A presentation made to add information about the current condition of War on Drugs in Philippines. Enjoy!

1. ANTI-DRUG CAMPAIGN
Presentation by Anjelica Gaile Certeza

3. ANTI
a prefix that means
opposed to or against to.

5. DRUG
is any substance that, when
inhaled, injected, smoked,
consumed, absorbed via a patch on
the skin, or dissolved under the
tongue causes a temporary
physiological change in the body.

7. CAMPAIGN
a series of military
operations intended to achieve
a particular objective, confined
to a particular area, or involving
a specified type of fighting.

9. ANTI-DRUG CAMPAIGN
• It is a series of operations
intended to achieve the objective
in terms of opposition in using
illegal drugs.
• Fighting against illegal drugs.

11. MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 17
DIRECTING THE PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE AND OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT
AGENCIES TO RESUME PROVIDING ACTIVE SUPPORT TO THE PHILIPPINE DRUG
ENFORCEMENT AGENCY IN THE CONDUCT OF ANTI-ILLEGAL DRUG OPERATIONS

12. WAR ON DRUGS
Also known as Philippine Drug War
(Filipino: Giyera Kontra Droga, lit. "War
Against Drugs"), refers to the drug policy
in the Philippines initiated by the Philippine
government under President Rodrigo
Duterte.

13. DUTERTE'S DRUG WAR IN 2017
The year of deaths and denials
Official data shows that 3,993 people were
killed in police operations, yet the
administration of President Rodrigo Duterte
refuses to tag them as extrajudicial killings.
Human rights organizations say the world
will not be fooled.

14. COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
is an independent constitutional
office created under the 1987
Constitution of the Philippines, with
the primary function of investigating
all forms of human rights violations
involving civil and political rights in
the Philippines.

16. The year of deaths and denials
By: Jodesz Gavilan
MANILA, Philippines – It's been a news cycle of deaths
and denials in 2017.
Practically every day for the most part of the year, TV
footage, online posts, and newspaper photos showed
blood and grief as policemen raided poor villages and
shanties to implement the Duterte administration's war on
drugs. (READ: The Impunity Series)
Despite official data and eyewitness accounts, the
government has repeatedly denied that the dead are
victims of extrajudicial killings.
This state of denial has come in many forms, such as
official declarations – like the one made before the
Universal Periodic Review (UPR) in September – that the
deaths from police operations "are not extrajudicial
killings"; the rejection of calls by United Nations member-
states to conduct a thorough and impartial probe; and the
intimidation of local and foreign human rights advocates.

17. At the slightest hint of intending to investigate the
drug war, international organizations and
personalities were demonized by President
Rodrigo Duterte. He cursed and threatened to
slap United Nations Special Rapporteur Agnes
Callamard and warned to put on the immigration
blacklist US lawmakers who have been pushing
for an independent probe into alleged police
abuses.
The government also declared it would reject aid
from nations that have expressed concern over
the killings.
Parallel to these frontal attacks were diplomatic
efforts made by Duterte's advisers, such as
Foreign Affairs Secretary Alan Peter Cayetano
and Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque.
Before state-parties to the International Criminal
Court (ICC), where a Filipino lawyer filed a
"communication" against Duterte, Roque said that
the administration would "reassess" its commitment
to it should the court violate the principle of
complementarity enshrined in its founding treaty.
(The principle requires the ICC to step in only if it's
been proven that a concerned country has not been
willing to act on the issues hurled against it.)
Government officials have also issued broad
commitments to bring to court anyone found to
violate criminal laws.
Denial's consequences
Latest government numbers show that 3,993
suspected drug personalities were killed in police
anti-drug operations since Duterte became
president in June 2016. Families of victims said
policemen shot defenseless suspects. (READ: The
Fifth Man)

18. Ellecer Carlos of the In Defense of Human Rights and
Dignity Movement (iDEFEND) said the administration's
dismissal of any human rights probe is proof that it won't
"accept any interference.” But this has consequences,
he said.
Carlos noted that aid-giving states have "considerations
that will always depend on how the government treats
its most vulnerable, how it respects, protects and fulfills
human rights." He added, "There will be states which
may now think twice about providing support to the
Philippine National Police because they know that the
funding will just go to waste.”
As signatory to various international human rights
treaties, the government is “duty-bound” to follow the
guidelines and implement appropriate measures to
investigate and prosecute those responsible, he said.
Non-acceptance of the criticisms and
recommendations by other countries regarding the
human rights situation “does not relieve the
government at all of its obligations and
accountability before the community of nations,”
according to lawyer Perfecto Caparas.
“At all times, government remains to be the duty-
bearer primarily responsible to respect, protect and
fulfill all the economic, social, cultural, civil and
political rights of all people, who are the rights-
holders,” he added.
No to executive branch's investigation
Human rights groups and advocates said the
situation calls for investigation by parties outside the
executive branch of government. (READ: Supreme
Court asked to order probe into all EJK cases)

19. Yet, the local constitutional body tasked to protect
human rights and prevent its abuse, has also been
emasculated. The Commission on Human Rights is
barred from accessing important legal documents
such as case folders of drug war deaths.
Outside the Philippines, the UN has various
mechanisms and tools to hold countries and leaders
accountable.
The UN Human Rights Council can unilaterally begin
its own investigation of the reported extrajudicial
killings here, according to John Fisher, director of
Human Rights Watch Geneva, citing the example of
Myanmar and the prosecution of the Rohingya
Muslims there.
“One way or another, there needs to be an
investigation, there needs to be accountability and if
the government is sincere in saying that it is open to
that kind of scrutiny, then we expect them to be open
to that kind of probe,” Fisher said.
He expressed the hope that the government would
eventually cooperate with an international team –
should the time come. (READ: No extrajudicial
killings in PH? World 'not fooled,' says HRW)
“If the government claims that they are not doing
anything, why would they not want to cooperate?”
Fisher said. “The fact that they have been so
resistant to independent scrutiny suggests that they
are well aware that the killings of the so-called war
on drugs are in violation of international standards
and that in fact don't want what's happening to come
to life,” he added.
What local groups can do
Carlos said that any move by UN agencies and
experts is “very dependent” on the activities of
human rights groups in the Philippines. (READ:
'Demonizing' human rights in the first year of
Duterte)

20. These local groups have been the center of Duterte’s
tirades. He has threatened to shoot advocates if they
“obstruct justice” even as rabid supporters called for
their death. “The government fostered systemic
impunity and engendered routine disregard for the rule
of law makes the work for human rights defenders very
challenging and risky,” Carlos said.
While it is a tiring and taxing battle, the human rights
campaign compels groups involved to exhaust all legall
means to exact accountability from public institutions
and officials.
If these means are exhausted and impunity persists,
then this would be a "key requirement for various
international mechanisms to kick in,” Carlos said.
One example of an international mechanism is the
ICC, which can try Duterte over crimes against
humanity or “serious violations committed as part of
a large-scale attack against any civilian population.”
In April 2017, lawyer Jude Sabio filed with the ICC a
78-page “communication” entitled, "The Situation of
Mass Murder in the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte:
The Mass Murderer.” Additional documents were
filed by Senator Antonio Trillanes IV and Magdalo
Representative Gary Alejano.
The filing is just the first step as the Office of the
Prosecutor still has to decide whether the complaint
has basis. (READ: What challenges will complaint vs
Duterte face before ICC?)
But the "decisive arena” of the human rights struggle
is in the domestic front, Caparas stressed. “Surely,
our people will continue defending the democratic
space we still have at the moment," he said. –
Rappler.com

21. Duterte's drug war in the Philippines is out of control, he needs to
be stopped
By: Robert Muggah
Even the most adamant supporters of the war on drugs
agree that it is failing. At a major UN summit on drug
policy earlier this year, many member states argued
forcefully for a more balanced and humane approach.
But there’s one anti-drug crusader who refuses to face
the facts. For the past six months Rodrigo Duterte,
president of the Philippines has waged one of the
world’s most vicious counter-narcotics campaigns.
Duterte campaigned for president with a pledge to clean
up the drug menace for good. Within days of winning the
election he launched a scorched earth approach
targeting anyone suspected of being involved in
consuming or selling narcotics. During his inaugural
address on 30 June, the one-time mayor of Davao city
vowed to “slaughter these idiots for destroying my
country”.

22. And kill them he has. The national police estimates that
more than 6,000 people were assassinated by law
enforcement, paramilitaries and vigilantes since 1 July
2016. The police say that at least 2,000 people were shot
and killed by officers in “self defence” during anti-drug
operations. Around 33 people are killed for every one
person injured, making this the most deadly drug war
ever. Another 38,000 people have reportedly been jailed,
fuelling a crisis in the country’s overpopulated prisons.
The president exults in the bloodbath. He recently
boasted of killing suspects during his time as mayor,
saying in “Davao I used to do it personally”, suggesting
that summary executions are tolerated at the very top.
The president claims to have “cleaned up the streets” of
Davao during his roughly two decades in power, calling it
one of the world’s safest cities. Although the city is
certainly cleaner and features new legislation that
improves crime reporting, claims of public safety are
vastly overstated. Indeed, publicly available data on
crime shows the city posted the highest rates of murder
and second highest rates of rape in the country between
2010-2015.
Inmates look outside from an overcrowded police
jail cell in Manila, Philippines.
Facebook Twitter Pinterest
Inmates in an overcrowded police jail cell in Manila,
Philippines. Photograph: Dondi Tawatao/Getty
Images
Duterte has a nasty habit of playing fast and loose
with the facts. In a bid to give credence to his drug
war, his team exaggerates and invents data. For
example, Duterte inflated the estimated number of
drug users in the country, stating that there are
currently 4 million users – with as many as 10
million projected by 2020. Yet the country’s own
drug authorities contend that the number of users of
hard drugs is much lower. The prevalence rate for
drug use by Filipinos is actually closer to 2.3% (pdf),
roughly half the global average. Inflammatory
rhetoric and dodgy data have real world
consequences. Not only can they incite violence,
but they also determine the shape of government
policy.

23. Yet Duterte’s tough on crime bombast goes down well with
Filipinos. His use of Visayan slang (rather than just
Tagalog or English) marks him as one of the people, and
his approval ratings are topping 85%, though this is typical
for first year presidents. Nevertheless, there are signs that
the opposition is beginning to rally, with some senators
calling for his impeachment. His authoritarian tendencies
are also starting to worry civil liberties experts: at a press
conference he responded to one question by saying “just
because you’re a journalist you are not exempted from
assassination”, and last month he threatened to kill human
rights activists because of their criticism of his crackdown
on crime.
Duterte is upending the country’s international image. On
the one hand, he has undermined the prospect of a
serious and evidence-based strategy to prevent drug
abuse problems, including of “shabu”, a highly addictive
methamphetamine with dangerous side effects. His
dragnet collapses users of a wide range of drugs with
devastating effect, including violating basic human rights.
This kind of impunity cannot be tolerated.
It may be time to consider divesting from
companies that are directly and indirectly fuelling
the massacre of Filipinos
But foreign governments are noticeably quiet
about Duterte’s bloody campaign. The White
House recently condemned statements by the
president but is reluctant to take action for fear of
jeopardising the visiting forces agreement and
other geo-strategic priorities in the region. For his
part, US president-elect Trump speaks admiringly
of Duterte’s antics. In addition to cozying up with
China, Duterte recently threatened to withdraw
from the UN in response to criticism of his drug
war. Soon after, the UN special rapporteur on
extrajudicial killings cancelled a visit to the country
after the president imposed unprecedented
conditions on her visit.

24. There are signs that human rights specialists are
beginning to fight back. Religious and civil society
groups are already mobilising to push back against the
state-sanctioned killings. The Philippines former
secretary of justice and chair of the Commission on
Human Rights, Leila de Lima, is one of the president’s
most vocal critics. Outside of the Philippines, the UN
special rapporteur on the right to health called for drug
dependency to be treated as a public health issue and
the decriminalisation of consumption. What’s more, the
18-member UN committee on economic, social and
cultural rights took Duterte to task for the massacre of
suspects.
Bolder action is needed. The international criminal court
could start by treating the situation in the Philippines as
a “crime against humanity” and opening an investigation.
The chief prosecutor has already . The president
responded with characteristic bravado, describing
foreign lawyers as “idiots” and the . The UN security
council can also refer the situation to the ICC in order to
investigate the president and other senior officials
involved in the killing.
The international community can also consider
economic sanctions. Duterte has told worried
businesses to “”, claiming that the Chinese would
happily take their place. Perhaps foreign businesses
should take his advice. The European, American and
Nordic Chambers of Commerce would do well to revisit
the compatibility of their investments and shareholder
concerns with systemic violations of human rights. It
may be time to consider divesting from companies that
are directly and indirectly fuelling the massacre of
Filipinos.
Foreign governments should also consider withdrawing
their aid to the Philippines if no change of direction
materialises. The US started taking steps in this
direction. After voicing their alarm with the president’s
alleged involvement in assassinations, the US
Millennium Challenge Corp deferred renewal of a
poverty reduction programme “subject to a further
review of concerns around the rule of law and civil
liberties”. An earlier $434m (£353m) dollar package
expired the month before Duterte’s taking office. Other
aid agencies should follow suit. Duterte will no doubt
brush it off, but it’s time to show that short-term financial
imperatives should not trump human rights.

26. Image showing
Filipinos who lit
candle in their
protests for people
who died on War on
Drugs.

27. Image showing Filipinos asking justice for Kian’s death.