handbook of international relations. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
24
that operates in that context, such as interests and identities.77
The relations between
“Structures” and “Agents” are mutually constituted, which mean both “Structures”
and “Agents” which indicated the states as the actor and context as the system, are
constructing each other, or in the other word, both are being influenced by the
situation their interaction creates.78
The relation between “Agents” and “Structures” also called as the making
process of social structures. However, the social structures cannot be made without
the role of practices between the actors.79
The practices as according to
Constructivism is really important, in which can help to build the social structures,
which develop to build state‟s identity and interests.80
As what Alexander Wendt
emphasize on the book of ―Anarchy is what States Makes of it: The Social
Construction of Power Politics‖ since the process is mutually-constituted, the
practice can affect the social process to constructing and re-constructing them self, as
he explain furthermore, ―Changing the practices will change the intersubjective
knowledge that constitutes the system.‖81
As the constructivist put focused on idea and norms as the leading factor of
state‟s behavior, here Michael Barnett emphasize two main elements as a factor of
social construction especially towards the state‟s identities and interests. The first
element, Michael Barnett emphasize on the role of culture that can produce and idea
and norms which can affecting the state‟s identities and interests.82
The second
element, Michael Barnett emphasize on how knowledge such as symbols and rules
77
Ibid 78
Waltz, K. N. 1959. Man, the State, and War: A Theoretical Analysis. New York: Columbia
University Press 79
Constructivist Theories of IR. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.public.iastate.edu/~pol_s.453/const.htm 80
Wendt, A. (1995). Anarchy is What States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics
(1992). International Theory, 403-407. 81
Ibid, p-, 403-407. 82
Baylis J., Smith S., Owens P. (2008). The Globalization of World Politics : An Introduction to
International Relations. Oxford University Press, England.
25
that construct an individual to behave and understand towards their world.83
As he
explains furthermore,
―Reality does not exist out there waiting to be discovered, instead,
historically – produced and culturally – bound knowledge enables
individuals to construct and give meaning to reality‖84
To understand the concept of idea that become the main construction of
state‟s behavior, Michael Barnett has already explained it clearly by the concept of
cultural fault-lines, which is something that drive the behavior and interests of the
state. As what Michael Barnett has explained,
―Constructivists attempt to recover the meanings that actors give to their
practices and the objects that they construct. These derive not from private
beliefs but rather from culture. In contrast to the rationalist presumption
that culture, at most, constrains action, Constructivists argue that culture
informs the meanings that people give to their action. Sometimes
Constructivists have presumed that such meanings derive from hardened
culture. But because culture is fractured and because society is comprised
of different interpretations of what is meaningful activity, scholars need to
consider these cultural fault – lines and treat the fixing of meanings as an
accomplishment that is at the essence of politics…‖85
As can be seen on the statement above, Michael Barnett emphasize that the
constructivist believe that culture informs the meaning that people to their action,
and sometimes those meaning derive from the hardened culture. The process of the
state‟s construction is mutually-constituted which emphasized that the practice can
affect the social process to constructing and re-constructing them self. Since the
social process can construct and re-construct again, the making of hardened culture
is one of the result of re-construction process which derive from practice. Simply,
the practice as according to constructivist can construct a culture, and the culture
83
Jackson, R and Sorensen, G(2006). Introduction to International RelationsTheories and
Approaches. Oxford university press. 84
Baylis J., Smith S., Owens P. (2008). The Globalization of World Politics : An Introduction to
International Relations. Oxford University Press, England. 85
Baylis J., Smith S., Owens P. (2008). The Globalization of World Politics : An Introduction to
International Relations. Oxford University Press, England
26
has been through a re-construct process, so that resulting a practice or also called as
a hardened culture.86
The Constructivism that focused on Ideas and norms as a main factor of
social construction as well as a factor that construct states‟ behavior, is such a
suitable theory to be used on the topic of the extrajudicial killing by Duterte
regarding his “War on Drugs” campaign. As stated before, the case of extrajudicial
killing on Philippines were gained mass support from its citizens, here the theory of
constructivism will give a better explanation on the background of Filipinos
behavior, especially towards “War on Drugs” campaign. Furthermore, on finding
the cultural fault – lines constituted the interests and also identity of Philippines that
are historically and socially constructed that lead to an action of extrajudicial killing
by Duterte as well as the ideas that construct Filipinos to support the “War on
Drugs” campaign, in which also supporting the extrajudicial killing itself.
\
86
Ibid
27
1.7 Framework of Research
Figure 1
Conceptual Framework
Source: Research Framework constructed by Atlindo Rizky Putranto
28
Based on the framework of the research constructed by the writer and Ms.
Natasya Kusumawardani, S.IP., the framework of this research will put focused on
culture as a leading factor of Philippines‟ extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs”
campaign, which has violate the Universalism concept of Human Rights. Especially
on the practice of death penalty that has been exist since the colonialization era,
which has been brought by the Spanish. the figure above explains on how the
practice of Death Penalty on Philippine‟s has create norms and values in which
taking an important role on the making of culture of killing on Philippines. As
according to Michael Barnett regarding Social Constructivism, the cultural fault-
lines has take a role on shaping the state‟s behavior, and here the culture of Killing
on Philippines has become the cultural fault-lines that affecting the Filipino‟s
perception toward Human Rights, in which they perceive it as a relative concept,
instead of as an Universal concept that has to be applied to all Human being. The
figure above has explained, since Human Rights considered as a Relative concept
for the Filipinos, so that the Filipinos being supportive toward the “War on Drugs”
campaign that done by Duterte. Therefore, this thesis will have a further discussion
on the violation of Human Rights by the extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs”
campaign that done by Duterte and supported by the Filipinos and put the practice
of Death Penalty as the main factor of the culture of killing (cultural fault-lines)
which create the Relativism concept toward Human Rights on the perception of
Philippine‟s citizens.
1.8 Research Methodology
This research is designed as a descriptive research, focusing on fact finding
inquiry. In order to answer the core problem presented in this research, literature
review is conducted concerning in the debate on Universalism and Relativism
concept of Human Rights, in the case of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs”
campaign under Duterte‟s administration on Philippines. The writer will use the
report of Human Rights Watch (HRW) (an international non-governmental
29
organization that conducts research and advocacy on human rights), as well as
Report on Philippine Extrajudicial Killings from 2001-2010 by Atty. Al A. Parreño
as a primary source, since both reports give a clear data on current situation of
extrajudicial killing on Philippines and the history of extrajudicial killing on
Philippines. The instrument used in this research are not limited to printed version,
but also helped by electronics sources, especially from the internet.
1.9 Scope and Limitations of the Study
This thesis will focus on the implications of “War on Drugs” campaign on
Philippines under Duterte‟s administration on 2016 until 2018, as a case of
contradiction towards the universalism concept of Human Rights, regarding the
extrajudicial killing on the implications of “War on Drugs” campaign. This thesis will
discuss the role of culture on constructing Philippine‟s behavior including the leader
as well as its citizens regarding the implementation of “War on Drugs” campaign as
well as the support given by the citizens towards the “War on Drugs” campaign. This
thesis will limit to analyze the extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign in
Philippines as case of the violation of Human Rights.
1.10 Thesis Structure
Chapter I – Introduction
In this chapter, the writer will discuss more about the foundation of the topic
problems which includes of the background of the study, problems identification,
research question, significance of the study, theoretical framework which used to
analyze the problems, scope and limitation of the study, and also thesis structure. As
the fundamental of the thesis, the first chapter will focus on explain the way of
thinking how the problems exist and solved on that time frame.
30
Chapter II – Overview: Extrajudicial Killing as a Violation of Human Rights
In this Chapter, the writer will discuss about extrajudicial killing as a form of Human
Rights violations. The discussion will elaborate the Philippines government failure to
protect Human Rights.
Chapter III – War on Drugs Campaign on Philippines
In this chapter, the writer will discuss about the case of “War on Drugs” campaign on
Philippines. The discussion will elaborate the current “War on Drugs” campaign as
well as the background of the implementation of “War on Drugs” campaign on
Philippines
Chapter IV – Analysis
In this chapter, the writer will analyze the relation between the case and the
theoretical framework that used which has support this research.
Chapter VI – Conclusion
The conclusion of this thesis will be written in this chapter, which can be used to the
civil society to enrich the view about the motives and the causing factor behind the
implication of “War on Drugs” campaign.
1.11 Literature Review
In order to support the research, there are some books and journal as well as
articles that providing a better understanding regarding this thesis. The books will
mostly discuss about human rights, the theories that has been discussed above, and
obviously about Philippines “War on Drugs” itself. Here are some books and
journals that important for this research.
31
1.11.1 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) Document
Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a document that become a
milestone in the history of human rights. the Declaration was proclaimed by the
United Nations General Assembly in Paris on 10 December 1948. It has giving a
clear understanding on the definition of human rights. As according to the UDHR
document, human rights consider as ―the inherent dignity and of the equal and
inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom,
justice and peace in the world....‖.87
besides, the UDHR also give a further
understanding of human rights regarding things that so called as rights. UDHR
emphasize that human rights consider as a right inherent to all human beings,
regardless of race, sex, nationality, ethnicity, language, religion, or any other status.
Human rights include the right to life and liberty, freedom from slavery and torture,
freedom of opinion and expression, the right to work and education, and so on and
so for.88
Above all, the UDHR establish as a declaration of the universalism of
human rights, which has become the source this research in terms of supporting the
existence of human rights as a universal concept. The universalism of human rights
has been clearly stated on UDHR document, in which stated on the preamble of
UDHR,
―THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL
DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of
achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual
and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind,
shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights
and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to
secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among
the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of
territories under their jurisdiction.‖89
87
Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (2018, January 29). Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/ 88
Ibid 89
Ibid
32
As stated above, which clearly stated that the UDHR establish as a common
standard it is obviously stated the universalism of Human Rights. Therefore, the
UDHR has become one of the literature since it has gave a better understanding to
define Human Rights as well as its universalism concept.
1.11.2 Wendt, A. (1995). Anarchy is What States Make of it: The Social
Construction of Power Politics (1992). International Theory
Anarchy is What States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power
Politics is a book by Alexander Wendt, who best known regarding constructivism.
On the book of Anarchy is What States Make of it: The Social Construction of
Power Politics, Alexander Wendt has clearly explained the constructivism itself, he
believes that constructivism is a theory that important to conceived the social
construction. As he explained on his book, that the power, interests and identity on
International Relations are shaped by the behavior of the state, which the process is
mutually-constituted or on the other word, the behavior and those elements
(identity, power, interests) are constituted each other.90
As he explained on his book, the process of shaping the behavior and the
elements is also known by shaping the social structures. In which social structures
is important to shape the behavior of the state, since it is a mutually-constituted
process. However, the process cannot be done without the practice or praxes of the
actors.91
Moreover, he explained that practice is really important to shape the state‟s
behavior, since practice is something that done over and over again so that it has
construct the state;s behavior.
The book of “Anarchy is What States Make of it: The Social Construction
of Power” will support this thesis regarding giving a clear understanding to analyze
the idea behind the practice of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign
90
Wendt, A. (1995). Anarchy is What States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics
(1992). International Theory 91
Ibid
33
under Duterte‟s Administration. In which to put focused on the role of practice as a
driving factor to the state‟s behavior and social structures.
1.11.2 Relativism and Human Rights (Claudio Coradetti)
The Relativism and Human Rights is a book by Claudio Coradetti. The
book of Relativism and Human Rights explains on how the concept of Relativism
and Universalism of Human Rights were established. both of the Universalism and
Relativism of Human Rights were explained on this book in a philosophical way. In
which Claudio Coradetti explained on how the Universalism concept was made, as
he mentions on his book that that the Universalism theory establish since the
establishment of agreement should be supported by a pattern of mutual
understanding, which proceed to justification.92
In which the Human Rights concept
has been through a pattern of mutual understanding so that it can accepted and
applied Universally.
On the other hand, Claudio Coradetti also emphasize that the concept of
Relativism is was established from a morality of human in which tend to relative.
He emphasizes that the perspective of morality is able to provide a qualified proof
towards the concept of relativism, in which the Relativism also can be called as a
“standard-related” which indicates the standard of something is relative. In which
the Human Rights concept also can be considered as “standard-related” concept, or
on the other words, considered as relative.93
The book of Relativism and Human Rights by Claudio Coradetti, will
support this thesis due to give a clear philosophical understanding towards the
concept of Universalism and Relativism of Human Rights. In the case of
extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration,
to understand the concept of Universalism and Relativism is really important, by
understanding the concept of Universalism and Relativism the writer is able to
92
Corradetti, C. (2009). Relativism and human rights: A theory of pluralistic universalism.
Dordrecht: Springer. 93
Ibid.
34
analyze on the Filipinos perception towards Human Rights, whether considered as a
Universal or Relative concept.
1.11.4 Baylis J., Smith S., Owens P. (2008). The Globalization of World Politics
: An Introduction to International Relations
The Globalization of World Politics is a book by John Baylis, Steve Smith,
and Patricia Owens. The writer would like to focused on page 169 – 184 regarding
the constructivism theory provided by Michael Barnett, as a scholars of
Constructivism theory. As stated on the book, according to Michael Barnett
Constructivism is a theory that perceiving ideas as the main factor of international
structure. As quoted below,
―Constructivist believes that ideas define the international structure, how
this structure shapes the identities, interests and foreign policy of states and
how state and non – state actors reproduce that structure – and at times
transform it.‖94
Furthermore, the book also providing a clear conception on Constructivism as
according to Michael Barnett. Michael Barnett emphasize two main elements as a
factor of social construction especially towards the state‟s identities and interests.
The first element, Michael Barnett emphasize on the role of culture that can
produce and idea and norms which can affecting the state‟s identities and
interests.95
The second element, Michael Barnett emphasize on how knowledge
such as symbols and rules that construct an individual to behave and understand
towards their world.
The theory of constructivism that provided by Michael Barnett will support
this thesis due to the theoretical framework of this thesis. It will give a clear
understanding on ideas as the construction of state‟s behavior, in this case the
constructivism theory will focused on ideas as the background or something that
94
Baylis J., Smith S., Owens P. (2008). The Globalization of World Politics : An Introduction to
International Relations, p. 164 Oxford University Press, England. 95
Ibid, p-164
35
construct the action of extrajudicial killing done by Duterte under “War on Drugs”
campaign, as well as the support by Philippines‟ citizens towards the campaign.
1.11.5 Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights
Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights is a book by Jack
Donnelly, which is a political science scholar from the University of California. In
the book of Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights, Jack Donnelly
emphasizes on the contradiction between the concept of Universalism and
Relativism, in which giving a clear understanding on the differences between both
conception. In the book of Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights, Jack
Donnelly emphasize on the role of culture as a supportive factor for the relativity
concept, which so called as cultural relativism. As according to Jack Donnelly,
Cultural relativism simply can be interpreted as a perception on culture as a
fundamental aspect of the rules and norms. Jack Donnelly believe that the relativity
of culture is an undeniable fact, which can be seen from moral rules and social
institutions evidence an astonishing cultural and historical variability.96
Furthermore, due to supporting a clear conception of Cultural Relativism,
Jack Donnelly explains the importance of Cultural Relativism on shaping the
individual behavior, in which can lead to drives the state‟s behavior. As quoted
from the book of Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights,
―The impact of culture on the shaping of individuals is systematic and may
lead to the predominance of distinctive social types in different cultures.
There can be little doubt that there are important, structurally determined
differences, for example, between the modal "natures" of men and especially
women in modern western and traditional Islamic societies. In any
particular case, "human nature," the realized nature of real human beings,
is a social as well as a "natural" product‖97
96
Donnelly, J. (2013). Universal human rights in theory and practice. Ithaca: Cornell University
Press. 97
Ibid
36
The Cultural Relativism theory that provided by Jack Donnelly will give a
clear and better understanding on the role of culture as source of construction of the
idea on the implication of “War on Drugs” campaign. Since the “War on Drugs”
campaign that refer to the extrajudicial killing are also being supported by
Philippines‟ citizens, the Cultural relativism is become a suitable theory to used, to
find out the motives behind the extrajudicial killing, in which put culture as the
main source of the state‟s behavior.
1.11.6 Human Rights Watch: License to Kill
“License to Kill” is a report by human rights watch regarding the “War on
Drugs” campaign on Philippines, emphasizing on the extrajudicial killing inside the
“War on Drugs” activity itself. The report that given by Human Rights Watch
clearly giving a clear information about the data regarding the killing under
Duterte‟s “War on Drugs” campaign. The report that given is supporting the fact of
extrajudicial killing on Duterte‟s anti-drugs campaign
As reported by Human Rights Watch, there are over 7,000 people that
being killed on the anti-drugs campaign of Duterte since Duterte was elected as the
President of Philippines. Human Rights Watch also stated that the killing under
Duterte‟s administration was done not only by the official police of Philippines but
also done by some un-identified gunman, which so called as Duterte‟s death
squad.98
The data that given was supported by the interview that has done by
Human Right Watch towards the victim as well as the officer that conducting the
killing under Duterte‟s anti-drug campaign.99
Besides Human Rights Watch also giving a clear information towards the
response from some International Organization regarding the extrajudicial killing
under Duterte‟s “War on Drugs” campaign that already been discussed above.
98
'License to Kill? | Philippine Police Killings in Duterte's 'War on Drugs? (2017, July 13).
Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/03/02/license-kill/philippine-police-killings-
dutertes-war-drugs 99
Ibid
37
Those data and information that given by Human Rights Watch are really important
as a source of this research regarding the extrajudicial killing that done under
Duterte‟s administration.
1.11.7 Johnson, D. T., & Zimring, F. E. (2009). The next frontier: National
development, political change and the death penalty in Asia. Oxford: Oxford
Univ. Press
The book of “The next frontier: National development, political change
and the death penalty in Asia” is a book by David T Johnson, Franklin E Zimring.
The book discussed the istory of death penalty especially in Asia region. In which
Philippines also discussed on the book. The book has give a clear discussion on
historical background and practices of death penalty that happen on Philippines. it
emphasized that Spain, America, and Japan as a pioneer country that implement the
death penalty during the colonialization era.100
Regarding the case of Human Rights violation by extrajudicial killing on
“War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration, to understand the
historical background on the practice of death penalty on Philippines is really
important. So that the author can analyze further regarding the factor behind the
practice of extrajudicial killing that happen on Duterte‟s administration. The book
of “The next frontier: National development, political change and the death penalty
in Asia” will support this thesis regarding giving some information on the history
and practice of death penalty on Philippines.
100
7 Johnson, D. T., & Zimring, F. E. (2009). The next frontier: National development, political
change and the death penalty in Asia (pp. 105-108). (Next frontier.) Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press
38
CHAPTER II
AN OVERVIEW OF EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLING AS A
VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Human Rights as a universal concept should be applied to all human being.
The Universalism of Human Rights has been declared on the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights (UDHR) which stated that Human Rights work as a universal
concept and has to be protected for those who ratified the declaration. As has been
explain on the previous chapter, Philippines is one of the country who ratified the
UDHR, however Human Rights still cannot be implemented fully on Philippines.
the act of Duterte on violating the Human Rights has trigger the response from
several International organization that promoting the Human Rights. This chapter
will discuss the overview of the ratification on Human Rights documents that done
by Philippines and the practice after the ratification, whether Philippines has
promoting Human Rights or not regarding the case of “War on Drugs” campaign
under Duterte‟s administration
2.1 Extrajudicial Killing on “War on Drugs” decision as a Violation
on Ratified Treaties of Human Rights
Human Rights is a right inherent to all human beings, regardless of race,
sex, nationality, ethnicity, language, religion, or any other status. Human rights
include the right to life and liberty, freedom from slavery and torture, freedom of
opinion and expression, the right to work and education and many more.101
since
Human Rights is a right inherent to all human being, it has become a universal
concept and have to be applied universally. the Universalism concept has been
101
Human Rights. (2017, October 31). Retrieved from http://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-
depth/human-rights/
39
declared on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). UDHR The
UDHR was proclaimed on 10 December 1948 and has been translated into 500
languages and has been ratified by forty-eight members of the United Nations.102
It
is a document that declared by the United Nations (UN) as a common standard of
achievements for all peoples and all nations and to be applied for all human being
and universally protected.103
The UDHR has been agreed as the foundation of
International Human Rights law, and it has become an international standard of
Human Rights. So that the Human Rights has become a universal concept because
the declaration of UDHR. As quoted below:
―The core principles of human rights first set out in the UDHR, such as
universality, interdependence and indivisibility, equality and non-
discrimination, and that human rights simultaneously entail both rights
and obligations from duty bearers and rights owners, have been
reiterated in numerous international human rights conventions,
declarations, and resolutions. Today, all United Nations Members States
have ratified at least one of the nine core international human rights
treaties, and 80 percent have ratified four or more, giving concrete
expression to the universality of the UDHR and international human
rights.‖104
The UDHR that proclaimed on 10 December 1948, has translated into 500
languages and has been ratified by forty-eight members of the United Nations.
Among forty-eight members of the UN that ratified the Human Rights documents,
Philippines has become one of the who ratified the UDHR.105
The ratification of
Human Rights documents that done by Philippines has shown Philippine‟s
commitment to protect and promote Human Rights universally. Besides, the
ratification of Human Rights documents by Philippines also shown its obligation to
102
Ibid 103
Ibid 104
The Foundation of International Human Rights Law. (2017, October 31). Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/en/sections/universal-declaration/foundation-international-human-rights-
law/index.html 105
History of the Document. (2017, October 31). Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/en/sections/universal-declaration/history-document/index.html
40
respect Human Rights under International Law. As according to Office of the High
Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), a United Nations agency that
established to promote and protect Human Rights that guaranteed under
International Law and UDHR, Philippines has ratified 14 documents of
International Human Rights treaties from totally 18 treaties. By the ratification of
14 treaties Philippines is actually has portraying a good image on the status of
ratification that set up by UN, as what shown on the figure below.106
Figure 2
Source: OHCHR Dashboard
As can be seen in the figure above on the mapping of Ratification of 18
International treaties, the color indicates the range amount of treaties that has been
signed of the state‟s members of UN. And Philippines has portrayed a good image
in the status of the ratifications. Since Philippines has signed 14 treaties from totally
18 treaties of International Human Rights treaties.
106
OHCHR Dashboard. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://indicators.ohchr.org/
41
Among 14 documents of International Human Rights treaties Philippines
has signed several documents with different form of Human Rights. The documents
that Philippines has ratified are shown as below107
:
- International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
Discrimination :1969
- International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights :1976
- Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights :1976
- Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty :1991
- International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights :1976
- Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against
Women :1981
- Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women :2000
- Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment :1987
- Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,
Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment :2006
- Convention on the Rights of the Child :1990
- Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the
involvement of children in armed conflict :2002
- Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale
of children, child prostitution and child pornography :2002
- International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant
Workers and Members of their Families :2003
- Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities :2008
107
Ibid
42
UDHR that discussed on Human Rights in general has two covenants,
International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), and
International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), both covenant along
with the UDHR also known as International bill of Human Rights.108
The ICESCR
and ICCPR focusing on different aspect of Human Rights. The ICESCR are
focusing on the rights of economic, social, and cultural rights, meanwhile the
ICCPR are focusing on the rights of civil and political rights, however both of them
are still in the same path of promoting the Universalism of Human Rights. The
separation between ICCPR and ICESCR that based on different aspect was aimed
to achieve the goals of Human Rights. As according to the Fact Sheet No.2 (Rev.1),
The International Bill of Human Rights, to achieve the goals of Human Rights is
based on the freedom of civil and economical rights.109
As stated on the Fact Sheet
No.2 (Rev.1), The International Bill of Human Rights.
―in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the ideal of
free human beings enjoying freedom from fear and want can only be achieved
if conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy his economic, social
and cultural rights, as well as his civil and political rights.‖110
There are many forms of Human Rights violation, regarding to the case of
“War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration, extrajudicial killing was
found on the practice of the campaign. And extrajudicial killing is one of the form
of the violation of Human Rights. Extrajudicial killing can be defined as an
unlawful killing, or an action of killing without a legal process that done by
government (or with their complicity) which are not adequately investigated and
prosecuted by the authorities.111
It is considered as a violation of Human Rights
since the action of extrajudicial killing is considered as an action of cruel as well as
because it is considered as an action of taking the human‟s freedom.
108
Fact Sheet No.2 (Rev.1), The International Bill of Human Rights. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FactSheet2Rev.1en.pdf 109
Ibid 110
Ibid 111
Gould, L. A., & Pate, M. (2016). State fragility around the world: Fractured justice and fierce
reprisal (p. 31).
43
Extrajudicial killing as a form of Human Rights violation actually not stated
clearly in any Human Rights documents. Even though there is no clear statement
regarding extrajudicial killing as a form of Human Rights violation, however,
extrajudicial killing still considered as a form of Human Rights violation. it can be
seen from the Article 3 of UDHR, "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and
security of person", and Article 5 of UDHR that stated that ―No one shall be
subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment‖.112
From those articles, it can be seen that extrajudicial killing clearly
violate the Human Rights since it has deprived the right to life, liberty and security
of person and subjected to a degrading punishment.113
As has been stated above, it
is simply considered as a violation Human Rights since extrajudicial killing has
take the human‟s freedom and in practice the killing is not through a legal
procedure.
The violation of Human Rights by extrajudicial killing has been discussed
clearly on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The
ICCPR reiterates the right to life, liberty and security of person, and prohibit the
action that violate those rights.114
Extrajudicial killing as an action of violation on
Human Rights, has been emphasized further on Article 6 and 7 of ICCPR.115
- Article 6
Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be
protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life. ...
- Article 7
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment.
112
Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (2018, April 23). Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/index.html 113
"Disappearances" and extrajudicial executions as violations of international human rights. (n.d.).
Retrieved from https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/188000/act330051993en.pdf 114
Ibid 115
Fact Sheet No.2 (Rev.1), The International Bill of Human Rights. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FactSheet2Rev.1en.pdf
44
The right to life, liberty, and security of person reiterated on the Article 6 and 7 of
ICCPR. In which emphasize that no one shall be subjected to cruel punishment that
lead to a deprivation to right to life.
Furthermore, ICCPR emphasize again the extrajudicial killing as a form of
Human Rights violation in terms of killing without a legal procedure on the part 3
Article 9 of the covenant.116
Article 9.
1. Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be
subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention. No one shall be deprived of his
liberty except on such grounds and in accordance with such procedure as
are established by law.
2. Anyone who is arrested shall be informed, at the time of arrest, of the
reasons for his arrest and shall be promptly informed of any charges
against him.
3. Anyone arrested or detained on a criminal charge shall be brought
promptly before a judge or other officer authorized by law to exercise
judicial power and shall be entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to
release. It shall not be the general rule that persons awaiting trial shall be
detained in custody, but release may be subject to guarantees to appear for
trial, at any other stage of the judicial proceedings, and, should occasion
arise, for execution of the judgement.
The Article 9 of Part 3 of the covenant, has clearly emphasize the extrajudicial
killing as a form of Human Rights violation. As can be seen above on the number 3
of Article 9, that anyone that being arrest because of a criminal charge shall be
authorized by law to exercise judicial power or process. Meanwhile the practice of
extrajudicial killing is not through a legal procedure. Since extrajudicial killing is a
killing without a legal procedure and it has clearly violate the Human Rights as
according to Article 9 of Part 3 of ICCPR.
Besides the ICCPR, to consider extrajudicial killing as form of Human
Rights violation, Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman Degrading
Treatment or Punishment (CAT) also emphasize the action of extrajudicial killing
116
Ibid
45
as a violation of Human Rights. CAT established to promote the Universalism
concept of Human Rights, to aim the freedom of human through Protection of All
Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment.117
The establishment of CAT is in line with the point of
UDHR and ICCPR regarding to an action against torture and cruel action. As
quoted below:
―Having regard to article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
and article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
both of which provide that no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.‖118
Regarding the extrajudicial killing practice, CAT has emphasized that
state‟s should prohibit and promote anti torture and cruel action on the article 2 of
CAT, which extrajudicial killing also considered as a cruel action.119
Article 2:
1. Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial
or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its
jurisdiction.
2. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a
threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency,
may be invoked as a justification of torture.
3. An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked
as a justification of torture.
As can be seen above, the CAT emphasize that state should take a judicial process
to prevent act of torture and cruel to be happen.
Regarding the case of “War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s
administration considered as a violation of Human Rights. Since The extrajudicial
killing practice that found inside the “War on Drugs” campaign. The extrajudicial
killing on “War on Drugs” campaign has clearly violated the Universalism concept
117
OHCHR | Convention against Torture. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CAT.aspx 118
Ibid 119
Ibid
46
of Human Rights, since the practice of the extrajudicial killing has taken the
human‟s freedom which violate the article 3 and 5 of the UDHR. The extrajudicial
killing on “War on Drugs” campaign also violate Article 9 of ICCPR. In which the
extrajudicial killing practice has conduct a killing without a legal procedure.
Furthermore, Philippines has also violates the ratified documents of Human Rights
by implementing the “War on Drugs” campaign, which extrajudicial killing were
inside the practice of the campaign. Its become worst since Philippines also ratified
the Human Rights treaties that discuss the extrajudicial killing as a violation of
Human Rights. Therefore, the “War on Drugs” campaign has considered as a
violation of Human Rights, and in the other hand, Philippines has violated the
Human Rights treaties that they already ratified.
2.2 Extrajudicial Killing on “War on Drugs” Campaugn as
Violation of R2P
The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) established since the states cannot fulfil
their obligation regarding to be responsible to protect Human Rights. Precisely,
R2P established because of the case of mass killing that happens on 1990‟s, such as
the mass killing case on Kosovo, Rwanda, Bosnia, and many other places.120
Since
then, states have begun to advocating a right to undertake interventions to stop mass
violations of Human Rights.121
Then, on 54th
session of United Nation General
Assembly on 1999, Kofi Anan as the UN Secretary General ask the member states
to prevent such a case of mass Human Rights violation.122
Therefore, the R2P
concept was established to encourage the state‟s obligation to protect Human
Rights. On the other hand, the concept of R2P also established in order to support
120
Badescu, C. G. (2012). Humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect: Security and
human rights (pp. 1 - 3). London: Routledge. 121
Ibid, p-1 – p-3 122
Badescu, C. G. (2012). Humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect: Security and
human rights (p. 6). London: Routledge.
47
the implementation of Universalism of Human Rights, therefore, the R2P concept
also called by “collective responsibility” to protect Human Rights.123
The concept of R2P emphasizing on state‟s responsibility to protect Human
Rights has two main frameworks. Those are sovereignty as responsibility and
international responsibility. Both of the frameworks are connected each other, a
sovereign state entails a responsibility to protect its citizens from a deprivation of
their Human Rights, that is why in the case of Responsibility to protect of Human
Rights, a sovereign state that cannot protect their citizens from a deprivation of
Human Rights, then the responsibility to protect falls to the International
community.124
Furthermore it is also supported by three pillars, the protection
responsibility of the state, the responsibility of International Community to assist
states to fulfill their obligation, and the commitment to collective action.125
To enforced the implementation of Human Rights protection, R2P is being
supervised under the UN Human Rights bodies, which encourage the states member
to protect Human Rights and encourage to give a report on Human Rights cases in
the country as a contribution toward the implementation of R2P.126
meanwhile the
state contribution toward R2P also shown by the ratification of Human Rights
treaties. In which the states have given their agreement on promoting and protecting
the Universalism of Human Rights by the ratification.127
The United Nations also
emphasize the importance and the state‟s responsibilities after the ratification as
quoted below.
123
Cohen, R. (2016, July 29). The Responsibility to Protect: Human Rights and Humanitarian
Dimensions. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/on-the-record/the-responsibility-to-protect-
human-rights-and-humanitarian-dimensions/ 124
Badescu, C. G. (2012). Humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect: Security and
human rights (pp. 1 - 3). London: Routledge. 125
Badescu, C. G. (2012). Humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect: Security and
human rights (p. 110). London: Routledge. 126
Ibid, p-110 127
The Foundation of International Human Rights Law. (2017, October 31). Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/en/sections/universal-declaration/foundation-international-human-rights-
law/index.html
48
―By becoming parties to international treaties, States assume
obligations and duties under international law to respect, to protect and
to fulfil human rights. The obligation to respect means that States must
refrain from interfering with or curtailing the enjoyment of human
rights. The obligation to protect requires States to protect individuals
and groups against human rights abuses. The obligation to fulfil means
that States must take positive action to facilitate the enjoyment of basic
human rights.‖128
However, Philippines as one of the country that ratified several Human
Rights treaties still cannot fulfil its obligation to protect the Human Rights in the
country by having an extrajudicial practice inside the “War on Drugs” decision on
Duterte‟s administration. Meanwhile, Philippines as the state who ratified should
have known the obligation and responsibility to protect Human Rights in the
country. On the other Hand, the attitude of Duterte indicates the government‟s
ignorance toward the obligation to protect Human Rights.
Philippines also has been under supervision and investigation by The Global
Centre for the Responsibility to Protect, which a NGO to promote value of
“Responsibility to protect”.129
In the report of Global Centre for the Responsibility
to Protect, it is clearly stated that Philippines currently having a violation toward
the concept of R2P by implementing the “War on Drugs” decision, as stated on the
R2P monitor 15 November 2017 Issue 36,
―The government of the Philippines is failing to uphold its Responsibility to
Protect all Filipinos from crimes against humanity, including those accused
of drug offenses.‖130
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect also has declared a necessary
action toward Philippines government as stated below.
128
The Foundation of International Human Rights Law. (2017, October 31). Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/en/sections/universal-declaration/foundation-international-human-rights-
law/index.html 129
R2P MONITOR 15 NOVEMBER 2017 ISSUE 36 A bimonthly bulletin by the Global Centre for
the Responsibility to Protect. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.globalr2p.org/media/files/r2p_monitor_nov2017.pdf 130
Ibid
49
―National authorities in the Philippines must restore the rule of law and
immediately halt widespread extrajudicial killings. The Philippines Senate
should ensure that a substantial and credible investigation into extrajudicial
killings and the "war on drugs" is undertaken. The UN Human Rights
Council should continue to closely monitor the situation in the
Philippines.‖131
The action of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign by Duterte
has clearly violated the R2P concept. It is simply considered as a violation toward
R2P because Duterte cannot fulfil the frameworks and pillars of R2P. As mention
before, that the framework of R2P is sovereignty as responsibility and international
responsibility, meanwhile, Duterte cannot fulfil the responsibility to protect its
citizens from Human Rights violation as a sovereign state, as well as being
ignorance to the international community regarding responses on responsibility to
protect Human Rights.132
On the other hand, Duterte also cannot fulfil the three
pillars of R2P, in which emphasize on the protection responsibility of the state, the
responsibility of International Community to assist states to fulfill their obligation,
and the commitment to collective action.133
By implementing the extrajudicial
killing on “War on Drugs” campaign, Philippines has clearly violates its
responsibility to protect Human Rights as well as being ignorance toward the
responses of International community.
2.3. International Responses Toward “War on Drugs” Campaign
As a state that ratified the Human Rights treaties, Philippines should protect
its citizens from the action of Human Rights deprivation. The concept of R2P also
has clearly emphasizes that the International community have a responsible to assist
131
Ibid 132
Badescu, C. G. (2012). Humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect: Security and
human rights (pp. 1 - 3). London: Routledge. 133
Cohen, R. (2016, July 29). The Responsibility to Protect: Human Rights and Humanitarian
Dimensions. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/on-the-record/the-responsibility-to-protect-
human-rights-and-humanitarian-dimensions/
50
the states to fulfil their obligations.134
Meanwhile, in the case of “War on Drugs”
campaign, Duterte as the President of Philippines has ignored the responses from
International Community. And still conducting the “War on Drugs” campaign
without paying attention to the responses and condemnation from International
Community.
The implementation of “War on Drugs‟ campaign under Duterte‟s
administration has triggered the International Community to respond. The
responses are coming from several International Organizations and several states.
Some of the response are asking Duterte to stop the extrajudicial killing inside the
“War on Drugs” campaign in the name of Human Rights. In June 2016, Ban Ki
moon as the Secretary General of UN expressed his disturbed feeling toward the act
of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign In an annual meeting of the
UN Correspondents Association, as he stated below,
“I unequivocally condemn his apparent endorsement of extrajudicial killing,
which is illegal and a breach of fundamental rights and freedoms. Such
comments are of particular concern in light of ongoing impunity for serious
cases of violence against journalists in the Philippines.‖135
The condemnation that given by UN also stated by Yuro Fedotov, the executive
director of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). He strongly
rejects the act of extrajudicial killing by Duterte as he said on August 2016,
―The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) remains greatly
concerned by the reports of extrajudicial killing of suspected drug dealers
and users in the Philippines. I join the United Nations Secretary-General in
condemning the apparent endorsement of extrajudicial killing, which is
illegal and a breach of fundamental rights and freedoms.‖136
134
Badescu, C. G. (2012). Humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect: Security and
human rights (p. 110). London: Routledge. 135
Ban disturbed by remarks made by President-elect of the Philippines on extrajudicial killings.
(2016, June 8). Retrieved from https://news.un.org/en/story/2016/06/531752-ban-disturbed-remarks-
made-president-elect-philippines-extrajudicial-killings#.WH44jRsrKUk 136
'License to Kill? | Philippine Police Killings in Duterte's 'War on Drugs? (2017, July 13).
Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/03/02/license-kill/philippine-police-killings-
dutertes-war-drugs
51
The action of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign also being
criticized as an action of lack of understanding on the Universalism concept of
Human Rights. Moreover, Zeid Bin Ra‟ad Al-hussein the current United Nations
High Commissioner for Human Rights stated that the act by Duterte is such a scorn
for International Human Rights law. As he stated below,
―The President of the Philippines's statements of scorn for international
human rights law display a striking lack of understanding of our human
rights institutions and the principles which keep societies safe. Fair and
impartial rule of law is the foundation of public confidence and security.
Empowering police forces to shoot to kill any individual whom they claim to
suspect of drug crimes, with or without evidence, undermines justice. The
people of the Philippines have a right to judicial institutions that are
impartial and operate under due process guarantees; and they have a right
to a police force that serves justice. I strongly encourage the Philippines to
extend an invitation to the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or
arbitrary executions. My Office is ready to assist, including with respect to
rule of law institutions and the prevention and treatment of drug use in
accordance with international norms.‖137
The responses and rejections toward Duterte is not only came from the UN,
there are several states that also showed the expression of rejection regarding the
case of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign. One of the example is
the United States. As a country that have a good cooperation with Philippines, in
terms of “War on Drugs” campaign, US also show their rejection by the statement
of Anna Richey-Allen, as the State Department spokesperson. ―We strongly urge
the Philippines to ensure its law enforcement efforts are consistent with its human
rights obligations.‖ As the state Department spokesperson said.138
The US Senators
Cardin and Patrick Leahy, author of a provision of US law also show the expression
of rejection toward Duterte‟s action,
137
'License to Kill? | Philippine Police Killings in Duterte's 'War on Drugs? (2017, July 13).
Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/03/02/license-kill/philippine-police-killings-
dutertes-war-drugs 138
Ibid
52
―Duterte‘s ―war on drugs‖ is not a situation in which there is occasional
error or over-zealous application of force. This is systematic, widespread,
brutal, and beyond the bounds for a constitutional democracy.‖139
Meanwhile, in responding the response that given by the International
community Duterte showed no fear. As he response the US statement regarding the
“War on Drugs” rejection ―Why are you shooting the black people when they are
on the ground? [You] can do it, but we can‘t? … Do not pretend to be the moral
conscience of the world.‖140
Moreover, in some statement he response the
International Community statement with an insulting statement. As the example
when he response toward the UN High Commissioner requirement to open an
investigation on Duterte “War on Drugs” campaign.
―There‘s one United Nations official, [in charge of] human rights. He said
Duterte is a murderer and must be charged for murder. This guy is ever a
joker or a bit insane. What‘s difficult with the United Nations, you guys, you
are employed by an organ composed of nations whose officials are elected
by the people. You officials sitting there on your asses, we pay your salaries.
You idiot. You do not tell me what to do. I am your employer. Who gave you
the right? You lack knowledge of international law. We are the ones who
contribute to the United Nations. You shameless sons of a whore. I pay your
salaries. Don‘t talk to me like I‘m your employee. I am [the head of] a
member state, a sovereign state. Please shut up. Your brains are small. Do
not do that. You‘re just an employee there. You‘re appointed‖141
The act of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign under
Duterte‟s administration has considered as a violation of Human Rights, as has
been explain previously. Meanwhile, the response from International Community
toward the action of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign by Duterte
shown very well on how the Human Rights has considered as a universal concept,
since the International Community has seriously reject the action of extrajudicial
killing by Duterte. On the other hand, the action of Duterte regarding responding
back the rejection that given by the International community has showed
139
'License to Kill? | Philippine Police Killings in Duterte's 'War on Drugs? (2017, July 13).
Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/03/02/license-kill/philippine-police-killings-
dutertes-war-drugs 140
Ibid 141
Ibid
53
Philippine‟s violation toward the concept of R2P. In which Duterte has ignored the
international responsibility to assist the state to fulfil their obligation to protect
Human Rights, that can be seen from Duterte‟s rejection on the call for
investigation from UN. Those fact has lead to a question on whether the concept of
Human Rights has considered as a Universalism or Relativism by the Philippines,
that will be explain on next chapter.
54
CHAPTER III
AN OVERVIEW OF “WAR ON DRUGS” CAMPAIGN
BY DUTERTE’S ADMINISTRATION
The extrajudicial killing in “War on Drugs” campaign has become an
international issue, since it has violated the Human Rights as a Universal concept.
To be precise, the “War on Drugs” campaign has violated the Human Rights
treaties which Philippines has already ratified regarding the protection of citizens,
and Duterte violates it with implementing the extrajudicial killing in “War on
Drugs” campaign. The “War on Drugs” campaign has established since the very
beginning of Duterte‟s presidency, since then the practice of extrajudicial killing
were numerous. Besides, the “War on Drugs” campaigns have made pros and cons
from the Filipinos itself. However, the approval rate of Duterte cannot be
underestimated, since the majority of Filipinos were satisfied with Duterte‟s action.
This chapter will discuss the overview of the practice of “War on Drugs” campaign,
as well as the Filipinos perception toward Duterte.
3.1 The Background of “War on Drugs” Campaign.
As has been explained before, the “War on Drugs” campaign has become an
international issue, because the practice of extrajudicial killing was found inside the
implementation of the campaign. The practice of extrajudicial killing inside the
“War on Drugs” campaign has made the rejection and condemnation from
international community. However, the rejection and condemnation from
international community just being ignored by Duterte. Rodrigo Duterte as the
Philippines president still implement and keep the radical action as the practice of
the “War on Drugs” campaign. This sub-chapter will give a supportive data
55
regarding the background and reasons behind the implementation of the “War on
Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration.
The main reason of the implementation of “War on Drugs” campaign is
because the drugs problem on Philippines has become a serious problem. The data
regarding the drugs abusers on Philippines has been counted by the Dangerous
Drugs Board (DDB) Philippines, a government agency tasked to control and
prevent the drugs abuse on Philippines.142
To control and prevent the drugs abuse
on Philippines, DDB also being supported by another government agency such as
Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) that tasked to enhance for the
efficient and effective law enforcement of all the provisions on dangerous drugs
and/or precursors and essential chemicals.143
The DDB also supported by the
Philippine National Police (PNP), which also tasked to assist the DDB and PDEA
to eradicate the drugs abusers on Philippines.144
PDEA and PNP has claimed that
the drugs abusers in Philippines has increased year by year, the PDEA stated that
―There is an increase in the incidence of drug abuse in terms of persons arrested
for drug use for the period 2010-2015.‖145
On the other hand PNP also stated that
―There is an increase in the incidence of drug abuse in terms of persons arrested
for drug trafficking and use for the period 2011-2015.‖146
The claim by PDEA and
PNP showed very well that the drugs abusers on Philippines has increased year by
year, and its indicates that the drugs abusers on Philippines has become a serious
problem.
However, the year of 2015 is not the peak of drugs problem on Philippines.
The drugs problem on Philippines has comes to the peak on 2016. As according to
142
Dangerous Drugs Board. (n.d.). Vision, Mission, Mandate. Retrieved from
https://www.ddb.gov.ph/about-ddb/vision-mission-mandate 143
User, S. (n.d.). Mandate and Functions. Retrieved from http://pdea.gov.ph/transparency/mandate-
and-functions 144
Nationwide Survey on the Nature and Extent of Drugs Abuse in the Philippines. (n.d.). Retrieved
from Dangerous Drugs Board (DDB) website: http://pcij.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/DDB-
2015-Nationwide-Survey-Final-Reportc.pdf 145
Ibid 146
Ibid
56
DDB statistic on 2016, the drugs abusers on Philippines has reached the number of
1.7 million, it is almost 1.7% of Philippine‟s populations.147
The DDB also
reported that the range of age among 1.7 million drugs users were various. The
range age from the 1.7 million drugs abusers are ranged from age 10 until 69 years
old, and 44.69% of them are unemployed which means has covered a wide range of
ages, from children to adult.148
On the other hand, Rodrigo Duterte has claimed a
different number with DDB regarding the drugs abusers on Philippines. Duterte
itself has claimed that the drugs abusers in Philippines has reached to the number of
4 million.149
Even though there is a big difference between Duterte‟s number and DDB‟s
number, the drugs abusers still considered as a serious problem.150
With the age rate
from 10 years old to 69 years old, the drugs problems is clearly has become a
serious problem on Philippines.151
Since the users of drugs on Philippines has
reached the various range of age, which mean the users of drugs on Philippines
started from the early teenagers up to an adult.152
According to DDB Chairperson
Benjamin Reyes, the government‟s anti-illegal drug campaign are also focusing on
the prevention of the drugs abusers on Philippines on getting wider. As he stated
below,
―As much as possible, we are trying to prevent the 4.8 million to not try
using illegal drugs again, our key message is to not use and do not try
illegal drugs because retention rate is high.‖153
The drugs problem on Philippines has become the main reason of Duterte to
established the “War on Drugs” campaign. Since Duterte perceived that the drugs
147
Dangerous Drugs Board. (n.d.). 2016 Statistics. Retrieved from
https://www.ddb.gov.ph/research-statistics/statistics/45-research-and-statistics/329-2016-statistics 148
Ibid 149
Ibid 150
Dangerous Drugs Board. (n.d.). 2016 Statistics. Retrieved from
https://www.ddb.gov.ph/research-statistics/statistics/45-research-and-statistics/329-2016-statistics 151
Ibid 152
Ibid 153
DDB: Philippines has 1.8 million current drug users. (2016, September 19). Retrieved from
https://www.rappler.com/nation/146654-drug-use-survey-results-dangerous-drugs-board-
philippines-2015
57
problem is the main obstacle to Philippine‟s development, moreover, he emphasizes
that the drugs problem will inhibit the progress of social and economic sector of
Philippines.154
Since then, the “War on Drugs” campaign was established to
imposed the drugs abusers on Philippines. From his disturbance feeling regarding
the drugs abusers on Philippines, Duterte‟s ambition to eradicate the drugs abusers
is so strong. It can be seen from the action that Duterte take long before he was
inaugurated as the president of Philippines. His intention to promote the “War on
Drugs” campaign actually has started since he became the Major of Davao city for
two decades.155
When he was the Major of Davao city, Duterte has started his
campaign on “War on Drugs”, the campaign was imposed to the drugs dealers on
Davao City at first and he considered that the killing is an effective way to combat
the drugs abusers.156
As his statement on Davao City on June 4 2016, ―If you are
still into drugs, I am going to kill you. Don‘t take this as a joke. I‘m not trying to
make you laugh. Sons of bi**hes, I‘ll really kill you.‖157
The statement has
indicated his ambition to eradicate the drugs abusers on Philippines. Besides,
Duterte also used his “War on Drugs” campaign as campaign tool for the
presidential election. As he said on May 2016 on a presidential election occasion,
―If by chance that God will place me there, watch out because the 1,000
[people allegedly executed while Duterte was mayor of Davao City] will
become 100,000. You will see the fish in Manila Bay getting fat. That is
where I will dump you.‖158
From the statement above, it can be seen on how Duterte‟s ambition to eradicate the
drugs abusers on Philippines by implementing the “War on Drugs” campaign. By
154
Xu, M. (n.d.). Human Rights and Duterte's War on Drugs. Retrieved from
https://www.cfr.org/interview/human-rights-and-dutertes-war-drugs 155
Andreas, R. D. (2016). Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs The Early Duterte Presidency
in the Philippines. The Spectacle of Violence in Duterte‘s ―War on Drugs‖,. Retrieved from
http://nbn-resolving.org/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:gbv:18-4-10128 156
Ibid 157
'License to Kill? | Philippine Police Killings in Duterte's 'War on Drugs? (2017, July 13).
Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/03/02/license-kill/philippine-police-killings-
dutertes-war-drugs 158
Ibid
58
eradicating the drugs problem, Duterte also eradicate the obstacle of the
development on social an economic progress on Philippines.
3.2 The Implementation of “War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte’s
administration
As has been explain before, Duterte‟s ambition to eradicate the drugs
abusers on Philippines is very high. Since Duterte perceive the drugs abuser has
become the main obstacle of Philippine‟s social and economic progress. Besides,
Duterte‟s ambition to eradicate the drugs abusers also can be seen from his
statement long ago before he was inaugurated as the president of Philippines.
Unfortunately, the “War on Drugs” campaign that aim to eradicate the drugs
abusers on Philippines, tend to a mass murder and an extrajudicial killing practice.
Moreover, Human Rights Watch (HRW) stated that, Philippines is such having a
justification of killing as so called by “License to kill”.159
In which Rodrigo Duterte
can kill Philippine‟s citizens in the name of “eradicating the drugs problem”
without a legal procedure.
Since the inauguration of Duterte as the president of Philippines, “War on
Drugs” campaign has become his priority. The priority also followed by his strong
ambition to eradicate the drugs problem on Philippines, as he stated below on
March 15 2016, before his inauguration become the President. ―When I become
president, I will order the police to find those people [dealing or using drugs] and
kill them. The funeral parlors will be packed.‖ Besides, Duterte also promised that
the “War on Drugs” campaign will use a radical approached as the practice of the
campaign. As he stated on April 26th
2016,
―It is going to be bloody. I will use the military and the police to go out and
arrest them, hunt for them. And if they offer a violent resistance, and
thereby placing the lives of the law enforcers and the military whom I would
159
Ibid
59
task for a job to do, I will simply say, ‗Kill them all and end the
problem.‖160
The “War on Drugs” campaign also known as Oplan Tokhang in
Philippines language. The Oplan Tokhang campaign has been officially stated by
the PNP as an action for President Rodrigo Roa Duterte in his fight against illegal
drugs and other forms of criminality in the country.161
It was firstly implemented on
Davao City, and now it has been implemented for all over Philippines.162
Besides,
Oplan Tokhang also known as a Double Barrel operation which tasked to eradicate
the drugs abusers by a direct action by the PNP under supervision of PNP chief
General Ronald "Bato" Dela Rosa. Oplan Tokhang is basically mean by (tok-tok
[knock], hangyo [request]), then the police will visit the house of the drugs suspect
and ask to stop using and selling drugs.163
However, the implementation of Oplan Tokhang is not as smooth as its
purposed, where the police will visit and ask the drugs suspect to stop. The
implementation of Oplan Tokhang have another side, it is considered as a bloody
operation which extrajudicial killing was found inside the campaign.164
As
according to HRW report, the implementation of “War on Drugs” campaign has
already killed more than 7.000 people that assumed as a drugs abuser. As quoted
from HRW report,
―Since the inauguration of President Rodrigo Duterte on June 30, 2016,
and his call for a ―war on drugs,‖ Philippine National Police officers and
unidentified ―vigilantes‖ have killed over 7,000 people. The anti-drug
campaign dubbed ―Operation Double Barrel‖ has targeted suspected drug
dealers and users ostensibly for arrest but in practice has been a campaign
of extrajudicial execution in impoverished areas of Manila and other urban
160
Berehulak, D. (2016, December 7). 'They Are Slaughtering Us Like Animals? Retrieved from
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/12/07/world/asia/rodrigo-duterte-philippines-drugs-
killings.html 161
Lgu. (n.d.). PNP OPLAN - DOUBLE BARREL PROJECT TOKHANG. Retrieved from
http://www.calambamisocc.gov.ph/index.php/60-capital-outlay/411-pnp-oplan-tokhang 162
Ibid 163
Ibid 164
'License to Kill? | Philippine Police Killings in Duterte's 'War on Drugs? (2017, July 13).
Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/03/02/license-kill/philippine-police-killings-
dutertes-war-drugs
60
areas. Duterte‘s outspoken endorsement of the campaign implicates him
and other senior officials in possible incitement to violence, instigation of
murder, and in command responsibility for crimes against humanity.‖165
It has showed clearly that the “War on Drugs” campaign has a bloody practice
inside the implementation.
Moreover, as according to the report of HRW, the killing inside “War on
Drugs” campaign also done by an “unidentified gunman”, which actually not the
member of the PNP. As the report of HRW, on one of the case of extrajudicial
killing by “War on Drugs” campaign that done by the unidentified gunman.
―Six masked armed men burst into a Manila home where a small group,
including several teenagers, were watching television. The men arrested
and beat drug suspects Aljon Mesa and Jimboy Bolasa, and then took them
away on motorcycles. A half hour later, after hearing from a uniformed
policeman, relatives rushed to a nearby bridge to find Aljon and Bolasa‘s
bodies, both with gunshot wounds to the head, their hands tied with cloth.
The gunmen were still at the scene, while uniformed police cordoned off the
area. The police report, headed ―Found Bodies,‖ claims that a ―concerned
citizen‖ alerted the police to the presence of two dead bodies. A week after
Aljon Mesa‘s killing, 10 police officers, some in civilian clothes, arrested
his brother Danilo Mesa and took him to the local barangay office. That
evening masked armed men abducted him from the barangay office; shortly
afterwards, his body was found under a bridge a block away. His relatives
said that his entire head had been wrapped in packing tape, and his hands
had been tied behind his back. He had been shot execution-style through the
mouth.‖166
The report showed that the practice of “War on Drugs” campaign also involved by
the unidentified gunman. The involvement of unidentified gunman could worsen
the implementation of the campaign regarding the killing without a legal
procedure.167
Duterte‟s intention to eradicate drugs problem by killing the drugs abusers
on Philippines is so strong, it can be seen from the statement of Duterte. Duterte
165
Ibid 166
'License to Kill? | Philippine Police Killings in Duterte's 'War on Drugs? (2017, July 13).
Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/03/02/license-kill/philippine-police-killings-
dutertes-war-drugs 167
Ibid
61
himself often use the word of “Kill” in his statement, when he said “kill” it is
literary means kill, which indicates that his ambition to eradicate the drugs problem
by a radical approach which is killing. As his statement on 24th
May 2016,
―I will definitely kill you. I will win because of breakdown in law and order.
I do not want to commit a crime. But if by chance per chance God will place
me there, stay on guard because that 1,000 will become 100,000. You will
see the fish in Manila Bay becoming fatter. That is where I will throw
you.168
‖
The radical approach of Duterte to eradicate the drugs problem also followed by
some controversial statement, which stated that he would be happy to slaughter the
drugs abusers on Philippines. As he stated on 30th
September 2017,
―Hitler massacred three million Jews. Now, there are three million drug
addicts. I‘d be happy to slaughter them. If Germany had Hitler, the
Philippines would have (me).‖169
The “War on Drugs” campaign will be continued until the end of Duterte‟s
presidency era, since he perceives that the “War on Drugs” campaign is an effective
way to eradicate the drugs problem on Philippines. As he stated that, ―Droga (drug
war) is a nonissue to me. It will be a policy until the dying days of my presidency or
my life,‖170
he also stated that he will not stop the “War on Drugs” campaign untl
the drugs lord killed or surrender. As his statement below,
"My campaign against drugs will not stop until the end of my term... until
the last pusher and last drug lord (is killed), We will not stop until the last
drug lord, financier, pusher is put behind bars... or below the ground if they
so wish,"171
His ambition to arrest the drug lord is so strong, moreover, he also announced to the
Philippine‟s citizens to also take a role to eradicate the drugs abusers. On June 5
168
Ibid 169
Andreas, R. D. (2016). Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs The Early Duterte Presidency
in the Philippines. The Spectacle of Violence in Duterte‘s ―War on Drugs‖,. Retrieved from
http://nbn-resolving.org/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:gbv:18-4-10128 170
Tubeza, P. C., & Orejas, T. (2017, December 9). Duterte: War on drugs to continue until 2022.
Retrieved from http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/950878/rodrigo-duterte-war-on-drugs-drug-killings-
extrajudicial-killlings 171
Ibid
62
2016, he announced that he would pay 5 million PHP (USD 100,000) as a reward to
anyone who could kill a drug lord and 3 million PHP (USD 60,000) as a reward to
anyone who could kill their distributor.172
Besides, those factors of ambition that
makes Duterte will keep the “War on Drugs” campaign until the end of his era,
Duterte himself considered that the “War on Drugs” campaign is the best way to
eradicate the drugs problem.173
Duterte considered the amount of killed drugs
suspects as an indicator of the campaign successes. As stated on the report of HRW,
―He praised the soaring body count of victims of police killings as proof of the
―success‖ of his ―war on drugs.‖174
3.3 The Support toward the “War on Drugs” campaign
The “War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration that
criticized by International community does not makes Duterte to stand back from
his campaign. Besides, even though his action has ream the criticism and
condemnation from International community, his approval rate on the country is
still high. Shockingly, Duterte‟s “War on Drugs” campaign has gain mass support
and approval from the government as well as from the Philippine‟s citizens. The
implementation of “War on Drugs” campaign that imposed for the drugs abusers, in
the other hand has bring a safe environment on Philippines.175
Therefore, besides
reap a lot of criticism, the “War on Drugs” campaign also gain mass support from
the Philippine‟s citizens.
172
Andreas, R. D. (2016). Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs The Early Duterte Presidency
in the Philippines. The Spectacle of Violence in Duterte‘s ―War on Drugs‖,. Retrieved from
http://nbn-resolving.org/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:gbv:18-4-10128 173
'License to Kill? | Philippine Police Killings in Duterte's 'War on Drugs? (2017, July 13).
Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/03/02/license-kill/philippine-police-killings-
dutertes-war-drugs 174
Ibid 175
Why are Filipinos supporting Duterte's drug war? (2017, October 14). Retrieved from
https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/185271-majority-filipinos-support-duterte-drug-war
63
The “War on Drugs” campaign has gain the support from Philippine‟s
government. The establishment of Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA),
Dangerous Drugs Board (DDB), and Philippine National Police (PNP) has
obviously support the “War on Drugs” campaign, since all of the government
agency has to in-line and support the current program of government. besides,
regarding the case of eradicating the drugs problem on Philippines, those
government agencies that tasked to prevent the drugs problem has to refer to the
Republic Act 9165 of Philippines. The Republic Act 9165 of Philippines is an act
that regulating the punishment imposed to the drugs abusers on Philippines.176
As
stated on the Republic Act 9165 of Philippines regarding the punishment for the
drugs abusers,
―Should any dangerous drug be the proximate cause of the death of a
person using the same in such den, dive or resort, the penalty of death and a
fine ranging from One million (P1,000,000.00) to Fifteen million pesos
(P15,000,000.00) shall be imposed on the maintainer, owner and/or
operator.‖177
In-line with the Republic Act 9165 of Philippines, the PDEA strongly
confirm their support toward Duterte‟s “War on Drugs” campaign. As the agency
that focusing on drugs enforcement PDEA has already promoting Duterte‟s “War
on Drugs” campaign, as has been stated on the PDEA‟s website.
“Unity is strength, let us all stand and be counted active community
participations in essential in President Rodrigo Roa Duterte‘s war against
Drugs‖178
As according the Republic Act 9165 of Philippines, DDB has been mandated to
also take charge to prevent and control the drugs abusers on Philippines. Therefore,
the DDB as a government agency specializing on drugs prevention and control has
to be in-line with current government program. As stated by the DDB‟s executive
director,
176
User, S. (n.d.). Laws and Regulations. Retrieved from http://pdea.gov.ph/laws-and-
regulations#executive-order-218 177
Ibid 178
Ibid
64
―Recent appointments made by President Rodrigo Duterte brought about
changes in the administration of the Dangerous Drugs Board, the country‘s
policy-making and strategy-formulating body on drug abuse prevention and
control. The DDB leadership is grateful for the recent appointments, which
will help the agency pursue the anti-illegal drugs agenda of the Duterte
Administration.‖179
The support on “War on Drugs” campaign not only came from the
government agencies. On the other hand, most of the Philippines citizens also
support the current government program, which is the “War on Drugs” campaign.
Since Duterte‟s “War on Drugs” campaign has brought a safe environment without
drugs abusers on Philippines. As according to Social Weather Stations, a non-profit
and private institution that dealing with social research in Philippines, most of
Filipinos are satisfied with Duterte‟s “War on Drugs” campaign.180
According to
the SWS‟s survey that held on September 2016, 7 from 10 Filipinos were satisfied
with Duterte‟s action regarding anti-drugs campaign. From 1,500 respondents, 77%
said they were satisfied, 14% were unsatisfied, and 9% were undecided.181
The
percentage of satisfaction were declining on 2017, from 77% to 63%, As shown on
the figure below.182
179
Dangerous Drugs Board. (n.d.). Malacañang implements reorganization at the DDB. Retrieved
from https://www.ddb.gov.ph/newsroom/345-malacanang-implements-reorganization-at-the-ddb 180
Social Weather Stations. (n.d.). Social Weather Stations | Second Quarter 2017 Social Weather
Survey: Pres. Duterte's net satisfaction rating a new personal record-high of "Very Good" +66.
Retrieved from https://www.sws.org.ph/swsmain/artcldisppage/?artcsyscode=ART-
20170706173742 181
Ibid 182
Why are Filipinos supporting Duterte's drug war? (2017, October 14). Retrieved from
https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/185271-majority-filipinos-support-duterte-drug-war
65
Figure 3.1
The figure above has shown that Duterte‟s satisfaction rate is really high. Even
though his satisfaction rate is decreased from 2016 – 2017, however, it is still above
50%. Which indicates that most of the Filipinos are satisfied with Duterte‟s
campaign on “War on Drugs”.183
One of the reason of the high satisfaction rate toward Duterte‟s “War on
Drugs” campaign was based on citizens perception on a safe environment because
of the implementation of “War on Drugs” campaign. 71% of Filipinos perceive that
the drugs abusers on Philippines are decreasing as can be seen on the figure
below.184
183
Ibid 184
Why are Filipinos supporting Duterte's drug war? (2017, October 14). Retrieved from
https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/185271-majority-filipinos-support-duterte-drug-war
66
Figure 3.2
The figure above has shown that 71% of Filipinos perceived that the drugs addict is
decreasing, 9% of Filipinos perceive that the drugs addict is increasing, and 12% of
Filipinos perceive that the drugs addicts is same as before.185
Therefore, the
decreasing percentage of drugs addict on Philippine‟s society could be one of the
reason of Duterte‟s high satisfaction rate.
185
Social Weather Stations. (n.d.). Social Weather Stations | Second Quarter 2017 Social Weather
Survey: Pres. Duterte's net satisfaction rating a new personal record-high of "Very Good" +66.
Retrieved from https://www.sws.org.ph/swsmain/artcldisppage/?artcsyscode=ART-
20170706173742
67
Moreover, Presidential Communications Secretary Martin Andanar also
stated that the crime rate oh Philippines also decreasing since the implementation of
“War on Drugs” campaign.186
As he stated below,
―It is evident we are hitting the mark in our campaign against illegal drugs.
But more than the statistics, the real score in the government‘s intensified
anti-drug operations is that it has pulled down the country‘s crime rate by
32%,‖187
On the other hand, the data from SWS also has shockingly showed that the
Philippine‟s citizens not only satisfied with the “War on Drugs” campaign by
Duterte, but also support the extrajudicial killing itself. It can be seen from the SWS
survey report regarding Filipinos approval rate toward drugs suspect that already
surrendered but still have to be killed. as according to Social Weather Situations
(SWS) survey, there 63% of Filipinos that agreed that the drugs suspects still have
to be killed even after they surrendered.188
The SWS has conduct a survey that held
on June 2017, with the question ―There are suspects in the illegal drug trade who
already surrendered yet were still killed‖, the result form 1,200 respondents, are
9% were strongly disagree, 11% were disagree, 17% were undecided yet, 32% were
agree, and 31% were strongly agree.189
The survey has showed clearly that the
Filipinos are also support the practice of “War on Drugs” campaign which contain a
practice of extrajudicial killing.
Moreover, the satisfaction rate toward Duterte‟s “War on Drugs” campaign
also has been stated by the president spokesperson. In which emphasizing that even
though the Filipinos already knew that there are extrajudicial killing on the
campaign, however, they still satisfied with Duterte‟s campaign. As stated above by
the spokesperson of the president,
186
Drug war nets a million mark surrenderers, 31 Dec. 2016 – Presidential Communications
Operations Office. (2017, June 1). Retrieved from https://pcoo.gov.ph/uncategorized/drug-war-nets-
a-million-mark-surrenderers-31-dec-2016/ 187
Ibid 188
Ibid 189
Ibid
68
―And if you recall, there was also a survey ‗no that 88 percent of the
Filipinos support the drug war. [inaudible] around 70 plus believe that
there are extra-legal killings ‗no. To me it‘s unfortunate that people know
that there are EJKs and despite this knowledge, you know, the support for
the war against drugs is still at 88 percent ‗no. So let us not underestimate
the success of the President in the war against drugs. As in fact, other
countries now look to us as a model.‖
The “War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration has gain
mass support from the government as well as from the Philippines citizens. As has
been explained before, the government has supported the “War on Drugs”
campaign since those government agencies has to be in-line with the current
president‟s program. Meanwhile, the support also given by the Philippine‟s citizens
itself. Duterte‟s satisfaction rate has indicates the Philippine‟s willingness to
support the “War on Drugs” campaign since most of the Filipinos perceive that the
“War on Drugs” campaign has succeeded to decreased the drugs addiction on
Philippines. Moreover, The Filipinos also support the practice of extrajudicial
killing on “War on Drugs” campaign, that can be seen from Duterte‟s approval rate.
The support that given by government and the citizens has led to a question of
whether the Human Rights considered as a universal or relative concept as
according to Philippines, that will be explain on the next chapter.
69
CHAPTER IV
CULTURAL RELATIVISM ON EXTRAJUDICIAL
KILLING IN “WAR ON DRUGS” CAMPAIGN
The “War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration has become
an International issue. Since the practice of extrajudicial killing inside the campaign
has reap the criticism and condemnation from the International Community. The
extrajudicial killing in “War on Drugs” campaign has clearly violated Human
Rights in term of the deprivation on human right to life and liberty. Moreover, by
the implementation of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign, Duterte
has already violated the Human Rights treaties that Philippines has already ratified.
As well as violated the concept of Responsibility to protect Human Rights (R2P), as
an obligation of the states who in favor with the ratification of Human Rights
treaties.
On the other hand, Duterte‟s approval and satisfaction rate has indicates that
the most of Philippine‟s citizens has support the “War on Drugs” campaign.
Moreover, not only support the “War on Drugs” campaign, as according to the
survey by Social Weather Stations (SWS), most of the Filipinos indirectly has
support the extrajudicial killing itself. The extrajudicial killing in “War on Drugs”
campaign that clearly violates the Universalism concept of Human Rights has led to
a question on whether the Philippines perceive Human Rights as universal concept
or a relative concept, since the killing has become a usual thing on Philippines. This
chapter will analyze the reason behind the extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs”
campaign that gain mass approval by the society which led to the ignorance of the
state to have the responsibility to protect Human Rights.
70
4.1 The History of Death Penalty on Philippines
The “War on Drugs” campaign that contain an extrajudicial killing as the
practice shockingly has become a usual thing on Philippines. The culture of killing
on Philippines actually has occur since the era of colonialization of Philippines.
Where the death penalty and death sentences are numerous. Death penalty or also
known as capital punishment is a government action to give a death sanction to the
person as a punishment for a crime. The sentence that someone be punished so
called by death sentence, and the act of carrying out the sentence is known as an
execution.190
Before discussing the role of the death penalty as the main factor of
Philippine‟s and its citizens behavior construction, to know the history of the
practice of death penalty in Philippines is important to give a better understanding
regarding the background of the death penalty practice.
As a country that independent on 12th
June 1989, Philippines independence
cannot be separated from the bloody history from the colonialization era.
Philippines has been colonialized for more over than 300 years. Philippines has
through the era of colonialization that brought by several country, such as Spanish,
America, and Japan. Spanish has colonialized Philippines for 300 year, meanwhile
America has colonialized Philippines for…. Spanish and America colonialization
has brought a big impact to the culture and law of Philippines. One of the most
important law that brought by Spanish and Spain is the death penalty system. The
death penalty system during the colonialization were include the punishment of
burning, decapitation, drowning, flaying, garrote, hanging, shooting, stabbing and
others.191
The death penalty system actually also was ever mentioned on the
Kalantiaw Code. Kalantiaw Code is a common code of the indigenous people on
190
Kronenwetter, M. (2001). Capital punishment: A reference handbook (p. 202). Santa Barbara,
CA: ABC-CLIO. 191
Johnson, D. T., & Zimring, F. E. (2009). The next frontier: National development, political
change and the death penalty in Asia (pp. 105-108). (Next frontier.) Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
71
Philippines. It was firstly written by Datu Kalantiaw on 1433, as the chief of
Negros Island on Philippines.192
The Kalantiaw Code regulates the punishment for
the people of Philippines that break the law.193
Here are several examples of the
article of Kalantiaw Code that contain the death punishment and other cruel
punishment:194
―Article XII
They shall be drowned, all slaves who assault their superiors or their lords
and masters; all those who abuse their luxury; those who kill their anitos by
breaking them or throwing them away.
Article XVII
They shall be killed, who profane places where sacred objects of their
diwatas or headmen are buried. He who gives way to the call of nature at
such places shall be burned."
From Article 12 and 17 of the Kalantiaw code has showed that the culture of death
penalty and other cruel punishment. However, the Kalantiaw code is not enough to
proof the culture of Death penalty came from. Here the writer would like to
emphasize more on the role of Spanish and America colonialization that become
the main actor of the implementation of the practice of death penalty on
Philippines.
4.1.1 Spanish Colonialization Era
Spanish that become the longest country that colonialized Philippines, has
brought a significant impact toward the Philippines society and law. Regarding the
implementation of death penalty, Spanish has become the first country that brought
the death penalty system in Philippine‟s history. It was brought firstly by Ferdinand
Magellan on 1521, that implementing the Medieval Europe system, which include
192
Duka, C. (2008), Struggle for Freedom, Rex Bookstore, Inc., ISBN 978-971-23-5045-0. 193
Ibid 194
Ibid
72
the death penalty system.195
As explained before, the death penalty during the
Spanish colonialization era were including the punishment of burning, decapitation,
drowning, flaying, garrote, hanging, shooting, stabbing and others.196
The death
punishment was imposed to the Filipinos that being rebel to the colonial, which is
to toward the Spanish colonial.197
Spanish that took more than 300 years from 1521
to 1898 has done a lot of death penalty and deaths sentences for the rebelled
Filipinos. As can be seen on the figure below.198
Figure 4.1
Death Penalty Case During Spanish Colonialization
Source: The next frontier: National development, political change and the death penalty in Asia
195
Abinales, P. N.; Amoroso, Donna J. (2005), State and Society in the Philippines (p. 55). Rowman
& Littlefield, ISBN 978-0-7425-1024-1. 196
Ibid. P-55 197
Johnson, D. T., & Zimring, F. E. (2009). The next frontier: National development, political
change and the death penalty in Asia (pp. 105-108). (Next frontier.) Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. 198
Ibid, p-105-108
73
Based on the Figure above, it has showed that the Spanish colonial has
imposed 1703 murder case and 46 death sentences.199
As explain on the book ―The
next frontier: National development, political change and the death penalty in
Asia‖ the 1703 murder case that happen on Spanish colonialization during 1840 –
1885 were also done by the Spanish colonialization.200
And it was imposed to the
Filipinos that being rebel to the Spanish colonialization.201
It can be seen that
during the Spanish colonialization era, Filipinos that rebelled are being shut down
by the Spanish. Therefore, the Filipinos nationalist does not have any choices
except death, if they were being rebel to the colonial government of the Spanish.202
As has been explain above, that the death penalty during Spanish
colonialization has took several forms of executions, from the punishment of
burning, decapitation, drowning, flaying, garrote, hanging, shooting, until the
punishment of stabbing and others.203
Those various forms of executions has
occurred on different era of Spanish colonialization. On 1832, the common
execution from that used by the Spanish colonialization to punished the rebelled
Filipinos is hanging.204
The hanging executions was changed to the execution of
garroting, since the hanging executions was abolished by the Spanish government
because it can make a bad reputation on the international world.205
Even though the
executions were changed from hanging into garroting, but it is still considered as a
form of death penalty that imposed to the Filipinos. Then, after the year of 1832,
the other forms executions such as burning, decapitation, drowning, flaying,
199
Ibid, p-105-108 200
Ibid, p-105-108 201
A timeline of death penalty in the Philippines. (2006, April 18). Retrieved from
http://pcij.org/blog/2006/04/18/a-timeline-of-death-penalty-in-the-philippines 202
Ibid 203
Ibid 204
Johnson, D. T., & Zimring, F. E. (2009). The next frontier: National development, political
change and the death penalty in Asia (pp. 105-108). (Next frontier.) Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. 205
Ibid, p-105-108
74
shooting, until the punishment of stabbing were implemented to the rebelled
Filipinos.206
4.1.2 America Colonialization Era
As a country that also brought a big impact to the Philippine‟s society,
America colonialization era also implanted the death penalty system to Philippines.
Basically, the America colonialization was adopted the law of Spanish during its
era of colonialization, which also included the death penalty system.207
As a
country who continue the medieval Europe penal system, the death penalty during
American colonialization still happen. The change can only be seen from the
Spanish penal system that America colonialization revised on 1932. The revision is
regarding the target of the death penalty, or in other word the to whom the death
penalty should be imposed.208
As has been explained before, the death penalty
during Spanish colonialization was imposed to the Filipinos that being rebel to the
Spanish colonialization, but on 1932 America has revised the target of the death
penalty, from only imposed to the rebel Filipinos to also imposed on seven
category of crimes which includes Treason, parricide, piracy, kidnapping, murder,
rape, and robbery with homicide.209
Even though the America colonialization also implemented the death
penalty system, however the death penalty cases during America colonialization is
not many as the Spanish colonialization era. As according the book of ―The next
frontier: National development, political change and the death penalty in Asia‖ the
death penalty that occurred on America colonialization era just a few rather than
206
Ibid, p-105-108 207
Ibid, p-105-108 208
A timeline of death penalty in the Philippines. (2006, April 18). Retrieved from
http://pcij.org/blog/2006/04/18/a-timeline-of-death-penalty-in-the-philippines 209
Ibid
75
during the Spanish colonialization era.210
It was only reached the 1.8 average case
per year, which mean there were only 18 cases of death penalty during 1924to
1933.211
And there were no data record regarding death penalty execution from
1898 to 1923, as can be seen on the figure below.212
Figure 4.2
Death Penalty Case During American Colonialization
Source: The next frontier: National development, political change and the death penalty in Asia
It can be seen clearly from the figure above that the death penalty
executions during the America colonialization is just a few, and not many as
happen during the Spanish colonialization era. However, the decreasing case of
death penalty during the America colonialization era does not automatically means
that the America does not implement the death executions as cruel as Spanish does,
moreover as has been explained before, the America just added seven categories of
crimes as become the target of the death penalty executions. Even though America
colonialization does not show a mass death penalty execution as the Spanish does,
however, the death penalty during the America colonialization era still
implemented.
210
Johnson, D. T., & Zimring, F. E. (2009). The next frontier: National development, political
change and the death penalty in Asia (pp. 105-108). (Next frontier.) Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. 211
Ibid, p-105-108 212
Ibid, p-105-108
76
4.2. Death Penalty as the Cultural Fault-lines
Figure 4.3
Source: Research Framework constructed by Atlindo Rizky Putranto
As the constructivist believes on idea as the main factor of state‟s
construction, the role of culture and historical background also cannot be forgotten
as factor of states and its citizens behavior. As stated by Michael Barnett,
―Reality does not exist out there waiting to be discovered, instead,
historically – produced and culturally – bound knowledge enables
individuals to construct and give meaning to reality‖213
213
Baylis J., Smith S., Owens P. (2008). The Globalization of World Politics : An Introduction to
International Relations, p. 164 Oxford University Press, England.
Human Rights as a
Relative Concept on
Philippines
77
Here, as according to Michael Barnett, that the reality was produced by the role of
culture and historical background of the Country. Moreover, the historical
background is really important to shape the interpretation of society toward an
issue.214
Meanwhile, the society are consist of different interpretations, the
different interpretation of the society are so called as a cultural fault-lines.215
Therefore, Philippine‟s citizens interpretation is really important to construct the
state‟s behavior.
In the case of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign, to analyze
the factor behind the support of extrajudicial killing on Philippines is really
important. Here the writer would like to put focused on the practice of death
penalty as the cultural fault-lines of Philippine‟s history. Which emphasize that
because of the practice of death penalty, it may produce a perception of
compromised toward the action of killing, so that the practice of killing has become
a common thing on Philippines.
The “War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration has led to a
question on what is the factor that make the Philippine‟s citizens to justify the
action of killing and perceive it as a common thing on Philippines. Since the
campaign contain the practice of killing without a legal procedure. Which so called
as an extrajudicial killing. Since the satisfaction rate toward Duterte‟s campaign
that given by the Filipinos has showed clearly that Philippine‟s citizens are also
support the extrajudicial killing. This sub-chapter will analyze the existence of
death penalty as a hardened culture of Philippines and make it as a cultural fault-
lines.
4.2.1 Practice of Death Penalty as Hardened Culture
As showed from the figure above, the practice of death penalty has become
a culture of killing on Philippines. The culture killing on Philippines has considered
214
Ibid, p-164 215
Ibid, p-164
78
as the cultural fault lines in Philippines history, that lead to the perception of killing
as a common thing to do on Philippines. As can be seen above, the practice of
killing has made the norms and values that can be accepted by the Philippine‟s
citizens. As the practice of death penalty has been introduced since the era of
colonialization on Philippine, the Philippine‟s citizens were not shocked with the
practice of Death penalty. Moreover, they were easily accepting the practice of
killing since it has become a common values and norms on Philippines.
To proofed the practice of death penalty has become common norms and
values that lead to the creation of culture of killing on Philippines, this framework
of research will be based on the theory of Constructivism of Alexander Wendt and
Michael Barnett. Before knowing the importance of culture on constructing the
state‟s and its citizens behavior, here, Alexander Wendt has emphasized the
importance of practice on constructing the culture. As what Alexander Wendt
emphasize on the book of ―Anarchy is what States Makes of it: The Social
Construction of Power Politics‖ ―Changing the practices will change the
intersubjective knowledge that constitutes the system.‖216
It can be seen from the
statement that the role of practice is really important, since changing the practice
will change the knowledges of the people that constitutes the system. Meanwhile,
here the practice of death penalty has succeeded on changing the system and
citizens behavior of Philippines.
The changes of the system also interpreted as a cultural fault-lines as
according to Michael Barnett. As has been explained by Michael Barnett regarding
the cultural fault-lines,
―But because culture is fractured and because society is comprised of
different interpretations of what is meaningful activity, scholars need to
216
Wendt, A. (1995). Anarchy is What States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics
(1992). International Theory, 403-407.
79
consider these cultural fault – lines and treat the fixing of meanings as an
accomplishment that is at the essence of politics…‖217
It can be seen clearly that according to Michael Barnett, culture is fractured, but
since the society comprised or consist from different interpretations, it may produce
the cultural fault-lines. And here again, the practice of death penalty on Philippines
has give a contribution on making the cultural fault-lines, since the practice of death
penalty has change the interpretation of Philippine‟s citizens toward their culture.
To be precise, the culture of killing.
On the other hand, Michael Barnett also emphasized that the hardened
culture also can produce the cultural fault-lines. As stated by Michael Barnett,
―Constructivists attempt to recover the meanings that actors give to their
practices and the objects that they construct. These derive not from private
beliefs but rather from culture. In contrast to the rationalist presumption
that culture, at most, constrains action, Constructivists argue that culture
informs the meanings that people give to their action. Sometimes
Constructivists have presumed that such meanings derive from hardened
culture.‖218
Since the making process of social construction is mutually constituted, which
means that there is a process of practice that mutually-constituted and give meaning
to each other between the identity (History, Culture) and the actor itself, the
practice can affect the social process to constructing and re-constructing them
self.219
Since the practice can affect the social process to constructing and re-
constructing them self, by this mean, the practice of killing has become a hardened
culture on Philippines. To be precise, the practice of death penalty on Philippines
that brought by Spanish and America colonialization, has become the main factor
of Philippine‟s culture construction, since it has construct the norms and values that
can make the culture of killing on Philippines. Meanwhile, the practice of
217
Baylis J., Smith S., Owens P. (2008). The Globalization of World Politics : An Introduction to
International Relations, p. 164 Oxford University Press, England. 218
Ibid, p-164 219
Wendt, A. (1995). Anarchy is What States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics
(1992). International Theory, 403-407.
80
extrajudicial killing on Philippines is the output of re-construction process that
drives from the culture of killing on Philippines.
Even though extrajudicial killing has different meaning with death penalty,
in which extrajudicial killing interpreted as a killing without a legal procedure,
meanwhile death penalty is a killing sanction by the government through a legal
procedure, however, the death penalty practice has make a culture of killing in
Philippines as a hardened culture. So that has produce the practice of extrajudicial
killing on Philippines as a common thing. To proofed the killing practice as a
hardened culture which also drive to the practice of extrajudicial killing, the Japan
colonialization era will be taken as supportive data to proofed the analysis.
During the colonialization of Japan on 1941 to 1945, The death Penalty
were stop. There was no documented case for judicial executions. The Japanese that
came with a propaganda of liberating its fellow Asian country from Western
colonialization was accepted at first by the Philippines. Therefore, the death penalty
system was stop during the Japanese era of colonialization as can be seen on the
figure below.220
220
Johnson, D. T., & Zimring, F. E. (2009). The next frontier: National development, political
change and the death penalty in Asia (pp. 105-108). (Next frontier.) Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
81
Figure 4.4
Case of Death Penalty During Colonialization Era on Philippines
Source: The next frontier: National development, political change and the death penalty in Asia
As can be seen above, that there were no executions during the Japanese
colonialization era. However, stopping the death penalty doesn‟t mean that the
killing also being stop in practice. For the Filipinos, the Japanese period is just
another form of a colonialization. The Filipinos saw the Japanese period as a
“brutal conquerors” instead of “liberating” the Filipinos as its own Asian fellow.221
Since that, the extrajudicial killing during the Japanese period were numerous,
because there is no death penalty as a judicial platform for killing the rebel
Filipinos toward Japanese authority.222
From the figure above it can be seen that
even after the independence of the Philippines, there were still several executions. It
has showed that the culture of killing has become a hardened culture, since even if
the death penalty was stop during the Japanese era, the killing practice keep going
until the era of Duterte by the “War on Drugs” campaign.
221
Ibid, p-105-108 222
Ibid, p-105-108
82
4.3 Case of Extrajudicial Killing Before Duterte’s Administration
In order to support the argument of killing as a hardened culture of
Philippines, the writer would like to give several cases of extrajudicial killing that
done before Duterte‟s administration. The case of extrajudicial killing that will be
showed was done by several president before Duterte and has considered as an
International issue since it has violated the universalism of Human Rights. Besides,
the Presidents below also have a controversial issue, which will become a
supportive data to strengthen the argument of the killing practice as a hardened
culture.
4.3.1 Marcos administration (1965 - 1986)
Ferdinand Marcos is the 10th
President of Philippines that has been ruled
since 1965-1986.223
As the president of Philippines, Marcos has ruled Filipinos
with a dictatorship-style. He also has take over and control or cause the taking over
and control of all such newspapers, magazines, radio and television facilities and all
other media communications.224
Since during his presidency, there were a lot of
Communism that threatening the political interest of Ferdinand Marcos.225
One of the controversial issue during Marcos administration is the
establishment of Martial Law. The Martial law of Philippines is a law that regulated
to armed and give power to the armed force to prevent the Communism rebellion to
be ruled the Philippines.226
Since the implementation of Martial Law by Marcos
there are several cases of Human Rights violation. As has been recorded, there were
223
Celoza, A. F. (1998). Ferdinand Marcos and the Philippines: The political economy of
authoritarianism (pp. 1 - 6). Singapore: Toppan. 224
Ibid, pp. 1 - 6 225
Ibid, pp. 1 - 6 226
Nik de Ynchausti. (2016, September 24). The tallies of Martial Law. Retrieved from
https://www.esquiremag.ph/politics/martial-law-tallies-a1576-20160924-lfrm4
83
398 case of disappearances, and 1,388 cases of extrajudicial killings.227
His
campaign against communism rebellion called by Oplan Katatagan.228
4.3.2 Arroyo administration (2001 - 2010)
Gloria Macapagal Arroyo is the 14th
President of Philippines, and she has
become the President of Philippines from 2001 to 2010.229
Similar with Marcos,
Arroyo also has a controversial issue on Human Rights violation. The Human
Rights violation During Arroyo administration was also because the existence of
communism rebellion that threatening the presidency of Arroyo.230
Most of the
killings case during Arroyo administration has occurred from the period March
2005 until mid-2006 where close to 40 incidents of extrajudicial killings are
reported.231
As can be seen on the figure below.232
227
3,257: Fact checking the Marcos killings, 1975-1985. (2018, May 3). Retrieved from
http://www.manilatimes.net/3257-fact-checking-the-marcos-killings-1975-1985/255735/ 228
Celoza, A. F. (1998). Ferdinand Marcos and the Philippines: The political economy of
authoritarianism (pp. 1 - 6). Singapore: Toppan. 229
Skard, T. (2015). Women of power: Half a century of female presidents and prime ministers
worldwide. 230
Parre o, A. A. (2011). Report on the Philippine extrajudicial killings: (2001 - August
2010)(pp. 13 - 15). Makati City: Asia Foundation. 231
Ibid, p-13 – p-15 232
Ibid, p-13 – p-15
84
Figure 4.5
Extrajudicial Killing Case on Arroyo’s Administration
Source: Report on the Philippine extrajudicial killings: (2001 - August 2010)
As can be seen from the figure above, that the highest reported case of
extrajudicial killing on Arroyo administration was occurred on 2005 to 2006, where
they were 66 cases of extrajudicial killing on 2005 and 70 cases of extrajudicial
killing on 2006.233
Even though the case of extrajudicial killing on Arroyo
administration is not many as occurred on Marcos administration, however, the
extrajudicial killing still happens on Arroyo administration. The campaign to fight
against rebelled communism on Arroyo administration called by Oplan Bantay
laya.234
4.3.3 Benigno Simeon Cojuangco Aquino III Administration (2010 - 2016)
Benigno Aquino III is the 15th
President of Philippines, that become the
President from 2010 to 2016. As the president after Arroyo administration that
233
Ibid, p-13 – p-15 234
Parre o, A. A. (2011). Report on the Philippine extrajudicial killings: (2001 - August 2010 )(p.
20). Makati City: Asia Foundation.
85
being controversial because of her campaign, Aquino was promised to stop the
extrajudicial killing. As he stated, “will not tolerate extrajudicial killings in my
administration.‖235
Even though he promised to stop the extrajudicial killing in his
era, however the case of extrajudicial killing still can be found during his
administration. As can be seen from the figure that Aquino has 8 cases of
extrajudicial killing in 2010.236
On the other hand, the rate of extrajudicial killing during Aquino and
Arroyo is quite similar. As can be seen on the figure below.237
Figure 4.6
Extrajudicial Killing Case on Aquino’s Administration
Source: Report on the Philippine extrajudicial killings: (2001 - August 2010)
Compared to Arroyo‟s 2.5 killings per week in 2006, the rate of killings for Aquino
is at 2 per week, which indicates that the extrajudicial killing cases that found
during Aquino administration is quite similar with the Arroyo administration
does.238
235
Parre o, A. A. (2011). Report on the Philippine extrajudicial killings: (2001 - August 2010 )(p.
21). Makati City: Asia Foundation. 236
Parre o, A. A. (2011). Report on the Philippine extrajudicial killings: (2001 - August 2010 )(pp.
20 - 22). Makati City: Asia Foundation. 237
Ibid, p-20 – p-22 238
Ibid, p-20 – p-22
86
The extrajudicial killing cases that happen after the independence of
Philippines has showed that killing practice has become a common thing on
Philippines. It can be seen from the data that given regarding extrajudicial case
during the president before Duterte, such as Ferdinand Marcos, Arroyo and Aquino.
It has indicated that the “War on Drugs” campaign by Duterte is only a continuity
of killing practice culture that already done before his administration. On the other
hand, the data also has showed that killing practice has become an output of
reconstruction process of culture of killing which drives from death penalty
practice, that has been explained before. Therefore, the extrajudicial killing on
“War on Drugs” campaign by Duterte has been supported by the society since the
killing practice has become a common thing to do, as well as the Filipinos already
get used with the killing practice.
87
4.4 Human Rights as a Relativism Concept on Philippines
Figure 4.7
Source: Research Framework constructed by Atlindo Rizky Putranto
Human Rights as a universal concept that has been declared on the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) should be applied to all human
being. But in reality, there are several states that cannot applied and implement the
universal concept of Human Rights. One of the example is Philippines. As can be
seen on the figure above, Human Rights is a relative concept as according to
Philippine‟s perception. Therefore, by the implementation of extrajudicial killing
on “War on Drugs” campaign by Duterte, Philippines has obviously violated the
universalism concept of Human Rights. Moreover, as a state that ratified 14
documents of Human Rights treaties, Philippines also has ignored its obligation to
88
protect Human Rights.239
And it has been stated on the concept of Responsibility to
Protect (R2P).
The existence of Cultural Relativism has become a clear contradiction
toward the conceptual of Universalism. In the context of Human Rights, Cultural
Relativist argue that cultural traditions that properly determine the existence and
scope of civil and political rights enjoyed by individuals in a given society.240
By
this mean, the Cultural Relativism perceive that human rights standards are vary
among different cultures, moreover it can reflect the national identity.241
However,
the existence of Cultural relativism cannot be a justification of a violation of
Human Rights that done by a state.
As has been stated before, by the implementation of extrajudicial killing on
“War on Drugs” campaign by Duterte, Philippines has clearly violated Human
Rights and its obligation to protect Human Rights, since Philippines has already
ratified several Human Rights treaties. As become the state that ratified Human
Rights, Philippines should responsible to protect Human Rights, as has been stated
by the United Nations,
―By becoming parties to international treaties, States assume obligations
and duties under international law to respect, to protect and to fulfil human
rights. The obligation to respect means that States must refrain from
interfering with or curtailing the enjoyment of human rights. The obligation
to protect requires States to protect individuals and groups against human
rights abuses. The obligation to fulfil means that States must take positive
action to facilitate the enjoyment of basic human rights.‖242
However, in reality Philippines cannot fulfil its obligation to protect Human
Rights by implementing “War on Drugs” campaign which the practice of
extrajudicial killing was found inside the implementation of the campaign.
239
OHCHR Dashboard. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://indicators.ohchr.org/ 240
Tesón, F. R. (1985). International Human Rights and Cultural Relativism. Retrieved from
https://ir.law.fsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1038&context=articles 241
Ibid 242
The Foundation of International Human Rights Law. (2017, October 31). Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/en/sections/universal-declaration/foundation-international-human-rights-
law/index.html
89
Moreover, Philippines also has ignored the criticism and rejection by international
community. Meanwhile as according to R2P concept, a sovereign state that cannot
protect their citizens from a deprivation of Human Rights, then the responsibility to
protect falls to the International community.243
On the other hand, the support that given by the society toward Duterte‟s
campaign has showed clearly that the Filipinos are also support the extrajudicial
killing itself. It can be seen from the data from Social Whether Stations (SWS)
which stated that 77% of Filipinos were satisfied with Duterte‟s “War on Drugs”
campaign, and 63% of Filipinos were agreed that the drugs suspects that already
surrendered still have to be killed.244
The high support rate toward Duterte‟s
campaign was because most of Filipino perceive that Duterte‟s “War on Drugs”
campaign has made a safe environment on Philippines.
The high satisfaction rate as well as the high approval rate by the most
Filipinos toward Duterte‟s “War on Drugs” campaign has led to a question whether
the Filipinos perceive the Human Rights as a universal concept or a relative
concept. Then the answer would be the Philippines has considered Human Rights
as a relative concept. It can be seen from the high satisfaction and high approval
rate toward Duterte‟s “War on Drugs” campaign. The practice of death penalty that
create a culture of killing practice on Philippines has also support the relativism of
Human Rights on Philippines. Since then, the practice of killing has become a
common and usual thing on Philippines. As the Cultural Relativism believes that
the civil and political rights is referred to the position according to local culture
traditions, by this mean, the conceptual of Human Rights has become a relative
concept on Philippines, and the Filipinos rights are referred to its local traditions,
243
Badescu, C. G. (2012). Humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect: Security and
human rights (p. 110). London: Routledge. 244
Social Weather Stations. (n.d.). Social Weather Stations | Second Quarter 2017 Social Weather
Survey: Pres. Duterte's net satisfaction rating a new personal record-high of "Very Good" +66.
Retrieved from https://www.sws.org.ph/swsmain/artcldisppage/?artcsyscode=ART-
20170706173742
90
which is the culture of killing as a hardened culture. The indicators can be seen
from the practice of killing that has been done before Duterte‟s administration. The
extrajudicial killing that become a hardened culture has impacting to the Filipinos
perception that the practice of killing is a common thing on Philippines. Besides,
the perception of the practice of killing is a common thing to do on Philippines has
also led to the perception of relativism concept toward Human Rights on
Philippines.
Since the Filipinos has get used to the practice of extrajudicial killing and
led to the perception of Relativism concept toward Human Rights, so that the
Filipinos were accept the extrajudicial killing as a part of eradicating the drugs
abusers by the “War on Drugs” campaign of Duterte. Therefore, the conceptual of
R2P, whereas Philippines should be responsible to protect Human Rights has been
ignored by Philippines because Philippines has perceived Human Rights as a
Relative concept. By this mean, Duterte himself has ignored his responsible to
protect Human Rights since Duterte perceived that the action of extrajudicial killing
that he has done is not a form of violation on Human Rights, since the cultural
Relativist argue that the local traditions determine the civil rights that enjoyed by
the society. Here it can be seen that the local traditions that determine civil rights on
Philippines was created by the practice of killing as a hardened culture on
Philippines, that enjoyed by the society of the Philippines. Therefore, the
Relativism concept toward Human Rights on Philippines has led to the State‟s
responsibility to protect Human Rights to be relativism concept as well. Because
the
91
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION
Human Rights is a right inherent to all human being. It is simply become a
right inherent to all human being since the human were born as a human. The
Human Rights that inherent to all human being has made Human Rights as a
universal concept. The sense of humanity that attached with the human, also
strengthen the concept of Universalism of Human Rights. In which by the name of
humanity, people are willing to stand against something that deprive the rights from
human being. Human Rights as a universal concept also has been declared by the
United Nation (UN) with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).
Since then, the UDHR has become a common standard of Human Rights that have
to applied and promote universally by the states members of UN that ratified the
Human Rights documents. On the other hand, Human Rights as a universal concept
were being debated by the existence of Cultural Relativism concept. The Cultural
Relativism that exist as a contradiction toward the concept of Universalism of
Human Rights, emphasized that there is a cultural sense that made Human Rights as
a Relative concept.
However, even though Human Rights has been declared as a universal
concept by the UN, Philippines do not promote and implement the values of Human
Rights in the country. By the implementation of extrajudicial killing on “War on
Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration, Philippines are obviously
violated the Human Rights. Since the extrajudicial killing has considered as a
violation of Human Rights as according to UDHR and International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
On the other hand, Philippines has already ratified the Human Rights
documents, which stated the state participation to promote and implement Human
Rights universally. By the implement the extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” it
92
is also has become a contradiction of State‟s responsibility to protect concept. Since
Philippines cannot fulfil its obligation to protect Human Rights in the country. By
this mean, besides violating the Human Rights, Philippines also already failed to
fulfil its responsibility to protect Human Rights.
Shockingly, the “War on Drugs” campaign by Duterte has gained mass
approval that can be seen from the high satisfaction rate toward Duterte‟s
campaign. Since most of Filipinos perceive that Duterte has succeed to eradicate
the drugs problem and make a safe environment on Philippines. The high approval
rate has indicated that Filipinos are supporting the practice of extrajudicial killing
itself. By that, its indicates that Human Rights were perceived as a Relative concept
on Philippines.
Not only the support from the citizens that made Human Rights perceived as
a relative concept on Philippines, the practice of death penalty also has a role as a
constructing reasons of Filipinos behavior. The practice of death penalty that
brought the colonialization era of Spanish and America has become a hardened
culture which become the fault-lines on Philippine‟s culture. It has proved on the
Japanese colonialization era which stop the death penalty, but the extrajudicial
killing was numerous. Besides, the extrajudicial killing also happens on the
presidential era before Duterte. Therefore, the practice of killing has become a
culture and a common thing on Philippines.
Since the practice of killing has become a common thing on Philippines and
the Filipinos are supporting the extrajudicial killing on Duterte‟s “War on Drugs”
campaign, it has become an indication that Human Rights has become a Relative
concept on Philippines. Therefore, by the perception of Relativism concept of
Human Rights on Philippines, the Filipinos were accepting the form of Human
Rights violation by extrajudicial killing practice on “War on Drugs” campaign.
Besides, since the Human Rights perceived a relative concept on Philippines, it
leads to an ignorance to fulfil on implementing and promoting Human Rights
universally as well as fail to fulfil state‟s responsibility to protect Human Rights
93
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Book
Abinales, P. N.; Amoroso, Donna J. (2005), State and Society in the Philippines (p.
55). Rowman & Littlefield, ISBN 978-0-7425-1024-1.
Badescu, C. G. (2012). Humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect:
Security and human rights. London: Routledge.
Baylis J., Smith S., Owens P. (2008). The Globalization of World Politics: An
Introduction to International Relations, p. 164 Oxford University Press,
England.
Celoza, A. F. (1998). Ferdinand Marcos and the Philippines: The political
economy of authoritarianism. Singapore: Toppan
Chomsky, N. (2002). Terror and Just Response.
Donnelly, J. (1984). Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights. Human
Rights Quarterly, 6(4), 400-402. doi:10.2307/762182
Donnelly, J. (2013). Special Features of Human Rights. In Universal human rights
in theory and practice (2nd ed., pp. 10, 11). Ithaca: Cornell University
Press.
Duka, C. (2008), Struggle for Freedom, Rex Bookstore, Inc., ISBN 978-971-23-
5045-0.
Forsythe, D. P. (2018). Human rights in international relations
Gould, L. A., & Pate, M. (2016). State fragility around the world: Fractured justice
and fierce reprisal.
Johnson, D. T., & Zimring, F. E. (2009). The next frontier: National development,
political change and the death penalty in Asia. (Next frontier.) Oxford:
Oxford Univ. Press.
Kemerling, G. (2011). A Dictionary of Philosophical Terms and Name.
Kronenwetter, M. (2001). Capital punishment: A reference handbook. Santa
Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.
Rao, V., & Walton, M. (2009). Culture and public action.
Skard, T. (2015). Women of power: Half a century of female presidents and prime
ministers worldwide.
Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of
Power Politics. International Organization
94
New Zealand. (2008). The New Zealand handbook on international human rights.
Journal
Andreas, R. D. (2016). Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs The Early
Duterte Presidency in the Philippines. The Spectacle of Violence in
Duterte‘s ―War on Drugs‖,. Retrieved from http://nbn-
resolving.org/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:gbv:18-4-10128
Corradetti, C. (2009). Relativism and human rights: A theory of pluralistic
universalism. Dordrecht: Springer
Donnelly, J. (2013). Universal human rights in theory and practice. Ithaca: Cornell
University Press.
In Reus-Smit, C., & In Snidal, D. (2012). The Oxford handbook of international
relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jackson, R and Sorensen, G(2006). Introduction to International RelationsTheories
and Approaches. Oxford university press.
Miller, D. (2006). The Responsibility to Protect Human Rights.
Tesón, F. R. (1985). International Human Rights and Cultural Relativism.
Retrieved from
https://ir.law.fsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1038&context=articles
Waltz, K. N. 1959. Man, the State, and War: A Theoretical Analysis. New York:
Columbia University Press
Report
'License to Kill? | Philippine Police Killings in Duterte's 'War on Drugs? (2017,
July 13). Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/03/02/license-
kill/philippine-police-killings-dutertes-war-drugs
Nationwide Survey on the Nature and Extent of Drugs Abuse in the Philippines.
(n.d.). Retrieved from Dangerous Drugs Board (DDB) website:
http://pcij.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/DDB-2015-Nationwide-Survey-
Final-Reportc.pdf
Parre o, A. A. (2011). Report on the Philippine extrajudicial killings: (2001 -
August 2010). Makati City: Asia Foundation.
Social Weather Stations. (n.d.). Social Weather Stations | Second Quarter 2017
Social Weather Survey: Pres. Duterte's net satisfaction rating a new personal
record-high of "Very Good" +66. Retrieved from
https://www.sws.org.ph/swsmain/artcldisppage/?artcsyscode=ART-
20170706173742
95
World Report 2017: Rights Trends in Philippines. (2017, January 20). Retrieved
from https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2017/country-chapters/philippines
Website
3,257: Fact checking the Marcos killings, 1975-1985. (2018, May 3). Retrieved
from http://www.manilatimes.net/3257-fact-checking-the-marcos-killings-
1975-1985/255735/
A timeline of death penalty in the Philippines. (2006, April 18). Retrieved from
http://pcij.org/blog/2006/04/18/a-timeline-of-death-penalty-in-the-
philippines
Berehulak, D. (2016, December 7). 'They Are Slaughtering Us Like Animals?
Retrieved from
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/12/07/world/asia/rodrigo-
duterte-philippines-drugs-killings.html
Cohen, R. (2016, July 29). The Responsibility to Protect: Human Rights and
Humanitarian Dimensions. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/on-
the-record/the-responsibility-to-protect-human-rights-and-humanitarian-
dimensions/
Constructivist Theories of IR. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.public.iastate.edu/~pol_s.453/const.htm
DDB: Philippines has 1.8 million current drug users. (2016, September 19).
Retrieved from https://www.rappler.com/nation/146654-drug-use-survey-
results-dangerous-drugs-board-philippines-2015
Disappearances" and extrajudicial executions as violations of international human
rights. (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/188000/act330051993en.pd
f
Duterte fires drugs board chair for 'contradicting government' | Philstar.com. (2017,
May24). Retrieved from
https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2017/05/24/1703250/duterte-fires-
drugs-board-chair-contradicting-government
Human Rights Consequences of the 'War on Drugs? in the Philippines. (2017, July
31). Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/07/20/human-rights-
consequences-war-drugs-philippines
Xu, M. (n.d.). Human Rights and Duterte's War on Drugs. Retrieved from
https://www.cfr.org/interview/human-rights-and-dutertes-war-drugs
96
Nik de Ynchausti. (2016, September 24). The tallies of Martial Law. Retrieved
from https://www.esquiremag.ph/politics/martial-law-tallies-a1576-
20160924-lfrm4
Punongbayan, J. C. (2017, May 26). Why Duterte's ?4 million drug users? is
statistically improbable. Retrieved from https://www.rappler.com/thought-
leaders/170975-duterte-drug-users-statistically-improbable
Ranada, P. (2017, May 6). Is Duterte's '4 million drug addicts' a 'real number'?
Retrieved from https://www.rappler.com/rappler-blogs/169009-duterte-
drug-addicts-real-number
Tubeza, P. C., & Orejas, T. (2017, December 9). Duterte: War on drugs to continue
until 2022. Retrieved from http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/950878/rodrigo-
duterte-war-on-drugs-drug-killings-extrajudicial-killlings
United Nations Universal Declaration, International Covenant: United for Human
Rights. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.humanrights.com/what-are-
human-rights/international-human-rights-law/international-human-rights-
law-continued.html
Why are Filipinos supporting Duterte's drug war? (2017, October 14). Retrieved
from https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/185271-majority-filipinos-
support-duterte-drug-war
Official Site
Ban disturbed by remarks made by President-elect of the Philippines on
extrajudicial killings. (2016, June 8). Retrieved from
https://news.un.org/en/story/2016/06/531752-ban-disturbed-remarks-made-
president-elect-philippines-extrajudicial-killings#.WH44jRsrKUk
Dangerous Drugs Board. (n.d.). 2016 Statistics. Retrieved from
https://www.ddb.gov.ph/research-statistics/statistics/45-research-and-
statistics/329-2016-statistics
Dangerous Drugs Board. (n.d.). Malacañang implements reorganization at the
DDB. Retrieved from https://www.ddb.gov.ph/newsroom/345-malacanang-
implements-reorganization-at-the-ddb
Dangerous Drugs Board. (n.d.). Vision, Mission, Mandate. Retrieved from
https://www.ddb.gov.ph/about-ddb/vision-mission-mandate
Drug war nets a million mark surrenderers, 31 Dec. 2016 – Presidential
Communications Operations Office. (2017, June 1). Retrieved from
https://pcoo.gov.ph/uncategorized/drug-war-nets-a-million-mark-
surrenderers-31-dec-2016/
97
Fact Sheet No.2 (Rev.1), The International Bill of Human Rights. (n.d.). Retrieved
from http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FactSheet2Rev.1en.pdf
History of the Document. (2017, October 31). Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/en/sections/universal-declaration/history-
document/index.html
Human Rights. (2017, October 31). Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/human-rights/
Lgu. (n.d.). PNP OPLAN - DOUBLE BARREL PROJECT TOKHANG. Retrieved
from http://www.calambamisocc.gov.ph/index.php/60-capital-outlay/411-
pnp-oplan-tokhang
Media Interview with President Rodrigo Roa Duterte during his Visit to Marawi
City – Presidential Communications Operations Office. (2017, September
21). Retrieved from https://pcoo.gov.ph/media_interview/media-interview-
president-rodrigo-roa-duterte-visit-marawi-city/
OHCHR | Convention against Torture. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CAT.aspx
OHCHR Dashboard. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://indicators.ohchr.org/
OHCHR | What we do. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/AboutUs/Pages/WhatWeDo.aspx
R2P MONITOR 15 NOVEMBER 2017 ISSUE 36 A bimonthly bulletin by the
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.globalr2p.org/media/files/r2p_monitor_nov2017.pdf
R2P REFERENCES IN UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
RESOLUTIONS. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.globalr2p.org/media/files/hrc-resolutions-r2p-10-april.pdf
Social Weather Stations. (n.d.). Social Weather Stations | Home Page. Retrieved
from https://www.sws.org.ph/
The Foundation of International Human Rights Law. (2017, October 31). Retrieved
from http://www.un.org/en/sections/universal-declaration/foundation-
international-human-rights-law/index.html
The Foundation of International Human Rights Law. (2017, October 31). Retrieved
from http://www.un.org/en/sections/universal-declaration/foundation-
international-human-rights-law/index.html
98
Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (2018, January 29). Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/
User, S. (n.d.). Laws and Regulations. Retrieved from http://pdea.gov.ph/laws-and-
regulations#executive-order-218
User, S. (n.d.). Mandate and Functions. Retrieved from
http://pdea.gov.ph/transparency/mandate-and-functions
Government Publication
PNP ANTI-ILLEGAL DRUGS CAMPAIGN PLAN - PROJECT: "DOUBLE
BARREL" (16). (2016). Retrieved from Republic of the Philippines
NATIONAL POLICE COMMISSION NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS
PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF, PNP
website:
https://didm.pnp.gov.ph/Command%20Memorandum%20Circulars/CMC%
202016-16%20PNP%20ANTI-
ILLEGAL%20DRUGS%20CAMPAIGN%20PLAN%20–
%20PROJECT%20DOUBLE%20BARREL.pdf
99
APPENDICES
100
101
102
103
104