Rodrigo Duterte’s presidency (2016–2022) marked one of the darkest periods in modern Philippine history. His aggressive war on drugs, touted as a necessary step to save the nation from the clutches of narcotics, left an indelible mark of violence and controversy. Behind the veneer of a strongman’s crusade to rid the country of drugs lay a sinister reality: a systematic effort to eliminate competition in the drug trade while consolidating power and resources for Duterte’s inner circle.
Historical Context: Setting the Stage
The Philippines has long grappled with issues related to narcotics, a problem exacerbated by poverty, corruption, and weak law enforcement. By 2016, drug addiction and trafficking had become prominent concerns among citizens, creating fertile ground for a populist leader like Duterte to capitalize on public fears.
Riding a wave of anti-crime rhetoric, Duterte ascended to the presidency, promising a “bloodless campaign” to eradicate drugs within six months.
However, his tenure as mayor of Davao City—a period marked by the rise of vigilante death squads—foreshadowed the violence that would engulf the nation during his presidency.
The Human Cost of the Drug War
The war on drugs was brutal from the outset. In urban slums across the country, nightly police raids resulted in countless deaths. Witnesses reported summary executions, often with little to no evidence of drug involvement. The government’s narrative framed these deaths as necessary sacrifices, dismissing casualties as collateral damage or criminals “resisting arrest.”
Human rights organizations estimate the death toll to be between 12,000 and 30,000, with some of the most vulnerable populations—urban poor and marginalized communities—bearing the brunt of the violence. Mass graves, bullet-riddled corpses, and weeping families became emblematic of Duterte’s Philippines.
Yet, amidst this carnage, the campaign’s failure to arrest or kill high-profile drug lords raised suspicions. Investigative journalists and whistleblowers began to uncover inconsistencies, suggesting a deliberate targeting of small-scale offenders while shielding powerful figures within the drug trade.
Revelations from the Quad Committee Investigations
By 2024, public pressure and growing evidence compelled the Philippine House of Representatives to form a quad committee to investigate Duterte’s anti-drug campaign. The findings were damning. Far from being a legitimate war on drugs, the campaign was revealed to be a smokescreen designed to protect the true drug lords—many of whom were deeply connected to Duterte’s political and personal network.
Key Findings:
- State-Sponsored Violence: Testimonies detailed how police forces received monetary rewards for each “kill” linked to drug operations. This incentivized extrajudicial killings and created a culture of impunity within law enforcement.
- High-Level Collusion: Duterte’s son, Paolo “Pulong” Duterte, and son-in-law, Manases “Mans” Carpio, were identified as key players in smuggling operations. Evidence linked them to multi-million-peso shipments of illegal drugs, facilitated by corrupt customs officials.
- Propaganda Machinery: Senator Christopher “Bong” Go, Duterte’s former aide, was exposed as a central figure in managing propaganda campaigns. His efforts ensured the narrative of a righteous war on drugs dominated public discourse, obscuring the administration’s ulterior motives.
- Operational Protection: Senator Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa, the former Director General of the Philippine National Police (PNP), was accused of enforcing a policy that deliberately avoided targeting major drug syndicates. Instead, operations were directed at eliminating low-level operatives who posed no threat to the larger drug network.
- Chinese Connections: A network of Chinese nationals reportedly maintained close ties to Duterte’s administration, acting as financiers and facilitators of drug shipments. This raised concerns about foreign influence in domestic affairs and Duterte’s apparent willingness to prioritize these relationships over national interests.
The Fallout: Domestic and International Repercussions
The quad committee’s revelations triggered a political firestorm. Activists, opposition leaders, and international human rights organizations demanded accountability. The International Criminal Court (ICC), which had already initiated a preliminary investigation into Duterte’s administration for crimes against humanity, accelerated its efforts.
Implications for Duterte and his allies:
- Legal Challenges: The committee recommended filing criminal charges against Duterte, his family members, and key allies, including Senators de la Rosa and Go. These charges ranged from corruption and drug trafficking to mass murder.
- Political Fallout: Vice President Sara Duterte, though not directly implicated, faced intense scrutiny due to her familial ties. Public confidence in the Duterte political dynasty plummeted, threatening their long-standing grip on power.
- Global Response: Governments and international bodies condemned the findings, with several nations calling for sanctions against implicated officials. The ICC’s pursuit of Duterte also placed the Philippines at the center of a global debate on accountability for human rights violations.
Societal Ramifications and Lessons Learned
The Duterte administration’s actions left deep scars on Philippine society. Trust in law enforcement and government institutions eroded as revelations of systemic corruption and violence came to light. Families of victims continued to demand justice, organizing into grassroots movements that drew attention to the long-term impacts of state-sponsored killings.
However, the situation also underscored the resilience of civil society. Journalists, human rights defenders, and ordinary citizens played pivotal roles in exposing the truth, often at great personal risk. Their efforts highlighted the importance of a free press, an independent judiciary, and robust oversight mechanisms in safeguarding democracy.
The Path Forward
As the Philippines grapples with the legacy of Duterte’s presidency, the challenge lies in ensuring that such abuses are never repeated. Reforms in law enforcement, judiciary independence, and anti-corruption measures are critical to restoring public trust.
The ICC investigation represents a potential turning point. Should Duterte and his allies face accountability on the global stage, it would set a powerful precedent, signaling that no leader is above the law.
Conclusion: A Legacy of Infamy
Rodrigo Duterte’s war on drugs will likely be remembered as one of the most controversial chapters in Philippine history. What began as a campaign to eradicate drugs devolved into a deadly facade, masking the exploitation of power for personal and political gain. For the victims, justice remains elusive, but their stories serve as a stark reminder of the consequences of unchecked authority.
As the nation looks to the future, the lessons of Duterte’s presidency underscore the need for vigilance, accountability, and an unwavering commitment to human rights. Only through these efforts can the Philippines hope to heal and move forward.
*
Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser
Prof. Ruel F. Pepa is a Filipino philosopher based in Madrid, Spain. A retired academic (Associate Professor IV), he taught Philosophy and Social Sciences for more than fifteen years at Trinity University of Asia, an Anglican university in the Philippines. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
Featured image: Former president Rodrigo Duterte attends an inquiry on his administration’s war on drugs at the House of Representatives on Nov. 13, 2024. The House Quad Committee on Wednesday (Dec. 18) recommended the filing of crimes against humanity charges against Duterte, Senators Christopher Lawrence Go and Ronald Dela Rosa, and other police officials in connection with the alleged extrajudicial killings (EJKs) during the previous administration’s drug war. (Photo courtesy of House of Representatives Press and Public Affairs Bureau)