1
A STUDY ON POVERTY AND DRUG ADDICTION IN THE PHILIPPINES: “OPLAN TOKHANG”, AN ANTI-POOR AND INEFFECTIVE ANSWER TO THE DRUG PROBLEM 2012-01180 MAGTIRA, Paolo L.
FA-199 Section W-1
Abstract This study is a deconstruction of Rodrigo Duterte’s implementation of Oplan Tokhang as an attempt to answer the problem regarding illicit drugs in the Philippines; the Duterte administration’s anti-drug policy does not address the rampant poverty amongst people, which is cited as one of the main motivation to drug addiction. Instead, the government prefers the use of summary executions, claiming success in its body count. The extrajudicial killings as a result of Oplan Tokhang have been rampant; with the documented deaths committed in the hands of police have been with impunity.
The relationship of addiction and poverty with its relation to extrajudicial killings of the poor as consequence of the “War on Drugs” will be the primary point of discussion. Poverty and drug addiction has long been prevalent problems for Philippine society; these societal dilemmas have a direct correlation with one another. Economical disadvantage is a major environmental factor that can contribute to the predisposition of a person into substance abuse. Further adding, it should be noted that addiction is actually a brain illness that emerges through the application of two (2) variables: internal (genetics) and external (environmental societal) factors. The approach and concept of the war against drugs is an inherently flawed operational method; it only serves to make the entire drug situation worse, instead of addressing the addicts themselves through comprehensive rehabilitation programs and putting forth policies to alleviate environmental influences such as poverty. Despite the fact of the anti-poor and abusive nature of Oplan Tokhang, a significant number of Filipinos still express approval and support to the concept of Duterte’s War on Drugs, and the administration at large.
I.) Background of the Study “Oplan Tokhang” is the solution that the Duterte administration came up with as an answer to the prevalent problem of illegal drug trafficking and drug addiction in the Philippines. Ever since its implementation during the earliest days of the Duterte government’s term, it has come at the cost of the deaths of thousands of citizens who had allegedly fostered involvement with the illicit drug industry; these people were alleged to be drug traffickers and drug users, which culminated in the end result being a complete disregard for the concept of due process through rampant killings. These summary
2
executions or extrajudicial killings as they are commonly referred to, came to pass through the hand of either alleged “Third Party Vigilantes” or the Philippine National Police (PNP) themselves through routine anti drug operations. Furthermore, among the commonly occurring fatalities in the Duterte administration’s “War on Drugs” were the youth, Kian de los Santos (17) and Carl Arnaiz (19) are only a few of the numerous young victims. The police claim these teenagers were armed and dangerous at the time of their encounters; this alleged “retaliation” from suspects became a common motif for the justification of these police killings. These young lives are only a small part of the thousands of deaths under the Duterte administration’s bloody campaign in an attempt to provide a final solution to the drug problem that is afflicting the Philippines. In the middle of the month of October in the year of 2017, Oplan Tokhang was put to a halt by the Duterte administration after more than a year-long campaign that left thousands of bodies in its wake, all the while in the end being unable to put a forth the “final solution” to the drug problem. It was decided that the responsibility of dealing with the issue of the illicit drug trade was transferred from the Philippine National Police (PNP) to the Philippine Drug Administration (PDEA).
II.) Problem Statement 1.0 Main Statement Was Oplan Tokhang, a policy that led to the thousands of deaths of people mostly from the poor sectors, a proper answer to quell the drug problem in the Philippines? Under the main line of inquiry, there are a number of sub-questions that pertain to the original statement mentioned above:
1.1 About Oplan Tokhang
What were the policies put forth under Oplan Tokhang and how were they implemented? What was the connection of the implementation of Oplan Tokhang and the killings among perceived addicts/pushers? What were the implications of Oplan Tokhang being primarily aimed at poorer sectors of Philippine society? With previous “war on drugs” implemented in various countries as a reference, was Oplan Tokhang a proper approach?
1.2 About Drug Addiction
Should drug addiction be treated as a crime deserving of capital punishment? What effects does addiction have on the human body?
2
executions or extrajudicial killings as they are commonly referred to, came to pass through the hand of either alleged “Third Party Vigilantes” or the Philippine National Police (PNP) themselves through routine anti drug operations. Furthermore, among the commonly occurring fatalities in the Duterte administration’s “War on Drugs” were the youth, Kian de los Santos (17) and Carl Arnaiz (19) are only a few of the numerous young victims. The police claim these teenagers were armed and dangerous at the time of their encounters; this alleged “retaliation” from suspects became a common motif for the justification of these police killings. These young lives are only a small part of the thousands of deaths under the Duterte administration’s bloody campaign in an attempt to provide a final solution to the drug problem that is afflicting the Philippines. In the middle of the month of October in the year of 2017, Oplan Tokhang was put to a halt by the Duterte administration after more than a year-long campaign that left thousands of bodies in its wake, all the while in the end being unable to put a forth the “final solution” to the drug problem. It was decided that the responsibility of dealing with the issue of the illicit drug trade was transferred from the Philippine National Police (PNP) to the Philippine Drug Administration (PDEA).
II.) Problem Statement 1.0 Main Statement Was Oplan Tokhang, a policy that led to the thousands of deaths of people mostly from the poor sectors, a proper answer to quell the drug problem in the Philippines? Under the main line of inquiry, there are a number of sub-questions that pertain to the original statement mentioned above:
1.1 About Oplan Tokhang
What were the policies put forth under Oplan Tokhang and how were they implemented? What was the connection of the implementation of Oplan Tokhang and the killings among perceived addicts/pushers? What were the implications of Oplan Tokhang being primarily aimed at poorer sectors of Philippine society? With previous “war on drugs” implemented in various countries as a reference, was Oplan Tokhang a proper approach?
1.2 About Drug Addiction
Should drug addiction be treated as a crime deserving of capital punishment? What effects does addiction have on the human body?
3
What are the factors that make an individual predisposed to falling into addiction?
1.3 About Poverty in the Philippines and as an Environmental Factor to Addiction
How do we define the concept of poverty? What are the factors and circumstances of poverty in the Philippine context? How is drug addiction and poverty correlated?
1.4 About Rehabilitation as an Alternative
What are the different rehabilitation models as modes of treatments? How do we properly approach the process of addiction rehabilitation?
III.) Research Objectives A.) Main Objective To know that the if the “War on Drugs” implemented by the Duterte administration was an adequate answer to the Philippine drug problem; whether or not “Oplan Tokhang” was a policy that put forth the interest of the Filipino citizens or instead a haphazard attempt to create a solution to a complex problem.
1.1 About Oplan Tokhang 1.) To know the policies put under Oplan Tokhang and how these policies were implemented. 2.) To know the connection of the implementation Oplan Tokhang and the heavy death count that was perpetuated under the Oplan Tokhang. 3.) To be able to draw implications regarding the implications of the poor as targets under Oplan Tokhang. 4.) To be able to cross-reference previous campaigns of other countries in regards to the drug problem with the current Oplan Tokhang.
1.2 About Drug Addiction 1.) To be able to prove that drug addiction is a complex problem with deeper-rooted implications that is not easily answerable by capital punishment. 2.) To be able to determine and examine the effects of drug addiction to an afflicted individual. 3.) To be able to discuss and know about the major contributing factors that make an individual susceptible/predisposed to addiction.
4
1.3 About Poverty in the Philippines and as an Environmental Factor to Addiction 1.) To define the concept of poverty in a general context. 2.) To know the factors and circumstances of poverty to in the Philippines. 3.) To know how poverty and drug abuse are problems directly correlated in with one another.
1.4 About Rehabilitation as an Alternative 1.) To be able to discuss different rehabilitation models. 2.) To be able to outline a proper approach to the rehabilitation process..
B.) Scope and Limitations This study is primarily about the various aspects of an individual who experiences the addiction and the implications of Oplan Tokhang put forth by the Duterte administration. This is not a study about: A.) The various different effects of different drugs on the human body, the effect of “addiction” and rehabilitation itself is the main focus of the discussion. B.) Also importantly, this does not come with the intention of being anti-drug propaganda to vilify neither afflicted individuals nor a cautionary study to warn about the effects drug use. C.) The study is not a critique of the entirety of the Duterte Administration as this study is centered on the deconstruction of Oplan Tokhang and other related topics and concepts. The area of study will mostly be limited to the context of urbanized areas the Nationcal Capital Region (NCR) and surrounding cities as these places were the main point of interest in relation to the killings and operations connected to Oplan Tokhang.
IV.) Hypothesis of the Study Drug addiction is a brain illness brought about by factors that are internal and external in nature. These factors mend into one another in order to create an individual’s predisposition to falling into substance abuse. Poverty plays a crucial role in the development of addiction; its wide spread presence in the Philippine masses is a significant variable as to why addiction is such a prevalent and serious problem. Oplan Tokhang is not a proper solution due the fact that the government does not need to address drug addicts themselves through long-term incarceration or summary executions, instead it should be addressed through either or both (1) address the cause of poverty
5
among the masses and put forth policies that alleviate the problem and/or (2) establish an alternative, effective and comprehensive programs that deal with addiction prevention and rehabilitation of addicts in the country.
V.) Conceptual Framework This conceptual framework outlines the two (2) primary factors: (a) internal (genetics) and (b) external (environmental and societal) that generally contribute to an individual’s predisposition to falling into drug abuse. (K. Bettinardi-Angres and D. Angres 2010) These environmental and societal factors can further be categorized into Familial Background, Peers (Culture + Community) and Socio-economic standing. Familial Background is an important factor in regards to its state with broken families being more likely to breed future addicts. (Jêdrzejczak 2005, Hitchens 2011, Tsounis 2013) Poverty is specified as major contributing external factor; it can be considered to be the root of the problems regarding drug addiction, with the poor having an increased risk in comparison to other groups. (Niazi et.al 2009) Poverty in the Philippines is the result of the lack of agricultural farmland and production for the farmers in a rural setting while no proper national industrialization in the country results in general unemployment or barely livable wages for the workers in an urban setting (CPP 2005, ADB 2009). Filipinos who are counted as drug dependents are subjected to the policies outlined in Oplan Tokhang, which supposedly aims be a gateway to proper rehabilitation but instead culminates in an extrajudicial killing at the hands of the police.
VI.) Significance of the Study
6
Drug Addiction is not a problem easily answerable by putting the sufferers to death, especially the kind of death executed without proper trial nor due process; in the current Philippine society governed by the Duterte administration that implemented policies like Oplan Tokhang, the people who are living in poor and marginalized sectors who fall into drug addiction do not see an adequate solution to properly address their problem. The primary victims of the extrajudicial killings as a result of police operations are those who are living in poverty. The implications of the poor being the common targets under Oplan Tokhang goes far beyond the discussion of crime and drug addiction, it also touches on the power dynamics present in Philippine society. These intricacies regarding social class and the involvement of the state are significant factors in the perpetuated deaths connected to Duterte’s “War on Drugs”; these killings can be considered a form of “social cleansing” wherein the main targets are the lower class who happen to be addicted to drugs, while the higher classes enjoy relative peace. The implementation of Oplan Tokhang is a demonstration of the state’s ability to nonchalantly step over the rights of citizens; the people who belong closer to the base of the social triangle are commonly disregarded in favor of the higher placed classes. This study will stand as a dissection of the objective invalidity of the “War on Drugs”; An emphasis on rehabilitation and addressing poverty as the root of drug addiction is a better and more effective alternative answer to the drug problem.
VII.) Review of Related Literature A.1.0 - Introduction This section includes the analysis and related discussions of existing concepts that pertain to the topic of drug addiction in both a generalized sense (in an international context) and discourses anchored in Philippine society. Poverty, being a point of discourse directly tied with addiction, will also be put into discussion. Furthermore, rehabilitation and treatment methods will also be explored as an alternative to the drug war approach. The specific topics put into discussion are judged to be of relevance in relation to the situation in the country of the Philippines as country being subjected to the Duterte Administration’s “War on Drugs”; the information presented are cited from both international and local literature, articles and documents. The works are arranged thematically, wherein stated information from various sources are sorted in accordance to what concepts are discussed and the perceived relevance to the specific section of the review. Each section is separated by headings that pertain to a specific subtopic. To be able to deconstruct the situation of the drug problem in the Philippines and its relation to the implementation of Duterte’s “War on Drugs”, the concepts regarding the prevalence of poverty in the Philippines must be properly reiterated and discussed. The concept of poverty by itself and its connection to drug addiction will be dissected through
7
a Marxist perspective. This review aims to provide that foundational support to the arguments in sections that pertain to the analysis of Oplan Tokhang. The common notion among the works published under the topic of drugs and addiction that the concept of “addiction” itself is considered to be a form of mental illness, more of an affliction rather than just a question of morality and questionable decision making on the part of the individual. This “addiction”, as all illnesses are, needs to be primarily addressed through therapy/rehabilitation. There are a number of factors that define the susceptibility of an individual to fall into addiction, both internal (genetics) and external (environment). It does not equate to mere simple discernment of only one of these factors only; there is no single determinant whether an individual may be a potential addict.
A.2.0 - Drug Addiction as an Illness: Effects and Changes to a Human Body Under Addiction As stated by Dr. Des Corrigan in his essay, “Physical Impact of Drugs, Misuse and Abuse” (1995) , drug addiction defined as the continuous compulsive use of a specific substance in order to experience the psychoactive effects it provides and to further avoid the symptoms of discomfort in its absence. However, it should be noted that addiction is not merely limited to dangerous drugs; addiction can take on various forms other than dependence on addictive narcotics. Addiction is a complex affliction that has various documented effects to an individual’s body; these changes go far beyond the effect of the drugs themselves in a sense that it conditions the body to fall into compulsive tendencies. As referred to by Leshner (1997, p. 46), addiction is a brain disease that is prone to relapses; the effects of the sickness is predominantly apparent in the brain wherein the functions are modified by the exposure to addictive substances. Addiction is not a simple moral question easily answered with an intention to change one’s lifestyle; it takes more variables in order to completely address the source of addiction, as it is a chronic disease of the brain that is prone to relapses if not properly addressed through proper therapy and rehabilitation. (NIDA 2011)
Source: National Institute on Drug Abuse, United States of America, “The Science of Addiction” (2014).
8
If we examine figure 1.0, there is a clear distinction between brains in a perceived normal state in comparison to one afflicted by addiction; there is a documented decrease in brain function on particular areas indicated by the lowered metabolism. The changes in structure and function as a result of addiction can be likened to other diseases that afflict other parts of the human body; figure 1.1 demonstrates the changes in heart metabolism in a patient with heart disease, it exhibits an intrinsic similarity to the changes in a brain under addiction. The heart, in the same vein of the former, also shows signs of lowered metabolism. (NIDA 2014) These similarities in the alterations of each respective organ are indicative of the nature of addiction in a sense that it is a disease; these presented cases are both conditions that have their specified effects and changes on the human body. Thus addiction should be perceived the same way we associate common diseases with outwardly symptoms as indicated. Similarly to an individual afflicted with heart disease, a person who has fallen to addiction would have restricted bodily functions and detrimental effects of varying degrees to their bodies; the only difference between these cases are the specific parts of the body that are affected, with the case of addiction being predominantly observed within the brain. The brain is affected in a variety of reasons; there are actual identified neural receptors that are more susceptible to subsume actions directly linked to addiction. These receptors have common pathways in the neural system that is commonly a subject to affliction. These pathways exemplified in the difference of the present chemical balance when we compare the brains of those people who are addicted and those who are non-addicted. Furthermore, the individuals who do suffer from addiction appear to display the same several common physical traits and characteristics; it does not matter what substance(s) these individuals are exposed to, as these similarities are still present. (Leshner 1997)
Source: Professor Sir Gabriel Horn FRS FRCP “An Academy of Medical Science Group Report: Brain Science, Addiction and Drugs” (2008).
9
It is a proven fact that the prolonged exposure to addictive substances has devastating effects in the form of neurotoxic changes at a cellular level within the common brain systems; there are also notable behavioral changes with the individuals. The involvement of the neurological system with addiction is indicated through the various regions of the brain that commonly hold receptors that are predisposed to activating a chemical reaction that would eventually lead to addiction. These receptors have different ways of reacting to a specific type of addictive substance that lead to varying severities of affliction. (Horn 2008) As illustrated by figure 2.0, the human brain is composed of a variety of receptors that have various reactions to presented substances. It is detailed by the writings of Professor Sir Gabriel Horn (2008) that the “nucleus accumbens” found deep within the center of the brain is influenced by the various nerve cells (neural transmitters) that happen to contain the chemical “dopamine” that is responsible for the connections found in a human brain; several addictive substances work directly or indirectly by altering the function of neurological transmissions between the synapses of the brain. “The presence of an increase in dopamine levels in the brain over stimulates the area with the aforementioned reward circuit that gives out sensations of pleasure.” (NIDA 2011: p.3) Dopamine itself as a naturally occurring chemical within the brain has an integral role in the way it carries out its functions. Fluctuations in the natural dopamine levels present in the brain would lead to the emergence of various mental disorders; the effects are known to range from a variety of mental illnesses such as depression and schizophrenia. Bearing the importance of dopamine levels in the brain, most addictive drugs share a common trait of being able to facilitate an increase in the release of dopamine in specific areas of the brain, which in turn causes the feeling of being “high”. This acquisition of an increased amount of dopamine in the brain eventually leads to addiction. (Ayano 2016) The human body, after prolonged exposure to a specific substance would develop a dependence on the drug that it will eventually lead to continued compulsive use. The continued exposure will cause the body to seek out more of the substance to further experience its effects; in the event of the drug’s the absence in the individual’s body system, the individual will experience discomfort of varying severity depending on the onset of the body’s dependence. (Corrigan 1995) From the discussions presented about addiction, it can be inferred that an individual who has fallen to addiction will more or less find extreme difficulty in addressing the problem that has arisen from continued use of these addictive substances; being able to break free from the cycle of addiction is not a task easily attainable especially considering that the brain itself is afflicted. The body of the afflicted is effectively reprogrammed by the chemical imbalance brought about by these addictive drugs. Furthermore, being able to recover and ceasing the compulsive use of addictive substances does not completely negate the ill effects of a past addiction. As a direct quotation from an the article written by Alan I. Leshner, Science: Addiction is a Brain Disease and It Matters: “ Not only does acute drug use modify brain function in critical
10
ways, but prolonged drug use causes pervasive changes in brain function that persist long after the individual stops taking the drug. Significant effects of chronic use have been identified for many drugs at all levels: molecular, cellular, structural, and functional ” (1997, p. 46)
A.3.0 - Factors of Predisposition to Addiction There are a variety of variables that can be considered that results in an individual more susceptible to fall into addiction; these factors can be mostly categorized under two (2) main classifications: (1) Factors that deal with an individual’s genetic predisposition, which is to say that there are circumstances with the genes passed down through the generations that make an individual more susceptible to addiction. (2) Factors that take into consideration the specific circumstances that are related to an individual’s environmental and societal predisposition; specifically these are the variables that are concerned with family and household environment along with other significant factors such as education and socio-economic standing. Both of these factor classifications have to be taken into account in order to fully achieve an understanding of the question regarding what drives a person into addiction; a genetic predisposition is not enough of a foundation in order to accurately assess an individual’s susceptibility. We must also do an examination regarding the psychological and societal factors that can drive a person to use addictive substances. (K. Bettinardi-Angres and D. Angres 2010) These factors can be likened to the preposition of “nurture versus nature” that de lves into the discussion of whether a person is inherently predisposed to addiction due to “nature” or was “nurtured” by the environment that this person was exposed to since the early developmental stages as a child.
A.3.1 - Genetic Predisposition There is a strong correlation between the predisposition of an individual to fall into drug addiction and the aspect of genetics. It is possible to ascertain this genetic influence when we examine individuals who suffer from alcohol dependence; alcoholism and drug addiction are two facets of the same condition, even more so that these afflictions commonly co-occur. As outlined within the article by Dick and Agrawal, “The Genetics of Alcohol and Other Drug Dependence” (2008) , there had been previous studies made with the use of twins as subjects, the results yielded an apparent overlap between alcohol dependence and drug addiction; these are predominantly the results of these twin individuals having a shared genetic factor.
11
There is an existing risk of familial transmission in the subject of alcohol dependency and substance abuse, a number of animal studies have been conducted that resulted in the confirmation of the supposed possible genetic origins of alcohol-related characteristics such as sensitivity to intoxication, development of tolerance and susceptibility to organ damage. Studies that delve into the discussion of family illnesses, twins and adoption cases support the notion of genetics as a factor to alcohol dependence. (K. BettinardiAngres and D. Angres 2010) According to the compiled studies of McGue (1999), family, twin and adoption cases have proven that genetic ties have an outwardly influence on alcohol dependence; the estimated heritability factor ranging from 50 to 60 percent for both men and women. Furthermore, actual studies conducted from various sources by Agrawal and Lynskey (2006), Kendler et.al (2003) and Tsuang et.al (2001) on the topic of the dependence on illicit drugs has also been conducted in twin subjects, these studies exhibited results pointing to the influence of genetics in drug dependence. These studies among adult samples yielded a hereditability factor estimate of 45 to 79 percent. (as cited in Dick and Agrawal 2008)
Source: Danielle M. Dick PhD and Arpana Agrawal PhD, Alcohol, Research and Health, Vol. 31, No.2 “The Genetics of Alcohol a nd Other Drug Dependence” (2008)
12
As demonstrated in figure 3.0 , there is evidence that establishes a clear link between the genes that affect alcohol dependence, drug dependence, conduct disorder and adult antisocial disorder. Studies undertaken by Kendler et.al (2003) in the United States came up with an analysis on the Virginia Twin Registry that suggested a common genetic factor that ties addiction with various disorders related to externalizing psychopathy; it should be noted that several independent studies conducted by Krueger et.al (2002) and Young et.al (2000) also yielded similar results. This means that the genes responsible for externalizing psychopathy disorders are the same genes that have an influence over the emergence of alcohol and drug dependence. However, these genes are not the only factors that have a contribution to an individual’s predisposition to addiction, as there is evidence that point out to the existence of disorder specific genes that have the same effect in influencing addiction. (as cited in Dick and Agrawal 2008) Epps and Wright (2011) detailed two methods to fully identify the genetic factors that influence an individual’s predisposition to substance abuse; both of these methods work through the examination of an individual’s genetic material in order to find “linkages”. Linkages are similar to footprints that are passed down between family members; certain linkages are associated with the dopamine “reward system” in the brain. (1) The “candidate gene method” that works by isolating a specific gene that may have characteristics that directly or indirectly influence the predisposition of an individual to addiction. This method deals with the examination of an individual’s deoxy-ribonucleic acid (DNA) to look for specific patterns that are referred to as “markers”; these markers are dissected to find linkages. (2) The “genome wide linkage method” that works by examining the entire genome, genomes being the genetic material of an organism, to look for the aforementioned linkages through the blind study. These findings more or less confirm the existence of a genetic predisposition to substance abuse as certain genes, as enumerated by the aforementioned “linkages” found with the genetic code of the human DNA, have an influence on how the brain is structured to react to the exposure to certain addictive substances. Along with this, certain disorders are paralleled with these genes, further making an individual predisposed to faulty decisionmaking that eventually leads to dependence to either drugs or alcohol. It is an established possibility that an individual can become an addict due to hereditary factors; therefore further disproving the fact that addiction is solely a question of we ak moral character.
A.3.2 - Environmental and Societal Predisposition In the topic of addiction, there also exist factors that are external in nature; these factors deal with the type of predisposition to addiction that comes from an outward source. This is especially true when we consider the problem of substance abuse is not solely the problem of the individual who suffers through addiction, but instead a consequence that is also intrinsically linked to the community, culture and peer presence around the addict. There is an apparent context within the community in the influence that drives an
13
individual to resort to drug abuse, considering that many addicts are introduced to illicit drugs from a secondary source in a social setting. Aside from the influence of the community, there are also concerns regarding an individual’s familial environment, employment and socio-economic status. (Cullen 2003, Jêdrzejczak 2005, Hitchens 2011, Tsounis 2013, Yoshimasu 2013) Reviewing previously conducted studies and empirical research mentioned by Sinha (2001, 2008) consistently reiterates the extensive connections between drug abuse and stress. There is documented evidence demonstrating an apparent association between the experience of acute and chronic stress and predisposition to alcohol dependence and drug addiction. Documented specific causes of stress that are linked to eventual drug abuse are the loss of a parent, sexual abuse and the unfaithfulness of a significant other. Stress that is acquired in the developmental stage of an individual is also a notable predictor to the development of addiction in later life. Despite the supposed increased predisposition arising from early life stress, it is not a certain indicator, as many who experience this type of stress do not develop addiction. (as cited in Robson and Salcedo 2014) According to the study “Family and Environmental Factors of Drug Addiction Among Young Recruits (2005)” written by Marian Jêdrzejczak Ph.D as part of Military Medicine, the emergence of drug addiction that has to do with familial and community background has three (3) primary factors: (1) The effect of pathological families on an individual’s behavior at a young age and eventual influence unto adulthood; the term “pathological family” refers to a family with parents who suffer from mental illness and/or alcoholism that commonly leads to an abusive parent-child relationship.
(2) The availability of easy to access drugs; addiction commonly starts at the first instance of exposure of an individual to the addictive substances; it is further exemplified when these aforementioned drugs are easy to access primarily due to the community environment that a person is subjected to.
(3) The influence of people of the same age group and culture; peers are a common factor to influencing individuals to take up certain habits, as humans are beings that seek out social interaction and to gain peer approval. How these factors affect an individual’s predisposition to drug addiction are determined by the familial background and condition; there is a direct correlation to an increased predisposition if a person has weaker family ties; it has been shown that drug addicts commonly come from incomplete and pathological families. In families where there is the presence of warmth and love, the children rarely or do not develop an addiction in their lives; drug addicts commonly grew up from households that have harbor cold relations and hostility when they were children. (Hitchens 20 11, Jêdrzejczak 2005) It is important to note that there are certain factors that are present within a familial setting; these factors are (a) family atmosphere, (b) strength of family ties, (c) sense of happiness as a family member, (d) structure of authority within a family and (e)
14
alcoholism. The presence and the nature of one’s family carry a beneficial role whether or not drug addiction will become an installation in a person’s life; family is the most basic social group that an individual can be a part of. It can be considered as a mirror of the external community that exists outside the household as it can reproduce circumstances and conditions that also present in everyday social life. (J êdrzejczak 2005, Tsounis 2013) The structure of family is integral to the discussion of predisposition in drug addiction as it is the social relationship that has received the most attention in the field of previous studies; the main points of discourse being about the previously mentioned structure and quality of family life. As reiterated, a number of studies point to an established association with an initiation to drug use and a family structure riddled with conflicts that
can essentially be considered “broken”. Therefore it can be said that the quality of relationships that were established in the formative years of an individual can more or less determine if substance abuse will emerge in later life. (Rhodes et.al 2003) The family is often perceived as a primary source of strength that provides warmth and stability to its members in order to secure the future of the following generations. It can be seen as a way to sustain and protect its weaker members or a bad influence through being a source of tension and pathology that can lead to addiction. (Copenhagen 1995) Of the studies made in North America, one of the most prominent researches was undertaken through a five (5) year follow-up on at least one-thousand (1000) families that was headed by Needle and colleagues back in the year of 1982 (1990). By the time the study had reached its conclusion in 1987, 13 percent of the families had an experience of divorce that led to the initiation to substance abuse among the youths in the family. These
findings further confirm the notion of “broken homes” being a significant factor in increasing the later development of drug abuse among individuals, with familial connections having beneficial effects that will either make or break the introduction to drug addiction. (as cited in Rhodes et.al) As previously mentioned by Cullen (2003) and Jêdrzejczak (2005) the community and similarly aged peers also have a prominent influence over whether or not individuals may end up developing a form of addiction at some point of their lives. As an example, there is a prevalent association with a person of young age to take up the habit of smoking if his/her friends of the same age group also smoke. For reasons that are not completely determinable, young individuals tend to choose peers who share a similar pattern of substance abuse. This is especially apparent in alcohol and smoking, however this pattern can also be applied to illicit drugs. (Haase and Pratschke 2010) Aside from the influence factors that are of familial nature and community/peer driven variables, there is also the aspect of the social environment of the community, financial status, employment background that all fall under the umbrella classification of “psychosocial factors”; these specific factors that deal with the intertwined concepts of individual thought and social factors are key influencers in predisposition to substancerelated-diseases (SRD) and addiction. The aspects of substance abuse, socioeconomic
15
status and the type of job environments are related with one another. Poor work performance and execution that stem from the use o f addictive substances will commonly lead to immediate dismissal; it is then that the sudden unemployment causes psychological pressure on the individual that further pushes the indulges in taking addictive substances to alleviate the mental suffering. (Yoshimasu 2013) A review conducted by Hiscock (2012) demonstrates a correlation between smoking nicotine and having a low socio-economic status (SES); it suggest that people who have a high rate of smoking also have a low SES rating. This correlation can be traced to and financial stressors that influence the individual. Henkel (2011) made a study about the relation of unemployment and SRD. It was stated that people who are unemployed are more prone to develop alcoholism and to use addictive substances. As stated previously, substance abuse commonly leads to unemployment; the psychological stress arising from unemployment then raises the risk for substance abuse. Furthermore, being unemployed raises the likelihood of relapsing to alcoholism and drug abuse after a period of recovery. (as cited in Yoshimasu 2013) The presented evidence discussed in this section prove that the external environmental factors are just as significant as the previously mentioned internal genetic variables; both of these facets of causation form an image that demonstrates how an otherwise healthy individual normally capable of making valid decisions can be tainted by addiction. Once again the concept of “moral character” is put into focus; add iction is not a question of mere moral weakness and the inability to make good decisions, but instead it is a disease that emerges out of both a mixture of internal (genetics) and external (environmental) variables. Sickness should be given the proper treatment as it should be, not be perceived as a crime. Individuals who happen to fall into drug addiction should not be condemned to the finalization of death but instead should be given a second lease on life so that they can eventually find a cure through rehabilitation.
A.4.0 - Poverty, Philippine Society and How it Influences Drug Addiction In order to address this specific issue that to mention, is not only a problem that makes its various manifestations in the Philippines but also the entire world, it is needed that we establish a definition of the concept of poverty. According to the chapter “What is Poverty: Concepts and Measures” from the book “Poverty In Focus” written by Robert Chambers (2006) as part of the United Nations Development Program, he explored the three (3) relevant dimensions to the meaning of poverty: (1) “Income Poverty or Consumption Poverty” is the most relevant facet aspect of meaning; this terminology means as it is said, the type of poverty stemming from lack of income to adequately support the needs of an individual. This is the facet of poverty that most people and economists use when referring to the entire concept. (2) “Lack of Material” refers to the lack or little wealth at hand aside from actual income and the absence or the low quality of basic assets such as housing,
16
clothing, furniture and other material things of the same classification. This also refers to the inability or poor access to services. (3) “Capability Deprivation” is referring to what one individual can and cannot do in a society; this deprivation can include but can also transcend factors that relate to lack of material and income to further examine on human attainment (e.g. education) and human capabilities. (e.g. skills, physical abilities and self respect as a member of the society) The Philippines is a country wherein a significant number of the population is living in abject poverty; the lack of successful government programs and provided social services is rampant and readily apparent especially when the social stratifications is easily observed in urban areas. This is also seen in underdeveloped provincial areas when basic commodities like water and electricity are rarely if not present. The percentage of the Philippine population living below the poverty line has been observed to have not seen any leaps for improvement in the past four (4) decades. The main documented reason for the outright prevalence of poverty is the perceived inequality in the most beneficial of integral societal variables: the high rate of inequality in income and development brackets in multiple regions and sectors. (ADB 2009)
Source: Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), “Current Labor Statistics (CLS)” (2017)
The table above illustrates the Philippines having a cumulative 21.6 percent poverty incidence rate. However, this figure alone does not effectively paint the entire situation as the breakdown sorted according to region exemplifies the existing regional disparity of percentages of the population experiencing poverty incidence; the National Capital
17
Region (NCR), according to Census of Population and Housing (CPH) conducted by the PSA May 2015 had a population of approximately 11. 9 million people boasted a 3.9 percent (476,000) of its population living below the poverty line. If we compare these figures to the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM), we can see that with a population of 3.7 million in 2015, the region boasted a significantly higher 53.7 percent of poverty incidence (2 million approx.). If we further examine the table, the other provinces have a distinctly higher poverty incidence percentage compared to NCR with CALABARZON being the only other region with a single digit percentage with 8.3 percent in 2012 and increasing to 9.1 percent in 2015. (PSA 2017) However according to Balisacan (1994), it is important to note that percentages of poverty incidences in the urban areas of the Philippines can be underestimated due to the fact that families who are homeless or are without permanent residence are routinely omitted in the survey samples as these informal settlers are considered to be “unofficial” and therefore underrepresented in these censuses. Moreover according to ADB (2005), the entire poverty incidence rate presented for the country might be underestimated as the pricing for the food threshold which is the actual basis for the poverty line, does not take into account that the poor pay more for food because they do not have the capacity to buy in bulks. (as cited in ADB 2009) ADB outlined in its article “Poverty in the Philippines: Causes, Constraints and Opportunities” (2009), the majority of the people who are living in poverty can be described with the following characteristics:
(a) The vast majority of poor people lives in rural areas and belongs to the agricultural class of farmers and fishermen. (b) In urbanized areas, the poor are found either homeless in the streets or live in an informal settlement. (c) They have large families comprising of at least six (6) members. (d) In two thirds (2/3) of poverty stricken families, the heads of the households has an educational attainment of elementary school or lower. (e) They have no or few monetary or other material assets. (f) Their primary source of income is informal sector activities or informal employment, these are activities that are not taxed by the government and therefore cannot be effectively examined or monitored. (g) A significant sample of poor families are “chronically poor”, which means poverty that spans through multiple generations. The Philippines is still lagging heavily in aspects of primary education, reproductive health and mortal mortality rates mostly due to the fact that the provincial areas are significantly behind NCR in terms of poverty incidence rates. Poverty in the Philippines continues to be a provincial phenomenon as an estimated 75 percent of the entire population of the country is the farmers who live in abject poverty. This widely dominant presence of poverty in the countryside can be vastly attributed to decades long struggle of achieving a genuine Agrarian Reform to address the lack of land for the farmers and the lack of adequate agricultural services (modernized agricultural tools, subsidized
18
fertilizers) by the government and overall poor governance in the provinces. (CPP 2005, ADB 2009
A.4.1 - The Capitalist System, Social Classes and Class Struggle The Philippines is a country that is abundantly rich in regards to natural resources, it has the capacity to effectively sustain the entirety of its population with its rich lands suitable for agriculture and mountains filled with minerals; the materials are more than able to provide an adequate supply to support a full-scale national industrialization. The inability of the Philippines to take a step and commit to further economic development can be explained by the continued installation of an undeniably unequal system and the lack of national industries; this capitalist agenda is further advocated with the motive of foreign imperialism and the select few local bourgeois who benefit from the propagation of this system. The bourgeois classes that sit at the top of the social triangle head the economic paper tiger of capitalism; they further use the upper hand of economical control shaped by Philippine history to maximize its established concept of free trade for the sake of profit. The resources naturally found in the Philippines are not extracted and refined for the sake of its own citizens but instead is used to fuel the economy of foreign businesses. (Marx 1848, CPP 2005) “The bourgeoisie has subjected the country to the rule of the towns. It has created enormous cities, has greatly increased the urban population as compared with the rural, and has thus rescued a considerable part of the population from the idiocy of rural life. Just as it has made the country dependent on the towns, so it has made barbarian and semi-barbarian countries dependent on the civilized ones, nations of peasants on nations of bourgeois, the East on the West.” (Marx 1848 p.8) This quote from Marx further explains the situation that is current relevance in the Philippines; the countryside is relegated to abject poverty due to lack of livelihood while the urban population is the economic centerfold, yet despite being the economically superior, the capital still rife with issues regarding urban poverty and lack of proper housing.
The history of every existing society is a history that details the struggle between different classes; this struggle changes in its face in every passing era, but despite the outwardly alterations it still remains relatively unchanged in power structure and dynamics. An example of these relationships is the struggle between a free man against a slave and the lords against the serfs. If we talk within the parameters of the Philippine context, farmers against landlords and workers against comprador-bourgeoisie are the classes that participate in this struggle. (Marx 1848, CPP 2005, CPP 2010) In other words, the demonstrated relationship dynamics depicted in these struggles can be further simplified to the dynamics of the oppressors against the oppressed. These social classes are constantly standing in opposition with one another as they are involved in a continued struggle to fulfill the needs of the oppressed and to retain the status quo created by the oppressors. All classes participate in this struggle, the result in the end that some classes are victorious as the others are relegated to a loss. It is the history of man and the history of the different civilizations that were created for thousands of years. Class struggle will always exist as long as classes exist; it is when class no longer exists that
19
oppression and the oppressed are concepts that are also no longer prevalent. (Marx 1848, Zedong 1964) There is always a general tendency of the classes that have a more favorable standing in comparison to their lower counterparts to use exploitation to further gain an upper hand. The manner of which this exploitation works and finds its emergence within production is almost insurmountable and untraceable as there are an infinite number of instances where this exploitation can take place. This exploitation will always be present as long as the concept of social classes is still relevant in society. (Parsons 1949, Marx 1984)
Source: Partido Komunista ng Pilipinas (PKP) or Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP), “Maikling Kurso sa Lipunan at Rebolusyong Pilipino” (MKLRP), Pangatlong Edisyon (Third Edition) (2005)
Figure 4.0 further details the different social classes at play in Philippine society. Class is a classification that deals with an individual’s mode of production, contribution to production and income acquisition; classes are stratifications that are primarily determined in their roles in production. The illustration is formed as the aforementioned “social triangle” with the ruling class occupying the top-most 1 percent of the constructed hierarchy and the farmers relegated to bottom despite being the large majority of citizens
20
in the Philippines at 75 percent. In this society composed of the various social classes; every member is a member of a particular class along with every type of thinking without exception is branded by the particular characteristics of a social class. (Zedong 1964, CPP 2005) The presence and description of these social classes can be referred to as “social stratifications” in a society is distinctly described as ranking individuals according to a generalized social hierarchy and not into specific contexts. Most prominently, classes are determined by the “work” these people do, whether the nature of the work is in the field of economic enterprise, governmental activities, labor oriented work and even professions centered around academia. These stratifications are present due the inherently competitive aspect of an individualistic occupational system, (e.g. capitalism and socialism to an extent due to the continued presence of classes) this individual aspect can be suppressed by the concept of “organization” held by authority. (Parsons 1949)
As detailed by the writings of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP), “Maikling Kurso sa Lipunan at Rebolusyong Pilipino” (MKLRP) (Short Course on Society and the Filipino Revolution) (2005) with supplemental information from “State and Revolution” (1917) by Vladimir Lenin and “The Communist Manifesto” (1848) by Karl Marx, the different social classes along with their respective descriptions and characteristics present, from the mass majority to the ruling class in the Philippine context are as follows: (a) The “Farmers” (75%) are the majority of the Filipino people; these are the agricultural workers either have no or a lack of farm land to cultivate and is primarily oppressed by the presence of landlords in agricultural production. They shoulder the unreasonably high cost of rent in farmland and low profits in their harvested products. Landlords, bureaucrat capitalists and large foreign corporations mostly occupy the lands that they are supposed to cultivate for agricultural production. (b) The “Workers” or the “Proletariat” (14-15%) are the second largest social class of Filipino people; factory workers, carpenters, plumbers and other similar professions that require labor force belong to this class. These workers are predominantly living in poverty due to not having the possession of machinery or the means of production; due to the fact of not owning anything but they are forced by necessity to sell their labor force for the sake of profit of the local and foreign capitalists in exchange for low wages and dangerous, lack of job security. (c) The “Petite Bourgeoisie” or “Petty Bourgeoisie” (7-8%) constitutes the intellectuals, professionals, small businessmen and educated workers in the corporate world and various businesses. Their acquired intelligence, skills and knowledge are used in exchange for relatively livable wages under the capitalist system; however, their mode of living is being steadily devalued under the system as the value of their wages get smaller and the genuine lack of job security also puts them at risk. The continued prosperity of their small businesses and ventures are impeded and eventually lead to failure due the inflated loan interests, high
21
taxation and the rotten characteristics of the bureaucratic system.
(d) The “Ruling Classes”, Landlords (“Panginoong May Lupa” or PML) , Comprador Bourgeoisie (“Malaking Burgesyang Kumprador” or MBK) and the National Bourgeoisie (1%) are the ones occupying the top of the pyramid. However, it should be noted that the National Bourgeoisie ranks below the PML’s and the MBK’s as they as a social class are also oppressed through the manipulation of the policies put forth by the reactionary government through sheer economic influence, although many of those who belong to the National Bourgeoisie harbor ambitions of further progressing their class standing to either PML’s or MBK’s. The ruling class is composed the landlords (PML), that own large hectares of land in the provinces are the common oppressors of the farmers, and the owners of extremely large corporations (MBK) that take advantage of the workers’ labor force through cheap labor, unfair labor practices and contractualization in a commonly urban setting. However, as detailed in another literature work of CPP, “Batayang Kurso ng Partido” (BKP) (Basic Course of the Party) (2010), there are specific and special social classes that do not fit in the previously described categories above. Listed here are the social classes that have their own distinct descriptions and role(s) within Philippine society: (a) “Semi-Proletariat” is the class of people who are the by-product of the unequal nature of Philippine society. This class is not associated with the proletariat despite the terminology. The people who belong to this classification are the individuals who cannot effectively secure a means of income due to the lack of production and industry in the provinces. They are the workers of that hail from the farmlands, the poor and middle sectors of farmers that do not or have little means for production. (b) “Lumpen-Proletariat” is the class that is also the by-product of the lack of work in both the provinces and the urban areas due to the economically repressive setting of the Philippines. They commonly participate in questionable activities that are not mandated by the state. Some of the activities they take part in are considered to be of illegal nature. The activity of stealing, begging and prostitution are a few of their areas. This class is not acknowledged in regards to their contribution to production or in class struggle. However, members of this class can come to know change and eventually attain an actual contribution. (c) “The Special Classifications” is the class composed of people who have particular traits and characteristics and is unique due to the fact that their means of production is varied; this class is still significant in the discussion of class struggle despite having no particular means for production associated with them. These are the fishermen, national minorities, settlers, women and the youth. However, the social classes are not the only important variables we need to consider in
22
this picture in order to properly explain the dynamics of class struggle. The participation and the existence of the “State” in the continued propagation of the class struggle is an integral part of the discussion. Friedrich Engels put in his explanation in one of his works “The Origin of the Family, Private Proper ty and the State , Sixth Edition” (1894, p.177178) in his historical analysis regarding the State and its role in the contradiction between the social classes: “The state is, therefore, by no means a power forced on society from without; just as little is it 'the reality of the ethical idea', 'the image and reality of reason. Rather, it is a product of society at a certain stage of development; it is the admission that this society has become entangled in an insoluble contradiction with itself, that it has split into irreconcilable antagonisms which it is powerless to dispel. But in order that these antagonisms, these classes with conflicting economic interests, might not consume themselves and society in fruitless struggle, it became necessary to have a power, seemingly standing above society, that would alleviate the conflict and keep it within the bounds of 'order'; and this power, arisen out of society but placing itself above it, and alienating itself more and more from it, is the state." (as cited in Lenin 1917 p.4)
According to Lenin in “State and Revolution” (1917), the state itself, more specifically the Philippine government in the Philippine context, has been an instrument for the continued institutionalized exploitation of the lower classes for the sake of profit under the established capitalist system. The state is a product of the continued struggle between the social classes of society and its irreconcilable nature; the state serves as a barrier, a protector of the higher social class in a capitalistic society as it strives to preserve the status quo. The state still exists in a socialist setting, but it serves a different purpose as it instead attempts to retain the socialist system by quelling the class struggle of the bourgeois against the proletariat; in a socialist state, the class struggle still exists. The state exists as long as the class struggle remains, as it is objectively irreconcilable as long as the concept class itself is not truly obsolete. The advent of the industrial revolution and the newfound efficiency increase on the concentration of production and the eventual dominance of mass production led to the emergence of the characteristics and needs for foreign imperialism. The mode and means of production being monopolized and falling to the possession of a few groups or MBK’s is a natural consequence of the concept of the “free market” advocated by the capitalist system. This is referred to as th e “accumulation of capital” which is a direct result of the economic monopolization that occurs in the competition of various markets to achieve dominance; smaller businesses are eventually devoured and erased by the behemoths of that specific market. (Marx and Engels 1887, CPP 2010) The continued growth of a monopolized capital due to this accumulation will eventually lead to the inevitable need for market expansion, as it is unable to sustain itself in its current market that is now too small to create sizable profit. Therefore it seeks out another new market through another country; it colonizes it through economic means (product exportation) to further support its expansion. This is the main rationale behind foreign imperialism in the Philippines, these empires, like the US industry, cannot further support its continued as accumulation and surplus production in it’s own home land and
23
seeks out a different market to sell its products to avoid financial collapse. (Marx and Engels 1887, CPP 2010) It has been argued that capitalism as a system gives way to various opportunities to further increase human development as it is an economic system built on competition and dynamic innovation in order to get further ahead. This argument holds truth; however, it is also a reality of the capitalist system that these opportunities are not or will never be available to the majority of the population. There is the existence of certain barriers that prevent some individuals from taking the benefits of the capitalist system and leads them to remain in the bottom; these barriers have historically prevented certain sectors of society – the poor, women and ethnic minorities from continually advancing while favoring others. (Muller 2013) In a partial conclusion, the discussion about the rampant poverty in the Philippines is an issue rooted within the lack of national industrialization, lack of distributed farm land and the continued implementation of an inevitably failing capitalist system, which in principle is a system that only caters to a select few that are able to secure specific conditions to achieve financial success/adequacy. The semi-feudal and semi colonial nature (CPP 2005, CPP 2010) of Philippine society further allows the accumulation of resources and wealth among the one percent while a significant amount of the population lives in abject poverty.
A.4.2 - The Correlation Between Poverty and Addiction Poverty a plays a significant role in the potential development of addiction as it becomes the primary motivation to fall into dependence; it can be stated that the prevalence of poverty is the root of the entire problem. Poverty and its facets of the lack of education and income inequality as environmental factors further increase an individual’s predisposition to resorting to drug use. (Niazi et. al 2016) Poverty and drug addiction are intrinsically linked concepts that commonly occur in the same instances in respective of one another. The groups who are at risk of developing addiction are those who come from the margins of society; these are the individuals who are deprived socially and economically. As previously mentioned by Yoshimasu (2013) in an earlier section of this thesis about the Environmental and Societal Predisposition to Drug Addiction (p. 12-13), the lack of employment and a sustainable income makes a person more likely to be initiated to first time substance abuse. To further add to the point of discussion, it has been demonstrated in studies conducted by Butler (1997) in the country of Ireland, it has been consistently found that the selected respondents in relation to drug abuse have similar traits, it is the fact that these individuals do not come from randomly distributed neighborhoods, but instead it has been determined that they reside in community clusters that are stricken with poverty and is rife with general economical disadvantage. (as cited in O’Higgins 1998, SDF 2007) There is a notable difference of the manner of which drug use is motivated between the youth who are living in poverty and those who are living in considerable affluence. According to Zinberg (1984), living in the communities where poverty prevalent
24
increases the predisposition to riskier manner of drug use among the younger sectors of society in comparison to more affluent groups of the same age group. The primary motivation of poverty stricken youth to resort to drug use is seen as some sort of “self medication” as attempt for alleviation from the setting of common hopelessness and boredom brought about by economical disadvantage. In comparison, the middle-class to more affluent youth perceives the act of drug use as an “enhancement” to an already interesting and comfortable lifestyle. (as cited in O’Higgins 1998) This correlation is also apparent in alcohol dependence; people of low socio-economic status, low educational attainment or unsatisfactory occupational status tend to be more vulnerable to the risks of alcohol abuse related diseases and even death. The contrast between economically disadvantaged individuals and those living in relative affluence have also been apparent as is with drug abuse; the individuals living in poverty are more likely to engage in “binge drinking” which is a risky drinking pattern more associated with repercussions to health while their affluent peers only participate in slightly excessive drinking patterns. (Jones and Sumnall 2016) People living in poverty in retrospect, live a more difficult life compared to the percentage of the population that have relatively adequate financial capacities; the poor are commonly faced with the status of unemployment or having low skill jobs that leads to a general feeling of helplessness regarding socio-economic standing. A significant number of these people have less than ideal family structures and have a higher probability of being unable to pursue of finish their education. Furthermore, they more often than not have no or limited access to healthcare service that leads to these people being more likely to suffer from health h ealth related problems. This lifestyle is bound to cause psychological stress to the individual; stress as a primary factor factor can be used to explain the reason behind substance abuse. According to the “Tension Reduction Hypothesis” by Conger (1956), people tend to engage in substance abuse in order to alleviate the stress they experience. (Niazi et.al 2009, as cited in Jones and Sumnall 2016) Unemployment is a common status among those who are living in poverty; this lack of a means of producing income and drug abuse are closely linked with another. Gfroerer and Brod- sky (1993) in their study provided data that further cemented this relation between unemployment and drug addiction; the percentage of the population who are not employed demonstrate an increased prevalence to use substances such as heroin, cocaine, marijuana, hallucinogens, PCP and heavy alcohol use. This relationship is also widely documented among the drug addicts who are participating in treatment and rehabilitation. (as cited in Silverman and Robles 1999) 1999 ) This notion is partially proven by the significant number of patients in rehab programs are commonly unemployed. In a large-scale Treatment Outcome Prospective Study (TOPS) conducted by Hubbard et.al (1989) in the United States found that 11,000 drug addicts who were being treated in 41 different drug rehabilitation centers shows a high rate of unemployment among the patients. The patients that were featured in the study came from three (3) different treatment stratifications: (1) outpatients (2) residential patients and (3) outpatients who were drug free; these patients were asked regarding their employment status from the first year of their respective rehabilitation programs to its
25
end after five years of receiving the treatment. Less than 50 percent of the patients coming from all stratifications had reported to having a full-time employment and approximately less than 30 percent of all patients reported to acquiring a job in any of the years participating in rehabilitation. (as cited in Silverman and Ro bles 1999)
Neale (2002) clarified that these people who are deprived economically do not necessarily all eventually turn out as problematic drug users. However, these groups who especially are commonly homeless have a higher risk of developing a debilitating addiction. Homeless and drug addiction are inherently linked concepts but there had only been a few documented studies that delve in this correlation. Hammersley and Pearl (1997) conducted one of the studies that explore this connection between homelessness and addiction; the details of the study outline the intimate connection of the housing problem and drug abuse. The study was set in Glasgow, Scotland that involved a hundred (100) homeless youths; it was documented that over 75 out of the 100 had experience with past or continued substance abuse. The abused substances included marijuana, hallucinogens and amphetamines; out of the 75, over half described themselves as “severely dependent”. (as cited in SDF 2007) Furthermore, the effects of drug addiction are even more devastating in the long term for the poor families and poor individuals as they are more vulnerable to get into multiple financial crises if their already small assets get further depleted due to addiction. Drug addiction is a problem that further worsens the already abject poverty they live through by impacting their financial assets and not facilitating any returns due to either small wages or general unemployment. This effect of addiction is apparent especially in familial units that have one or more member that is engaging in substance abuse; this effect is even more debilitating if it is the head or main earner of the family is addicted. The small resource of a poor household hou sehold is not at all easy to maintain especially if finances go through consistent depletion due to addiction without being adequately replaced by new wages acquired from employment. (Keshav et.al 2015)
A.5.0 - Oplan Tokhang: Policies, Implementation, Statistics and the Drug Problem The Duterte administration perceives its citizens who have fallen to the crux of drug addiction as subhuman dangerous criminals that are deserving of capital punishment. Since the installation of Rodrigo Duterte as the president of the Republic of the Philippines on the 30th of June in 2016, the administration wasted no time in taking the first steps to implementing its “War on Drugs”. Oplan Tokhang was the centerpiece of the government’s attempt to answer the drug problem; it’s own-patented design of operation that led to the deaths of thousands of poverty-stricken citizens through extrajudicial killings carried out by the Philippine National Police (PNP) or third-party vigilantes; the victims were alleged to be either drug users of dealers. These police killings have been commonly justified by the claim that suspects were armed and dangerous at the time of their encounters, thus the use of lethal force of the police was deemed necessary. (Ballaran, ABS-CBN 2016, HRW 2017, AI 2017)
26
As outlined in a published report, “License t o Kill – Philippine Police Killings in Duterte’s War on Drugs” (2017, p.7) by the Human Rights Watch, Rodrigo Duterte himself outwardly and regularly utters statements in his presidential addresses that explicitly demonstrate his hostility and desire to eliminate drug users in the Philippines through death. He also praised the continually growing body count amassed by the police killings as an indication of Oplan Tokhang’s success. His sentiments of his administration fully embarking on a bloody killing campaign against drug dealers and users are apparent in multiple direct quotations: (a) “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.” – Duterte Duterte (March 2016), stating his presidential electoral platform during a campaign rally. (b) “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 bitches, I’ll really kill you.” – you.” – Duterte Duterte (June 2017), further reiterating his intention and desire to kill drug dealers while being in Davao City after being elected. (c) “My order is shoot to kill you. I don’t care about human rights, you better believe what I am saying.” – – Duterte Duterte (August 2017), vowing to kill more drug involved individuals amidst reports and criticism of police engaging in extrajudicial killings. It has first been thought that these overtly disturbing words from Rodrigo Duterte during the earlier days of his term were only an outward display of his brash nature to further assert the power of his Presidency. Months later, it has unfortunately been proven that these seemingly immaterial threats were actually promises that he had no intentions of breaking; he would see to it that “ever y last drug lord and the last pusher have either surrendered, put behind bars or below the ground.” News of the sudden increase in deaths, killings, arrest and “voluntary surrenders” under the Duterte administration were soon to be the focus of Philippine media. (Santiago et.al 2016) It was on the 1st day of July in 2016; right after the first day that Duterte assumed the presidential office that the also newly installed PNP chief, Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa, signed Command Memorandum Circular (CMC) No.16-2016 that effectively detailed and put into effect the newly installed administration’s anti-drug campaign. “Oplan Tokhang” or “Oplan Double Barrel” was an alleged policy that “further strengthens the mechanism in the monitoring of drug-related cases, conduct criminal investigation and case-build up to ensure a filing of air tight cases in the courts against even PNP personnel and other personalities who are involved in drugs.” The projects stated purpose is to ategy of the government and the neutralization “support the Barangay Drug Clearing Str ategy of drug personalities nationwide. A “barangay” is the smallest administrative sector of the Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) headed by a “barangay captain and its councilors. (PNP CMC 16-2016 p.2, PNP 2016 p.1) The name of “Double Barrel” comes from the supposed two-part policy that composes the overall implementation of the Duterte administration’s drug war; (1) is “ Oplan HVT”
27
which is supposedly focused on the actual drug syndicates and big-time traffickers and (2) the widely known “Oplan Tokhang” which is an operation especially targeting lowlevel peddlers and users. “Oplan” is a juxtaposition of “operation” and “plan” and “tokhang” is the fusion of two words that mean to knock and plead, with the main alleged strategy of the operation is the police knocking on the doors of suspected drug traffickers and users and persuading the individuals to cease their illegal activities and voluntarily surrender to the authorities. (PNP 2016, AI 2017) According to the details outlined in CMC No.16-2016 and the “DIDM IMPLAN re: Anti Illegal Drugs Campaign Plan Project – Double Barrel” provided by the Philippine National Police, Oplan Tokhang has five (5) main stages of policy and implementation. These stages have specific subsets of conduct that the police are supposedly required to follow as operation guidelines. These documented stages in order are listed and explained below: (1) “Collection and Validation of Information Stage” – this was to be carried out during the first months of the Duterte administration’s term. It served as a foundation to the identification and the information regarding suspected drug addicts in various barangays. The identities of each suspect must be documented and verified as preparation for the house visitations. (2) “Coordination Stage” – this refers to the PNP establishing communication to coordinate with specific government agencies, stakeholders and nongovernmental organizations as further preparation before conducting the house to house visitations of suspected drug dealers and users. The organizations mainly involved with the coordination are the Barangay Anti-Drug Abuse Council (BADAC), Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA), the Dangerous Drugs Board (DDB), the media for the public information of police operations and other NGO’s deemed to have necessary involvement. (3) “House to House Visitation Stage” – this is considered to be the main point of interest in Oplan Tokhang; this is the visitation of the residencies of suspected drug pushers and addicts in the barangays. It was supposedly conducted simultaneously on the first day of office of the PNP. Operatives of the PNP primarily head the visitations accompanied by a representative from the BADAC of the specific barangay to assist and to serve as witnesses to the visitation. It is important to note that it is specifically detailed within this operation plan that visitations should not violate the rights of the subject. (4) “Processing and Documentation Stage” – this is where the verified drug dealers or users are to sign a “voluntary surrender form” and formally be taken in under police custody; any drugs and paraphernalia are confiscated by the authorities. Individuals are then referred or invited to local police stations for interviews, documentation and other alternative actions. Any suspected individual who denies involvement with drug dealing and drug use or refuses to participate in the house
28
visitations shall be referred to the Anti-Illegal Drug Units for immediate case build up. (5) “Monitoring and Evaluation Stage” – this is a “follow-up” on the individuals verified under the house visitation and documentation stages. If reports of continued illegal drug activities are persistent in a house previously subjected to the earlier stages of Oplan Tokhang, the chief of local police stations and other illegal drug units immediately put forth police mobilizations to arrest and file criminal charges to the violator(s). The police and representatives from BADAC conduct weekly follow-ups on various drug personalities to properly determine their status and whereabouts. The key dynamic in Oplan Tokhang is the coordination of the PNP and barangay officials in identifying certain individuals are suspected of drug dealing or drug use. This is done in the previously mentioned “Coordination Stage” of Oplan Tokhang. The two sectors enter a collaboration in order to compile and maintain a “Drug Watch List” or “Narco List”; this practice came into usage even before the Duterte administration. A circular signed in 2015 from the Department of Interior that ordered the BADAC to continuously gather data regarding individuals who are and were involved in illegal drugs proves this. There had also been previous police and news reports that detail the existence of these lists dating as early as 2005. (PNP 2016, Santiago et.al 2016, AI 2017) A “purok leader” or barangay subdivision head in Mindanao had told in an interview with Amnesty International that the police had asked him to provide a list of names; he had been told to include names of individuals who use illegal drugs, even in the past, disregarding of the person’s current status as a user. He had mentioned that some of the included names in the list was added from his “personal knowledge” while others were added on the merit of the provided accounts of community members; verification of the drug use was attempted by the purok leader through first hand inquiries with the suspected constituents. The individuals whose names were included through the community members’ accounts refused to admit any involvement with drugs in either dealing or use, despite this shaky verification method, their names were still included in the final list submitted to police. The local barangay administration barangay trusted the police to “figure out” if the person was actually involved in drugs. Accounts from barangay officials in Metro Manila show striking similarities with the events detailed in this interview. (AI 2017)
The problem with this practice is that a name can be included from unreliable and unverified sources; there are no procedures or standards present as guidelines to verify the names included on the list, neither is there any clear way for an individual to clear his/her name from the list. The Duterte administration uses the drug watch list to direct the point of attack that Oplan Tokhang will take; this is especially daunting when we consider that these lists are the catalyst to pave the way for the spate killings of alleged drug users who commonly come from poor communities. These extrajudicial killings violate the rights to life of the victims and to a due process. (KARAPATAN 2016, AHRC 2017)
29
It has been stated that the list is easily liable to inaccuracy and tends to turn into an actual “kill list” or “hit list” for its connections to the Duterte administration’s bloody anti -drug campaign that led to the deaths of thousands; the list can be used as a reference for vigilante gunmen to which names on the list will be the next statistic. A specific case that is cited to be a demonstration of this problem with the drug watch list was the killing of 10th grader Emmanuel Lorica (17), a student of Eusebio High School, in December 2016; his death was alleged to be of mistaken identity when an unidentified gunman shot him in his sleep at an evacuation center as witnesses testified that they heard the gunman say “it’s not him” right after killing him. Pasig City Police claimed that the boy was included in the list as a “drug user or pusher”; the barangay chairman who clarified that Lorica’s name was never included in the aforementioned list immediately contradicted this claim but the boy was said to be part of a separate investigation for being a “runn er” for another dealer. (Agoncillo, Inquirer 2016, Santiago et.al 2016)
A. 5.1 - Police Operations and Extrajudicial Killings
Source: Amnesty International “If You Are Poor, You Are Killed: Extrajudicial Executions on the Philippines, War on Drugs” (2017),
It can be stated that the police operations undertaken under Oplan Tokhang have had a direct hand into the deaths that have been brought into national attention. There had been conflicting numbers at the total presented death toll coming from the Philippine National Police. According to PNP spokesperson Senior Superintendent Dionardo Carlos, the currently cited figure of the fatalities associated with Oplan Tokhang is at least 2,600+ individuals killed in actual police operations while 1,300+ are not associated with the police, but are perpetuated by third-party vigilante groups; this figure only takes into account the incidents from July 2016 to March 2017. (as cited Tubeza, Inquirer 2017)
30
This directly conflicts with the commonly cited figures by the Philippine media and rights advocate groups of 7000+ fatalities, even in the opening remarks in a hearing in the United States Congress by the Tom Lantos Commission on Human Rights on July 2017 uses this larger figure to account for the deaths under Duterte’s war on drugs. However, this discrepancy can be explained by the fact that the PNP moved a majority of the deaths under the classification of “under investigation” thus causing the apparent drop in the numbers. (Mc Govern 2017) Extrajudicial killings are domestically defined to be summary or arbitrary executions that are considered to be a deprivation to life without the chance of experiencing a full legal and judicial process of persecution or legal process with the involvement and complicity of the government and its agents. In the Philippines, there is no set legal definition to extrajudicial killings; however the Supreme Court citing the rule on the Writ of Amparo further explained that these are the type of killings that are committed without the due process of law, without any legal safeguards or proceedings. Furthermore the Supreme Court also outlined the relation of extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances to be of the same concept due to the similarities of their respective purpose. (AHRC 2017) The international community, most notably proponents from the United States of America, also has misgivings on the actions of the Duterte Government that lead to rampant human rights violations. As remarked by Vice-Chairman of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission (TLHRC) James P. Mc Govern on a congress hearing: “We should be clear what an extrajudicial killing or execution is: it is the purposeful killing of a person by governmental authorities without the sanction of any judicial proceeding. No arrest. No charges. No warrant. No trial. No judge. No jury. Simply, murder. If the Filipino government is truly concerned about illicit drugs, then alternatives to killing people in cold blood are readily available.” (Mc Govern 2017, p.1-2) It is the Philippine National Police, not third-party vigilantes as stated by actual officers from the police force, are the agents who primarily carry out the extrajudicial killings. These deaths have received a significant increase ever since the beginning of the Duterte administration which can be attributed to the implementation of Oplan Tokhang; according to a report written by Mogato and Baldwin for Reuter’s News Agency posted in an article: “Police Paid to Kill Drug Suspects, Plant Evidence – Reuters Report” written by Gonzales for the Philippine Daily Inquirer (2017), it detailed the accounts of two (2) police officers in relation to the spate of killings on the condition that they remain unidentified. These are the significant parts of account detailed in the article: (a) There is coordination between the police and the local authorities to turn off the streetlights and surveillance cameras in specific areas of operation to avoid public witnesses of the killings. (b) Either rookie cops who are eager for experience or nominated officers by their superiors as a “baptism through fire” are the ones who execute most of the suspected drug involved individuals detained by the police in their precincts.
31
(c) The police usually plants evidence after a fatality in an operation in order to ensure the legality of the use of lethal force. Propping up a gun and placing it in the hands of the corpse of the suspect is common practice when planting
evidence; the trigger is pulled through the suspect’s finger to further provide evidence for forensics examinations. Drugs are also planted in the corpse as proof of involvement in illegal drugs. Further cited by the aforementioned Reuter ’s News Agency report is a PNP retired intelligence officer’s unpublished 26 -page report shared with Catholic Church Leaders and the Commission of Human Rights (CHR), titled: “The State-Sponsored Extrajudicial Killings in the Philippines” outlined the accounts of seventeen (17) different policemen that mentioned an incentive to officers for participating in the killings; police are allegedly paid 10,000 PHP per kill. This incentive does not only apply to killing drug dealers and users but also rapists, pickpockets, gang members and other perceived “troublemakers” The report also detailed a “price range” for killing drug suspects ; 10,000 PHP - 20,0000 PHP for “street level” drug dealers and users, 50,000 PHP for members of
“neighborhood councils, 1 million PHP for “distributors, retailers, wholesalers” and 5 million PHP for “drug lords” . (as cited in Inquirer 2017) According to the Human Rights Report compiled by Amnesty International, “ If You Are Poor, You Are Killed: Extrajudicial Executions on the Philippines, War on Drugs” (2017), the killings perpetuated by the police under Oplan Tokhang falls into three (3) categorizations of operation: (1) Acknowledged Police Raids on Homes – these are the operations that involve the police going to the place of residence of a suspected individual, the suspects are usually also killed within their residences witnessed by family members or other people living in the general vicinity.
*
Cited in the same report by Amnesty International, a specific case happened in Batangas City, police claim that they were serving a search warrant in the home of an alleged member of a drug syndicate and killed the suspect due to him resisting arrest and firing back at the police. The wife of the victim, who was present during the entire encounter, presented a contradictory account on the events that took place. She stated that after police entered the house, her husband was ordered to put his hand on the wall and was then frisked. Unarmed, her husband was then shot at close range and killed. She claimed her husband once worked for the police as an “asset”.
(2) Alleged Buy-Bust Operations – these are the operations where police perform an undercover purchase of drugs with the purpose of directly confronting the dealer and making an arrest. In cases in which there is the involvement of an extrajudicial killing, the police consistently claim that the suspect was in possession of firearms and retaliated to the police during the confrontation. The result being the death of the suspect; witnesses and the families of the victims commonly testify that these encounters were actually unlawful killings
32
*
The case of 33-year old father of five children, Uleyses Baja is a cited example of an extrajudicial killing arising from these alleged buy-bust operations. According to family and close friends, Baja actually sold and used illegal drugs; however, after the police conducted a house visitation under Oplan Tokhang Baja had accepted surrender and allowed the police to confiscate his merchandise and paraphernalia. On the evening of August 2016, he became another statistic after the police conducted a buy-bust operation in his area. According to police testimony, Baja was dealing drugs and had sensed that his customers were actually undercover police officers. He allegedly attempted to pull out a gun but it malfunctioned; police then killed him in order to “neutralize” him.
*
Several witnesses have a different version of the events that involved Uleyses Baja and had claimed that the police testimony was false; specifically a woman who happened to be walking with her friends to a disco had seen Baja sitting next to another man in a wooden shed and exchanged greetings with him. Suddenly a blue car pulled up and four men with black uniforms got out from the vehicle and approached the wooden shed: “Two men were asking, ‘Who among you is Ulyses?’ The other guy said, ‘Sir, it’s not me.’ They told the guy, ‘Run, you didn’t see anything.’ The guy ran in front of us. ... I saw Ulyses raise his arms and said ‘Sir, I already stopped doing that.’ ... I was just across the street. I was nervou s, at the first gunshot I wanted to run but I couldn’t because I was too nervous, by the third gunshot I ran, when I stopped at a store [down the street], I could see my knees shaking.” There didn’t seem to have been a conversation. Ulyses immediately raised his hands and said, ‘I already stopped.’ I only expected they would arrest Ulyses, I didn’t expect they would kill him.”
(Interview Transcript, cited in AI 2017, p. 23) (3) Killings Under Detention – these are the killings that occur after the police had managed to detain the suspected individual; these incidents demonstrate that surrendering to the police does not completely equate to safety behind bars as previously cited in Mogato and Baldwin’s Reuter’s Report (2017). The police as usual, claimed that the victims were the primary aggressors and only reacted accordingly. *
Detailed in the same report and two (2) news articles written by Erika Sauler for the Philippine Daily Inquirer, “Pasay Police Kill Another Drug Suspect, Gun Grabber, Cops Claim” (2016) and “Execution at Pasay Police Station” (2017) is the case of Jaypee Bertes who had decided to surrender to the municipal authorities in Pasay City after learning that his name was listed on the “narco list” a dealer; he cleared his small residence
33
of any drugs according to the accounts of his wife, Harra Kazuo. The police reports claim that Jaypee and his father Renato Bertes were caught with the possession of methamphetamine packets; the officers happened to run into them during their patrols as the father and son were gambling on the street. This was immediately contested by Kazuo by testifying that the police had knocked on their door in the middle of the night just about when they were ready to sleep. Several police officers had severely beaten Jaypee while the others searched the house for drugs without a search warrant. Jaypee still badly bruised and his father Renato, tried to stop the police from ransacking their residence. They were arrested and taken to the police station. It has been noted during the autopsy report that Jaypee had sustained a serious fracture in his right arm and multiple bruises in his body right after the police encounter in his residence. *
Jaypee and Renato were still alive by the time Kazuo made her way to the Pasay City Police Station the following day at 10 am; the Station of AntiIllegal Drugs-Special Operations Task Group (SAID-SOTG) was in charge in detaining the two men. However, by 5 pm Kazuo had received a call from the police station informing her of the deaths of both Jaypee and Renato; she saw the bodies of both men riddled with bullet holes. The police report claimed that the middle aged Renato tried to wrestle the gun of an officer as they were being accompanied to their cells; the officer reacted to Renato’s aggression and killed him by shooting. Further into the police report, it was written that Jaypee after seeing his father getting killed retaliated to the same officer by grabbing his gun; this prompted another officer in the vicinity to shoot at Jaypee which killed him.
*
The Commission of Human Rights (CHR) argued the validity of the police report as it has been noted that both of the men had serious injuries during the supposed instance where they attacked the police officers, especially Jaypee who had his right arm broken. The alleged attack of father and son on the officers in the police station has been ruled an “impossibility” due to the two men’s inability due to their sustained injuries.
Among the operations conducted as part of Oplan Tokhang, a specific case of extrajudicial killing that took place on the middle of August 2017 took the center stage in the discussion of Duterte’s Drug War; Kian de los Santos (17), a senior high school student from a Catholic School was killed in Caloocan City by anti-drug officers belonging to the Caloocan City police force. This incident was served as a wake up call to many Filipinos regarding the haphazard approach that the Duterte administration has handled the problem with drugs on the Philippines. According to United Nations special rapporteur Agnes Callamard in an interview in early September 2017, the killing of a minor shook the per ception of the entire nation of Duterte’s Anti-Drug Campaign, it can be considered to be a significant turning point. (Morales et.al, ABS-CBN 2017, as cited in Mateo, Philippine Star 2017) Kian’s alleged fostered connections to illegal drugs and the common story of retaliation
34
as he was being apprehended was the reasoning cited by the police for his killing; however, it has been revealed that the police had supposedly only been able to confirm this “connection” to illegal drugs after the fact that they had killed him. It was noted by now removed Northern Police District Chief Robert Fajardo that the police did not have a specific target on the time of operations that led to the death of Kian back in August 2016; however he claimed that he can “prove” Kian’s involvement in illegal drugs. A certain Chito Bersaluna, the also removed Caloocan Police Chief claimed that the Kian’s social media postings acquired from an old cellphone was irrefutable proof that he was a drug runner. (Morales et.al, ABS-CBN 2017) These statements from the actual police prove a disturbing tendency to “cover -up” the truth in the incidents of killings under their police operations; this further adds to the notion of an illicit conspiracy within the police under Duterte’s directive. Conflicting evidence had also been presented in the police’s claims of Kian retaliating with firearms as he was being apprehended; the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) referenced Kian’s autopsy report that showed that he was shot in the head as he lied in a fetal position. Security footage from the area that showed the encounter also contradicted this claim as it was seen on video that police had accosted the victim and dragged him towards a river and killed him. The place of which where the victim was killed is peculiar due to the fact that it was in the opposite direction of the police station; this suggested that the policemen did not have any intention of detaining him. A gun, supposedly the weapon Kian used in his “shootout” with police was submitted as evidence; forensic testing also did came with in negative gun powder residue in the hands of the victim which proves that he did not in fact fire a gun in the time of the encounter. (Tupas, Inquirer 2017)
It is important to note that the police also suffered casualties and fatalities as a consequence of Oplan Tokhang drug operations, thirteen (13) policemen were said to have died and thirty nine (39) were wounded from July 2016 to October 2016 according to statistics provided by the PNP. (as cited in Navallo, ABS-CBN 2017) Duterte’s “War on Drugs”, although creates more deaths on the side of purported drug dealers and users, also has a negative impact on the police force; not only does did it result in the needless deaths of thousands during its supposed 8-month long implementation but it encouraged the police to participate in illegal executions that damaged the Philippine National Police as an institution.
A.5.2 - The Philippine/International Drug Problem and the Drug Industry The problem regarding the prevalent existence of the drug industry is a problem that concerns the entire world; it has been documented that 247 million people globally used drugs in 2015. Out of the cited figure, 29 million are afflicted with drug addiction and other drug related disorders but only 1 in 6 of these people are actively seeking treatment through rehabilitation programs. Globally, drug use did not see considerable increase or decrease; therefore the situation is considered to be stable. However, there are certain regions in the world that have seen significant increases in drug use compared to “stable” areas. (UNODC 2016)
35
The Drug Industry is a lucrative and prevalent underground economy around the world even in the past; in the 1990’s, the annual production of heroin was marked up to 550 metric tons while cocaine produced 100 metric tons annually. The estimated economic expenditure on these illicit drugs in the same era was priced at $57 billion in the United States and 4 million pounds in the United Kingdom. Despite being the behemoth of an industry, the manner of distribution and the supply and demand of illicit drugs cannot be fully deciphered as there is little known documented knowledge regarding the topic. However, there exist some outlines regarding the distribution methods that the illicit drug industry utilizes which can be described and categorized. According to Gilman and Pearson (1991), the traditional perception to the distribution system in the drug industry is likened to a “pyramid”; at the top of the pyramid lies large scale manufacturers and importers that filter down their products to lower level dealers who sit at the bottom. (as cited in Hough and Natarajan 2000) Studies conducted by Hough and Natarajan (2000) have led to the uncovering of apparent common hierarchal characteristics among drug distributing organizations that can still take different forms. These categorizations were derived from the analysis of thirty-nine (39) American drug-dealing organizations by sorting then according to tasks given to members and organizational structure: (a) Freelancers – are the small groups who do not work with any hierarchal structure with entrepreneurial characteristics that focuses on personal motivations. (b) Family Businesses – groups that exhibit clear hierarchal structure and authority that comes from family ties among the members. (c) Communal Businesses – groups that can exhibit any of the previously mentioned traits but do not have a set format of hierarchy or power structure, these groups are commonly bound to common ties such as ethnicity. (d) Corporations – these are considerably large groups with formally defined hierarchies and clear divisions of labor among members. In an international context, the drug industry is deeply ingrained in many countries as illicit drugs are commonly distributed by large groups of varying amounts of power. The primary motivation is the acquisition of the lucrative profits arising from drug trafficking as the supply is provided to addicted individuals from around the world. In the Philippines, the Dangerous Drugs Board’s (DDB) National Household Survey in 2015 came up with the figure of 1.8 million drug users wherein 38 percent were without employment. In February 2016, PDEA reported 11,321 out of the 42,065 (27%) of the barangays in the country were affected by drug distribution and addiction amongst its constituents; these barangays are mostly based in urbanized areas. Most notably the National Capital Region (NCR) boasts the highest rate of being affected with a 93 percent of its municipalities having problems with drug distribution and drug use. Methamphetamine is the most commonly abused drug in the Philippines, which is manufactured within the country and continually smuggled through airports. Methamphetamine or “Shabu” has total domination over the Philippine illicit drug
36
market; it garners a 90 percent use amongst arrested individuals in followed by marijuana and other party drugs such as ecstasy. (PDEA 2013, DDB 2015, as cited in PNP 2016) The primary hot bed of drug trade, manufacturing and distribution in the Philippines is heavily situated in the National Capital Region (NCR); the production of illicit drugs commonly takes place in non-suspecting residential areas within affluent subdivisions, condominiums and apartments. From 2002 to 2013, 89 drug laboratories used for production was dismantled by authorities with the highest number at 11 laboratories back in 2003 and 2004 respectively. Larger laboratories can produce up to 50 kilograms of meth while small “kitchen type” labs can only produce 10 kilograms. The prices of illicit drugs in the Philippines are heavily dependent on the amount of demand in relation to supply; the quality and area where the drugs were produced are also factors that have an effect in its overall worth. In December 2013, a gram of methamphetamine was worth 3,800 – 10,000 PHP per gram. NCR has the cheapest price of meth per gram at 3,800 PHP. (PDEA 2012, 2013, DDB 2015) Illegal Drug Trafficking is the most lucrative and dominant drug activity in the Philippine Market; drug lords constantly innovate new ways of making their illegal activities more efficient and harder to detect by authorities. Drug syndicates effectively export and transport their goods to the country commonly through the exploitation of the geographical nature of the Philippines; the open coastlines are ideal for smuggling activities along with airports, seaports and economic zones are common points of entry of illegal drugs into the country. (PDEA 2012, 2013) According to the PNP (2016) and PDEA (2012, 2013) Drug syndicates hold the most influential and largest role in the distribution of drugs in the Philippines; these groups are the pillars that hold up the industry of illicit drugs. There are numerous international drug syndicates responsible for most of the flowing drug supply that operate in the country; the dominant presence of these groups in a global scale is an consequence of the further growing rate of globalization that encourages liberal movement and transfer of individuals and commerce. Authorities have able to identify three (3) major types drug syndicates that actively circulate their illegal merchandise in the country: (1) The Chinese or Filipino-Chinese Drug Syndicates dominate the Philippine drug market through the continued facilitation of production, manufacturing and organized smuggling. Their illegal activities are mostly confined within their groups with a few select Filipino locals involved; these pursuits constantly maintain the illegal drug supply in the country. These syndicates are also responsible for the presence of “shabu labs”. (2) The African Drug Syndicate (ADS) is a group mainly headed by African nationals that operate within the Philippines; they are the ones responsible for the prevalence of the practice of smuggling drugs through airports by employing drug couriers that are paid large amounts of money. (3) The Mexican-Sinaloa Drug Cartel is a new group that operates in the Philippines;
37
this cartel had formed connections with Chinese Drug S yndicates in the country in order to successfully penetrate the illicit drug market.
A.5.3 - Oplan Tokhang Compiled Surveys, Satisfaction Ratings and Public Perception In the midst of prevalent condemnation of the international community due to the inherent human rights violations towards the anti drug program implemented in the Philippines, the Duterte administration has consistently garnered outward public support; Oplan Tokhang in general public perception has been relatively well accepted in its early conception, up to today as a majority of Filipinos still show a general satisfaction towards the “War on Drugs” endorsed by the government. According to surveys conducted by Social Weather Station (SWS) in a presentation by SWS Deputy Director Vladimyr Licudine on October 2017, 77 percent of the 1,500 individuals primarily from NCR who participated in the survey said they were “satisfied” to the government’s approach to dealing with the drug problem. On another independent survey conducted between February and May in 2017 presented by Bloomberg, it noted 78 percent of 1,000 respondents of a “face-to-face” survey claimed overall support to the anti-drug campaign of the Duterte administration. (as cited in Talabong, Rapp ler 2017, Bloomberg 2017) However it should be noted that the results presented by the SWS has already seen a significant decrease compared to the earliest days of the Duterte administration; the 78 percent rating already suffered a minus 13 percent this September (2017) in comparison to September last year (2016) with the net satisfaction clocking at an 84 percent rating. The drop in satisfaction ratings are a result of more Filipinos having fears of them or someone they know become a victim of the brutal anti-drug operations headed by the police. In another survey conducted by SWS, it has noted that among the respondents, 73 percent were overtly concerned that the next victim would either be them or someone in close proximity. Furthermore according to in another noncommissioned survey conducted by SWS that was conducted in the middle of June 2017, there is a notable split between people who believe in the police claims of drug suspects retaliating when apprehended; an approximate 6 out 10 Filipinos do not believe the police’s version of events, 75 percent out of 1,200 respondents were in agreement of the notion of the police killings of suspects who already surrendered. (as cited in Talabong, Rappler 2017, Andrade, Inquirer 2017) One of the more daunting aspects about these results in the same survey is the fact that there is a 17 percent of participants who claimed that they personally know alleged drug suspects who were summoned by the police; they had contested the notion that these people were involved in illegal drugs as they had testified that they were not in fact drug pushers nor users. 50 percent of the previously mentioned 17 percent hold the belief that police assets responsible for pointing out suspected individuals had “lied” to the police and directed them to their enemies knowing that the police may kill them. This considerable surge of condemnation from the public is partly a consequence of the
38
previously mentioned killing of 17-year-old Kian de los Santos; it is one of the first cases that presented actual evidence of the police conducting unprovoked killings through video footage. Part of the general public, confronted with the reality of the nature of Oplan Tokhang and its consequences, had decided to rescind their support for the campaign of the administration. (as cited in Andrade, Inquirer 2017) Overall, despite the majority approving of the anti-drug campaign, it can be noted that the resulting net satisfaction ratings were significantly lower among the people who did not believe that the individuals summoned were involved with illegal drugs. An article written by Ballaran for the Daily Inquirer, “SWS: Most Filipinos Believe Not All Summoned For Oplan Tokhang are Addicts, Pushers” (2017) , cited another survey conducted by the SWS in September 2017 that involved 1,500 respondents. The sample was composed from Filipinos from different areas in the Philippines; 600 from all Luzon not including Metro Manila, 300 from Metro Manila, 300 from Visayas and 300 from Mindanao. The results are as follows: (a) 49% (735) believed that not all alleged suspects called up for Oplan Tokhang were actually drug pushers or addicts. (b) 36% (540) held a firm perception that these individuals were certainly involved with the illicit drug trade. (c) 14% (200) claim to not know anything about the suspected individuals. (d) 2% (30) claimed that these individuals were not at all involved with drugs. Aside from the surveys conducted by the SWS, “Pulse Asia” is another polling firm that conducted their own studies regarding the public perception to Oplan Tokhang that provided another layer of perspective on the issue. The Philippine National Police themselves used the results provided by Pulse Asia as a proper justification to the antidrug operations, despite the increased prevalence of extrajudicial killings. The survey yielded the sentiment of people feeling safer within their neighborhoods in comparison to previous years since the implementation of Oplan Tokhang; 81 percent of the respondents from the cumulative results of respondents from NCR, Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao agreed with the notion of their communities being generally safer. (as cited in Fonbuena, Rappler 2017) Rodrigo Duterte as the president of the Republic of the Philippines has seen an overflowing amount of support from the majority of the public ever since he was elected into office back in May 2016 elections with a significantly substantial 16 million votes. The overtly positive perception of many Filipinos to Duterte is mostly attributed as consequence of the incompetence of the previous administration; many supporters claim that Duterte’s rough nature is a sign of his sincerity and strength as a leader. As he in their perception “had things done” while past presidents barely even try to put in an effort to change things. Further expanding on the discussion is the image Duterte built as he was campaigning for the presidential position; he brandished himself as a person who did not belong to the typical economic, political or social elite being relatively unknown to the majority of Filipinos prior to his presidency. Some Filipinos also believe that the violence that arises from the drug war is “inevitable” as it is a sacrifice that has to be
39
made in order to achieve the change that this country (Philippines) had not seen in a very long time. (Quiano and Perry, CNN 2016, Bevin, Washington Post 2017) The outward support for the administration’s war on drugs can be partially attributed to the effort and less than ethical tactics utilized by the state to spread propaganda that paint the implemented policies of Oplan Tokhang in a good perspective. This manipulation is apparent according to independent reports published by a Human Rights Watch Dog based in the United States of America, the Duterte administration employs “keyboard warriors” to further stimulate support for the drug war. This keyboard army allegedly receives monetary compensation to manipulate public perception through social media intervention; comments and political content is created to suppress dissenting opinions and to continually bolster support for the administration. The influence of online propaganda and manipulation in this modern age play an integral role in the ability of people to properly perceive certain issues through creating smokescreens. (as cited in Mindanews 2017) Duterte is a leader that holds untold charisma over the Filipino people, as he is significantly different amongst the previous leaders of the Philippines; it can almost be said that he is somewhat of a fresh breath of air for a majority of the masses. His perceived image of not being part of the ruling class appeals to the class perception of many Filipinos as they can consider Duterte as “one of them”. His explicit profanity and enthusiastically delivered rhetoric appeal is commonly cited as an indicator of sincerity to his listeners; this brash and crude attitude is what painted him as a strong leader on the surface. These projected rhetorical traits allow the facilitation of his cult of personality that appeals to the Philippine masses that consequently lead to outward public support for Oplan Tokhang. This public perception of Duterte can be classified as a perpetuated “Cult of Personality” in modern politics; this terminology stands for the practice of the state to promote an idealized image of its head of state through the use of mainstream media in order to create a personal worship in a society. This is further detailed by the theory of “Charismatic Authority” written by prominent sociologist Max Weber; the state is a system that is persisted through the relationships between humans that is kept in place by power that is commonly acquired through violence. In order for the continued existence of the state, those who are below the government must submit to the rule of those in power; the beliefs of the people in the existence of a legitimate system are one of the main proponents for obedience and credible authority. (as cited Lu et.al 2014) The power of charismatic authority can be applied to Rodrigo Duterte as the definition of the term charisma means a specific quality that a leader possesses that can make him/her endowed exceptional powers and traits. It is not about who Duterte actually is as a person, but rather it is centered on the collective perception of those subjected to this charismatic authority that decides the overall validity of the charisma. This is apparent in the existence of several Diehard Duterte Supporters (DDS) groups that continually bring outward support to the administration primarily through social media and propaganda. Furthermore, the cause of “eliminating the drug problem” is also an effective tool to
40
consolidate Duterte’s leadership; each cult of personality pushes for a specific mission to be realized which is a mission with is a vision of the future that a leader supposedly represents. The demonization of drug dependents perpetuated by the government is an easily relatable call that many Filipinos can believe in; this mission is an integral component to the machinations that bond the administration and its followers that guides the direction in which how the undertaking will proceed. (Lu et.al 2014)
A.5.4 – Implications About Oplan Tokhang, Drug Addiction and the Poor It can be noted that the victims of extrajudicial killings under Oplan Tokhang is disproportionately anchored to those who belong to the poorer sectors of Philippine society; the large majority of victims are those who live on the slums and other impoverished areas of residence. The death of a family member who comes from a poverty-stricken familial background will often cause further financial difficulties for the remaining members of the household. (Ballaran, ABS-CBN 2016) Grief-stricken family members often cite the involvement of their killed loved ones in the illicit drug trade came about due to the lack of opportunities to make a proper living to support their households; furthermore, those who employ the use of methamphetamine or shabu do so to make themselves able to further comply with the long work hours required in order to satisfy the financial needs of their families. (AI 2017) It has been previously discussed in an earlier section on this thesis, “The Correlation of Poverty and Addiction” (p. 23-25) that the presence of abject poverty is a significant catalyst to individuals falling into addiction as the atmosphere created by this mode of living can easily drive a person’s introduction to substance abuse. The words of Peter Baume (2000), although talking about the “madness and hypocrisy” of the drug policy in Australia, can be applied to the context of the Philippines. He had said that it is infinitely easier to demonize the presence and users of illicit drugs than to actually address the underlying causes that come with the problem of drug abuse, which is the rampant predominance of poverty and general environment of hopelessness. It can be said Oplan Tokhang is a haphazard solution to address the drug problem in the Philippines, as it merely prefers to “erase” the addicts who are not the actual problem but instead merely a symptom of the larger ill in society; it does not take into account the factors and motivations that lead drug abuse and only serves to facilitate the killings of its own supposed constituents.
However, despite the fact that the poor are the predominant targets of his anti-drug campaign, Duterte asserts that rhetoric that either rich or poor can be killed as long as these people foster some sort of involvement in the illicit drug trade. He mentioned that the existence of drug runners couldn’t be without the presence of suppliers; therefore all are culpable to be victimized under Oplan Tokhang. He further reiterates his point that the killing of so-called “criminals” is not a human rights violation, as criminals should not be perceived to be part of humanity. (as cited in Regalado, Philippine Star 2017)
41
Oplan Tokhang as a patented policy of the Duterte administration eventually came to its supposed end on October 12, 2017. Under the direct order of the president himself, PNP chief Ronald “Bato” de la Rosa announced the termination of the centerpiece of the War on Drugs on the Philippines; the directive of implementing measures against the drug problem was passed on from the Philippine National Police (PNP) to the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA), making PDEA the sole agency to be put in charge of drug related issues in the country. (as cited in Philippine Star 2017)
A.6.0 - Cross-Referencing the “War on Drugs” in an International Context The concept of the “War on Drugs” was brought into the world’s center stage in 1971 when then US President Richard Nixon declared drugs as “public enemy number one”, this declaration led to the advent of a global campaign that sought to eliminate illicit drugs and illegal use. In the present, the results of this campaign that saw its start over 40 years ago can be considered a failure; this war on drugs only led to (1) the mass incarceration of non-violent drug dependents, (2) corruption between officials, (3) widespread political destabilization, (4) violence in Latin America, Asia and Africa and (5) the systemic abuse of human rights across the world. The states in several countries around the world had poured a significant amount of resources in the billions into this attempt at achieving a world without drugs, yet despite all this, it only led to further fueling of the power of drug cartels and upped the quality of drugs in the market. (Kurzgesagt 2016)
The main line of thinking behind the concept of “War on Drugs” is that the absence of drugs equals to removing the entire problem completely; the current model in place regarding the policies of drug control involves authorities working to destroy the illicit drug supply and the incarceration of drug offenders. This line of thinking may appear to make logical sense at first glance, however, this strategy ignores the fundamental aspect of “supply and demand”. The operational model of the “War on Drugs” aims to aggressively remove the supply of drugs but does not take into consideration the reduction of the demand; this oversight leads to the prices of illicit drugs to go up; the drug market is not “price sensitive”. This tactic is proven to work on stunting the sales of other products, but illicit drugs will continually be consumed no matter how high the prices are; the most daunting long term implications of this faulty strategy is the stimulation of the production of more high quality drugs and the recruitment of more drug traffickers that increases the availability of drugs. The described currently occurring situation is called the “Balloon Effect”. (Laffiteau 2010, Kurzgesagt 2016) This approach is proven to not be effective as it only further stimulates the demand for illicit drugs. The current model, instead of having a dampening effect on the supply as intended, merely led to the unforeseen consequence of further spreading the manufacturing and distribution of drugs in small rural town areas. The attempted destruction of large-scale drug production rings by the state only paved the way to the rise of many decentralized small-scale producers that used over the counter medicines as raw materials to produce less pure but still effectively strong variants of methamphetamine. The removal of large-scale and organized manufacturers and
42
distributors untowardly pushed the small time dealers and users to resort to “self production”; the final consequence was a boom in rural laboratories and hazardous explosions in small kitchen production labs used by addicts to in an attempt to produce their own supply of methamphetamine. (Laffiteau 2010) This section will discuss the tactics that the international community had put into place in order to deal with the drug problem and will provide case studies through two (2) countries, namely Colombia and Mexico.
A.6.1 - Colombia Colombia was one of the first countries to take notice of the worsening problems of the illicit drug trade within their borders; their approach was undertaken with the extensive aid of the United States of America. In consequence, this led to the installation of the same anti-drug operational model of prohibition. This prohibitionist approach failed to achieve the supposed directive it was envisioned for: the materialization of a society with significantly reduced illegal drug trafficking activities. The Colombian drug industry is a constantly evolving and complex system that has continually been exposed to various internal and external factors that determine its growth and development. The American initiative, “Plan Colombia” as an effort to step in as attempt to quell the growing illicit drug industry in the country, was an indignant and utter failure; this led to the South American States to the development and implementation of tools, policies and instruments that focus on a regional level that is supposed to meet the specific needs and circumstances of a given area as a better alternative. (Cincu and Barbu 2014) The country of Colombia has been subjected to widespread bouts of violence; the state was rife with terrorism and insurge ncy since the end of the 1940’s. The political environment in the state was described with prevalent instability and rampant violence. The government of Colombia was faced with numerous threats of getting its power stolen by numerous organizations and insurgents; the several existing powerful drug cartels were one of these aforementioned groups that were vying for further political power within the state. Although the government was being attacked from several fronts, the governmental aid provided by the United States of America was predominantly concer ned with the “War on Drugs”. The weakened grip of the government on the country allowed the rise to dominance of prominent figurehead Pablo Escobar who was the prime leader of the Medellin Drug Cartel. Escobar had a public image of being a modern day “Robin Hood” that allowed his organization to operate with complete impunity; the judges and officials who attempt to prosecute Escobar and his drug cartel were summarily executed. (Paul et.al 2014) A specifically US-trained National Police Team eventually killed Escobar; his death led to the dissolution of the Medellin Drug Cartel. However, Escobar’s death did not mean the end of the prevalence of the drug problem in Colombia. The void left by the Medellin Cartel was just as easily filled by an equally if not even more powerful Cali Drug Cartel; the new dominant organization was able to successfully penetrate the Colombian drug market through the use of widespread corruption. The development of an advanced
43
counterintelligence network and a specialized operational model that dealt with more aggressive and widespread criminal activities were the tools employed by the Cali Drug Cartel that led to even worse political destabilization, drug distribution and perpetuated violence in the country. (Paul et.al 2014) The US-aided drug war in Colombia was a failure as it only led to the further rise of the more powerful and efficient Cali Drug Cartel in the wake of Pablo Escobar’s death; the worsening problem is an adverse effect of the ineffective approach of “Plan Colombia”, which was a policy that centered itself on the disruption on the supply of illicit drugs, the destruction of drug production and the criminalization of drug use; this approach has been previously mentioned to be widely ineffective due to the “Balloon Effect”. The approach undertaken in Colombia did not at all properly address the drug problem, this failure only led to further destabilization and violence in the country; South American leaders as an attempt to alleviate the situation called for an alternative approach to solving the drug problem that did not center on prohibition methods as compared to the current implemented global model of drug control. (Cincu and Barbu 2014)
A.6.2 - Mexico Mexico’s drug situation has always been consistently compared with Colombia as both countries are with similarities in regards to the prevalence of violence, the rampant poverty due to the widening gap of income inequality and the comparable language and culture. However, Mexico is not Colombia, therefore the a completely new discussion must be undertaken in order to properly understand how the “War on Drugs” approach has come into effect in this country. Mexico is can be considered to be a significantly lucrative economy as it the 14th largest in the world, yet despite this the country is still prominently disjointed; its government is rife with institutionalized corruption with the bureaucratic system being described to be a failure of the state. (Paul et. al 2014) The most noticeable negative trait of Mexico is that its level of violence can be likened to war-torn countries – the countries that have been subjected to civil wars, widespread insurgency and ethnic cleansings, yet Mexico has not experienced any of these conflicts; the last recorded armed conflict in the country was the Mexican Revolution which happened in the 1920’s. This uncommonly high level of violence in the country can be partially attributed to the highly prominent presence of organized crime and drug trafficking; however, the presence of these illegal entities is cannot be fully pinned as the cause of widespread violence in Mexico, as these organized crimes and drug industries have been significantly growing in other areas than Mexico but have not experienced a noticeable increase in violence. (Paul et. al 2014) The Mexican Drug War has claimed an estimated figure of 30,000-40,000 people killed – civilians, drug cartel members and federal employees; the outward presence of conflict has disrupted the lives of citizens as the level of violence could not be effectively controlled by the government, with the kidnappings and murders tied to the illegal drug industry spilling over the border of Texas in the United States. The outward violence in Mexico can be traced to three (3) main sources: (a) internal disputes between the
44
members of drug cartels, (b) cartel to cartel conflicts and (c) the government waging war against the cartels. The states focus on eliminating drug cartels started when Felipe Calderon was elected as head of the state of Mexico in 2006; federal agents were commonly dispatched to eliminate high-level drug personalities. Calderon’s implemented tactic led to cartels retaliating with unleashing multiple waves of violence as an attempt to fight for turf. Calderon claims that this retaliation from the cartels is a definite indicator of the organized drug groups being successfully rattled; his critics contest this and claimed that his haphazard approach only made the already unfavorable situation worse. (Gautheir et.al 2012) The main course of action that the Mexican government takes as a countermeasure against the powerful drug cartels is the deployment of the state military to directly engage in combat with the cartel’s forces; the state deployed an approximate figure of 10,000 police officers and 50,000 soldiers as an attempt to completely eradicate the number of cartels in Mexico, yet despite this considerable effort from the government, the level of violence continues to increase with the drug related deaths rising to 40,000 since the Calderon administration’s installation. (Gautheir et.al 2012) With the worsening situation in Mexico, one can ask on what grounds did the government came to the assessment for instigating the war on drugs. Castañeda in his article, “Mexico’s Failed Drug War” (2010) for the CATO Institute Economic Development Bulletin, outlined Calderon’s reason for declaring the all-out war against illicit drugs; the discussion can be grouped into three (3) main rationales: (1) The perceived violence in Mexico was allegedly worsening according to Calderon; he had claimed that there had been a noticeable increase in instances of drug related violence during the previous administration. This claim is difficult to verify as Mexico is a country that had established a proper congress, free press and a semblance of accountability and transparency only in the last 15 years. There had been no proper documentation of the number drug related killings in the 1980’s up to early 2000’s; therefore, there is no conceivable way in empirical evidence to verify Calderon’s claim of worsening violence in the country. (2) The prevalence of corruption, according to Calderon, is worse than ever before compared to previous years. However, the same dilemma comes about in dissecting the truth to this claim; there is neither statistical evidence nor documented case studies to fully verify that drug related corruption had gotten more predominant compared to 40-30 years ago. (3) Finally, Calderon had claimed that the Mexican Drug Cartels had been able to effectively penetrate the political arena in the local and federal level that the state is losing its control over its territories. He further detailed that Mexico is turning into a country centered on drug consumption, yet the same problem in the two previously mentioned rationales by Calderon also presents itself in this instance. The government cannot properly substantiate this claim through empirical data.
45
In the end, the government of Mexico has been forced to acknowledge the fact that these methods are not a suited solution to the drug problem; solving the problem with illegal drug trafficking is an impossible goal to attain if the approach of a full-scale war that aims to eradicate the drug supply is pursued. The government of Mexico cited US influence as one of the causes that allows the continued propagation of the illicit drug industry in Mexico; the US constantly pushes for these anti-drug policies in the country without addressing the demand of drugs that further worsens the previously mentioned “Balloon Effect”, also it is further detailed by Mexican officials that the US consistently facilitates the traffic of weapons to Mexico which further perpetuates the state of widespread violence the country is experiencing. The optimal strategy for dealing with the illicit drug problem should focus on lowering the demand for drugs through finding an adequate solution for drug addiction; addressing the actual illness of addiction will lead to fewer instances of drug addicts, and in consequence lower the demand for illicit drugs. (Castañeda 2010, Shirk 2011)
A.7.0 - On Rehabilitation as an Alternative to the “War on Drugs” Approach The approach of directly waging war with the illicit drug industry is widely ineffective; it consistently created a considerable drain the resources of various countries without showing anything significant as a result. An alternative would be to focus on full rehabilitation and reintegration of addicted individuals; it should be noted that each rehabilitation program should be handled differently according to the substance that the individual was exposed to. Drug addiction is a multi-faceted affliction that has multiple models for treatment that was previously employed with varying results of success. However, there are certain policies that have actually seen governmental implementation and have proven success more than other forms of rehabilitation treatment; an example of these aforementioned methods is the “Four Pillars of Drug Rehabilitation” and the “Harm Reduction Strategy” employed by the government of Switzerland. (Kiely and Egan 2000, Piper 2008, See 2013) This section will discuss the strategies associated with drug rehabilitation to further explore its implications to the previously mentioned “Balloon Effect” as compared to currently pervasive “War on Drugs” model commonly endorsed and undertaken by multiple states around the world, including in the context of the Philippines.
A.7.1 - Models of Rehabilitation and Treatment The problem of narcotic addiction has been widely prevalent ever since the earlier parts of human society; the mode and classification of drug rehabilitation treatments has been already outlined as early as the 1910’s. Arthur Greenfield had noted in his article, “Public Heath Reports: Treatment for Drug Addiction” (1919), that most methods used for treating addicted individuals can be grouped into two (2) major stratifications: (a) “Ambulatory Treatments” refer to the types of methods that involves the prescription of physicians to afflicted individual the addictive narcotics that patient is completely free to control in terms of possession, meaning that the
46
physician does not have an active role in the method of treatment; the prescribed patient is able to take the prescribed dosages in any manner as part of selfadministration so that in time, they may eventually be able to keep their addiction in check. (b) “Institutional Treatments” refer to the types of methods that involve the direct influence and intervention of physicians in the method of treatment. The use of narcotics, if required is directly carried out under the discretion of the attending physician; this method is commonly more stringent and comes with formalized programs that must be followed by the patient. The ambulatory method is a rarely implemented mode of treatment in comparison to its institutionalized counterparts as it carries more risk and provided less control to the attending physician; due to this nature, the authorities does not commonly encourage the utilization of these styles of treatment. However, there are instances in which these forms of treatment can have its merits considering these are methods that rely heavily on the concept of “good faith” and putting the power to the patients themselves; it can be said this manner of approaching the steps of rehabilitation is unrestrictive and puts in the emphasis of the patients being able to monitor themselves properly. (Greenfield 1919) Yet the two types of treatment methods detailed by Greenfield although still arguably relevant, is a bit removed in terms of the current methods and models of treatment that rehabilitation centers can put into use. A research paper written Nora See, “Model s and Theories of Addiction and the Rehabilitation Counselor” (2013), further outlined modern approaches to treating drug addiction; there are five (5) treatment models used as methodological frameworks that was explored: (1) The “Moral Model” is a mode of tr eatment associated in instilling the idea that addiction can be overcome with moral integrity and addiction is somewhat a product of personal shortcoming; this imbues the afflicted individual with the moral capacity to know that addiction should be dealt with inwardly. This method aims to address the character defects that a patient needs to come into terms with; yet this model is a highly defective mode of treatment as it does not see the multiple factors that come into play when we talk about chronic addiction. The focus on individual choices is the main motif of this model, which does not allow it to have sympathy for patients. This model is not considered to be therapeutic nor effective. (2) The “Temperance Model” shows some similarities to the previously discussed moral model and is commonly paralleled with it; this is the common model of treatment in early eras that began in the 1840’s and persisted into the late 19th century. The main mantra of this method is the “abstinence”; it endorses the idea that individual will is prone to being diseased and is not strong enough to overcome the affliction of addiction; the status of being dependent on addictive substances is said to be an involuntary disease once an individual is exposed. This model advocates that people should avoid all forms of addictive substances all
47
together. In comparison to the moral model, this method is surprisingly sympathetic to addicts and sees them as the afflicted; the idea of supporting and assisting an addicted individual is beneficial to this mode of treatment. A “higher power” is needed in order to properly overcome the addiction. (3) The “Disease Model” is a modern and scientifically grounded mode of treatment, it is specifically stated in this framework that addiction is a medical condition, a chronic disease that causes neurotoxic changes to the brain and the body; this model perceives addiction as a persisting condition even after the successful removal of exposure of the patient to the addictive substance, it also believes the cause of addiction stems from mental or physical affliction. Moreover, this method also subscribes to the idea that addiction is a partial product of the genetic material that makes up an individual; however it has its flaws, as it does not properly address the role of environmental factors to the development of addiction and mainly shifts its focus on the internal variables. This model is commonly utilized in therapeutic settings. (4) The “Psychological or Character Model” is a framework that addresses the external psychological factors that a patient may be exposed to the led to the initiation to drug use; it believes that genetic factors do not have an outward influence for an individual to expose themselves to addictive substances for the first time which creates a notion that everyone is susceptible to falling into addiction. This model primarily concerns itself with the psychological motivation and stresses that a person can be exposed to, which may lead to the emergence of drug dependence. The mode of treatments used for this model is predominantly centered on psychological and behavioral therapy that aims to address the patient’s specific stressors and problems in hopes that this will lead to positive behavioral, interpersonal and psychological changes to the patient. (5) The “Social Education Model” is a model that combines elements from both the disease and psychological models; it believes that addiction is a product of both inherited and learned behaviors. However, environmental factors are given a higher ladder of influence in the development of addiction. Familial and community relationships that provide consistent support to the patient are beneficial components to controlling addiction and facilitating effective rehabilitation. Overall, the worldwide problem with drug addiction has warranted the use of multiple methods with differing perceptions on how this problem should be treated; these modes of treatment came from different eras that have varying levels of understanding on the discussion of drug addiction. More advancements in the field of drug psychology and rehabilitation are being made in the passage of time that allow us to further understand how we as a society should tackle the presented dilemma.
48
A.7.2 – The Four Pillars of Drug Addiction and Harm Reduction Strategy There is a concrete policy, a better alternative to the “War on Drugs”, that is currently being implemented in various countries around the world with actual results; “The Four Pillars of Rehabilitation refers to the four (4) aspects of drug control policy, namely: (1) Prevention, (2) Treatment, (3) Policing and (4) Harm Reduction; out of the four components, “harm reduction” is the most beneficial along with treatment for chronically addicted individuals as it details the specific strategy that facilitates the patient’s rehabilitation. (Kiely and Egan 2000, Piper 2008)
The Four Pillars program to addressing the problem to drug addiction and its four main components is described by Bill Piper in his printed report, “ A Four Pillars Approach to Methamphetamine: Policies for Effective Drug Prevention, Treatment, Policing and Harm Reduction” (2008). The explanation for the first three (3) components to the Four Pillars approach is detailed as follows: (1) Prevention programs are beneficially better as it can completely nip the problem of addiction in the bud if properly handled; the methods used for preventing addiction should primarily be aimed at the youth. Scare tactics and zero-tolerance policies are proven to be ineffective and in most cases actually impede the progress of the entire program; after school programs are one of the most effective tools to encourage the youth to not take drugs in middle class neighborhoods. Furthermore, the best prevention strategy should be headed with the direct intervention of the government through providing adequate educational opportunities, employment and general economic growth, in essence directly addressing the instances of poverty. (2) The advent of treatment centers and the widespread availability of treatment services is the type of answer to the drug problem that should be adequately funded by state resources, as it proven to be a cheaper and more effective policy to quell the problem; it is a certainty putting drug users in jail effectively cost more in comparison to investing in the implementation of a proper treatment method. The government should enact proper policies that encourage addicted people to seek out treatment and efforts to create comprehensive treatment regimen will cost significantly less than attempting to cut the supply of drugs by instead taking steps to lower the demand. Afflicted individuals should not be treated as criminals as it will only prevent them from actively seeking out proper rehabilitation for their problem; further adding, the incarceration of drug users will only lead to long term problems and will not actually lead to anything resembling a solution. Resigning addicts to prison sentences will only serve as a catalyst to the destruction of families, orphaned children and the overall deterioration of the overall health of the community. (3) Law enforcement agencies still have a role in the solution, instead of focusing on incarcerating and directly dealing with addicts, the police should do what they were intended to do: the disruption of the operation of drug syndicates, arresting
49
violent criminals and generally keeping the neighborhoods safe; the war that the police should be focused on are not the addicts themselves but instead should be focused on actual dangerous criminal activity. The law should prioritize the elimination of large drug syndicates that are operating in the country and resign the rehabilitation program of low to medium level drug offenders to the government. Furthermore, law enforcers should be provided with adequate training when confronting offending individuals as to not directly disrupt the community. E.g. non-violent confrontation. The main centerpiece of this proposed policy in dealing with the drug problem is the “Harm Reduction Strategy”; this is a method that primarily aims to reduce the damage that drug addiction inflicts upon its dependents. This mode of treatment still allows the patient to continue participating in drug use, however, the key concept of harm reduction is that steps are taken to continually reduce the effects of addiction while still partaking in the drug. The most significant goal of this strategy is to encourage safer patterns of drug use; this is use continued in progressively smaller dosages until the patient is effectively rehabilitated and is completely freed from drug dependence. (Kiely and Egan 2000) Clements and colleagues (1996, p. 42) defines the main concept of harm reduction in his book “Taking Drugs Seriously III, a Manual of Harm Minimizing Education on Drugs”, through this quotation; “An approach to education which aims to reduce the harm from drug use to the lowest level possible. By providing accurate information about drug use and it’s risks; developing the skills of less dangerous drug use; developing coping and helping skills; opposing discrimination against drug users. It encourages existing and would-be drug users to discover less dangerous ways of using and promotes helping and coping skills. ” (as cited in Kiely and Egan 2000, p.9)
A specific case study that can be cited as success of the Harm Reduction Strategy is the country of Switzerland in 1980’s; at the time, the countries strategy of dealing with the drug problem only consisted with three (3) of the four pillars of drug addiction. Furthermore the number of heroin addicts in the country saw a significant increase and numbered in the tens and thousands; this led to the existence of tolerated “needle parks” in various cities around the country wherein users engage in open use of heroin in public view. Addicts commonly slept in parks, publicly dealt drugs, lived in slum-like conditions and most of these people were of poor health; deaths from heroin overdose were a common occurrence. Eventually due to the growing public backlash, the law enforcement agencies were forced to step in to address the drug problem. (Koeppel n.d.) It was then that the Swiss government employed a relatively new strategy in dealing with their public health crisis, this was Harm Reduction; the state opened completely sponsored “heroin-maintenance centers” where addicted individuals will be provided adequate treatment and stabilization. It is in these maintenance centers that patients get access to free high quality heroin, clean needles, safe injection rooms, a generally safe and livable environment under direct supervision of medical professionals; among these services, social workers directly provide them aid regarding their problems of proper
50
housing and other problems that these patients are unable to deal with on their own capacity. The end result of the implemented harm reduction strategy was a sharp decline of drug related crimes and overdose deaths; further adding, a majority of the patients were able to secure a living while participating in the treatment as their finances were no longer constrained by sustaining their addiction as the drugs were already provided to them for free. (Kurzgesagt 2016) However, it should be noted that the Harm Reduction Strategy is not a way to completely eliminate an individual’s dependence on addictive substances; it is a means to secure the stability and safety of a patient all the while being effectively reintegrated as a working member of society; it is a manner of reducing the overall negative effects of addiction to an individual. Addiction can be a life-long affliction that affects the brain and the body and can only be properly treated through rehabilitation. The hardline approach of the “War on Drugs” is only a drain on government resources that lead to the perpetuation of abuses and general human misery; harm reduction, on the other hand is cheaper and has proven to be effective in reintegrating afflicted individuals as proper members of society without the cost on trampling on the human rights of citizens. (Koeppel n.d., Kurzgesagt 2016)
B. Theoretical Framework
The research for this study can be divided into two major classifications in terms of the topics discussed in the review of related literature: (a) discussions that pertain to drug addiction and (b) discussions that pertain to the circumstances and concepts regarding the Philippines and cross referential case studies in an international context in order to properly draw parallels.
51
This study is guided by three (3) theories: (1) The Bad-Habit Theory by Dr . Donald W. Goodwin, as a guiding principle to define and explain the factors at play regarding substance abuse. (2) Marxism-Leninism by Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels and Vladimir Lenin, as a guiding principle to examine the situation of the Philippines in the context of poverty, the current established economic system, the government and the implementation of policies like Oplan Tokhang. (3) Cult of Personality coined by Nikita Khrushchev to explain the outward public support of the Duterte administration and Oplan Tokhang garners from the general public despite its perpetuation of extrajudicial killings amongst the poor sectors of Philippine society.
B.1.0 - Dr. Donald W. Goodwin: The Bad-Habit Theory The “Bad - Habit Theory” is a theory regarding the emergence of drug addiction within individuals. It outlines the concept that drug addiction is a product of inherited factors and learned factors that interact with one another to make up an individual’s predisposition to drug abuse; genetic factors (inherited) and outside environmental factors (learned) are two sides that make up the entire likeliness to falling to drug dependence at some point of their lives. This theory also proposes the role of an “agent”, a “host” and the environment in which all three (3) of these factors interact with one another. (1) The agent refers to the addictive substance itself, whether it is alcohol, illegal drugs or other forms of addictive substances, (2) the host is the individual who has carries a certain genetic make-up that may or may not contribute to the development of addiction once exposed to the “agent” and (3) the environment in which can also be a contributing factor through determining the availability of agents and the exposure to other external factors that can drive a person to addiction.
B.2.0 - Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels and Vladimir Lenin: Marxism-Leninism Marxism-Leninism is a socio-political theory that outlines the existence of social classes and the class struggle that comes between the lower and higher classes present in society; it perceives history as a record of the aforementioned struggles that persist in society and believes that this conflict will continue to exist as long as the concept of classes remains prevalent. The relationship between economical power and the possession of the means of production is heavily discussed in Marxism-Leninism. Marxism outlines the root-cause of social inequality; poverty and general human misery can be attributed to the implementation of the imperialistic capitalist system in which farmers, workers and the petite-bourgeoisie is continually being exploited by the ruling class for further affluence. The bourgeoisie gains from the capitalist system through
52
monopolized ownership of the machinery for production, all the while enlisting the laborforce of workers in exchange for inadequate compensation. The capitalists continue to pocket most of the profit despite not having actual participation in the production while the workers is only given meager compensation for their hard work. Farmers also experience oppression from the system through the landlords that own vast volumes of land while employing farmers in the same unequal dynamic. Leninism stresses the importance of political organization within these lower classes (farmers, workers and the petite-bourgeoisie) to effectively overcome the established system. Marxism-Leninism also describes the role of the government or the state in the continued oppression of the masses; Lenin specifically discussed that the state in a capitalist system exists to protect the higher classes to preserve the status quo. Peasants and workers are commonly abused and marginalized by a capitalist society at large due to their lack of economic power; this economical capacity also determines the state’s bias of providing its services toward a certain class while effectively ignoring the other.
B.3.0 – Nikita Khrushchev: Cult of Personality The “Cult of Personality” outlines the resulting circumstance when the state, the mass media and other sources continually provide propaganda that paints a certain figure in an extremely charismatic light; these manufactured forms of propaganda portray the leader as possessing traits that are especially uncommon and admirable which consequently leads to the masses admiring the figure. This leads to certain leaders invested with this cult of personality being able to put forth policies and lead with impunity, as public support is basically a certainty no matter what the true nature of the regime actually is and political dissent is seen as undesirable or can even be considered as treason against the state. The public further lionizes the leader as more propaganda is consumed; this leads to an idealized version of the said figurehead, which solidifies the administration’s grip on their power.
VIII.) Methodology The focus of this thesis was to properly assess Oplan Tokhang as an anti-drug policy, the main question being whether or not it is an effective answer to the illicit drug problem in the Philippines; within this main line of inquiry the topic of addiction itself, poverty and rehabilitation was discussed in order to further establish a comprehension to the factors at play in this discourse. It has already been reiterated in the earlier sections of this thesis, see “Environmental and Societal Predisposition” (p. 12-15) and “Correlation of Poverty and Addiction” (p. 23-25), that the general social atmosphere of abject poverty and hopelessness is a major contributing factor to motivating addiction; this is especially true in the Philippines where a significant number of the population is living below the poverty line. The poor sectors of Philippine society are an integral component in this study as they are the primary victims of the administration under Oplan Tokhang. In order to properly come to an understanding to the mode of living these poverty-stricken citizens experience
53
and how the state perceives them as people, numbers, literature and graphs are not adequate forms of evidence, as it is not completely suited to effectively paint their situation. The method of choice in order to achieve this to conduct an ”integration” amongst them or living and talking with these people on a first hand basis; the utilization of this method yields to the acquisition of primary qualitative data. This approach can be considered an ethnographical method, as it is deals in the observation of people in their natural environment. This ethnographic approach is most effective in being able to establish an understanding with these marginalized sectors; we need to be able to break the ivory tower setting that commonly permeates in second-hand date gathering. The basic mass integration itself involved a “homeless camp” in Mendiola, Manila with its residents originally coming from the Pasig Floodway; these families were eventually driven away by the local government and have been left with adequate choices and were forced to look for an alternative place to live. These people chose to establish their camp in Mendiola in hopes that the president might hear their problems and actually take measures to address their situation. Unfortunately, they either have not been heard or being deliberately ignored by the government after a month of camping out in the streets. The disparage of the poor and the apparent apathetic nature of the middle classes to their plights also needs an assessment; it was previously established in the previous sections of this thesis, “Oplan Tokhang Compiled Surveys, Satisfaction Ratings and Public Perception” (p.37-39) that there is a general notion of public support for the war on drugs despite the documented extrajudicial killings mostly perpetuated on the poor at the hands of police. The fact of the pervasive general apathy towards the poor is already a confirmed circumstance in the literature reviews, it was decided that first hand data is needed as supplementary information for further reiteration. This data was collected through the survey method that inquired about the general perception, whether negative or positive, of the respondent on Oplan Tokhang and its consequences.
IX.) Data Analysis A.1.0 - Basic Mass Integration The ethnographic study or more suitably known as a ”basic mass integration” was conducted in the 1st of December and ran for a total of twelve (12) hours, it was set in the homeless camp located in Mendiola Manila. Surrounded by the bustle and hustle of the city of Manila and embraced by makeshift barricades, the camp was home to 50-70 people, these were mostly complete sets of families: i.e. mother, father and children. These families were displaced from their original place of residence in the Floodway of Pasig City by the local government headed by city mayor Robert Eusebio due to the place being an alleged “danger zone” which is a claim contested by the people who live there; the residents of the camp are families that live in poverty and have no sustainable source of income. They had been staying in Mendiola since the 25th of November and in the time of writing have been camping out for a month and six (6) days.
54
The residents are camping out in hopes that Rodrigo Duterte might come to hear out their plights and address their housing; many of the residents claim that the floodway was their place of residence for over thirty (30) years until their forced evacuation. Their main plight is the restoration of their place of residence or the alternative of bestowing upon them an adequate relocation site that also provided a consistent source of income. The main risk of camping out in the streets is that disease is starting to spread amongst it residence; this is a major concern for many of the families that reside in Mendiola, especially if they do not have the sufficient funds to acquire medicine. Hunger is also a major issue due to their limited resources but they manage to “scrape by” due to the help of visitors and mass organizations. Many believe that the administration has abandoned them and their pleas. Among the residents, a personal correspondence was set up with Joceline Pinerite, 48 years old, who was living with her husband ailing with arthritis and two children, a 17year-old boy and a 15-year-old girl. She recounted when police harassed her teenage son during the violent demolition of their place of residence; she had said that her son was merely checking the development of the situation and was using a cellphone to record the incident. An officer spotted him recording and asked him to surrender the cellphone; the boy refused and the officer immediately attempted to apprehend him. Joceline saw this unfolding and immediately came to aid her son along with her husband who was pleading the officer to “not hurt him” as he his only a kid. The young daughter also interjected which led to the officer pulling her hair. This encounter resulted in the imprisonment of their entire family for a period of eight (8) days. Joceline cited this event as a gross disrespect of the police to her entire family just because of their status as “poor”; she admits that she once believed in the words of Rodrigo Duterte during his campaign run but now she’s starting to lose her belief in the administration as she and her fellow displaced residents were being ignored. She also explained that it should be a leader’s primary job to listen to the plights of the masses, especially the marginalized classes in society. It’s as if the system is actively trying to prevent people like her from attaining a tolerable lifestyle; Joceline also lambasts the implementation of the “K -12” educational program as it only meant more years for her children in school and consequently more financial burden. In the topic of the War on Drugs, she expresses her concern that the government only seems to target the poor; it is not proper that suspects are being killed without a proper trial or proper evidence. She had recalled an incident of police killing that occurred on the night of November 31st that involved a man and a woman, with the woman being heavily pregnant. The police were allegedly looking for the man since the previous week, as he was involved in illicit drugs, they were eventually found dead. Overall, Joceline only wishes that she and her family was treated with respect and given concrete opportunities to lift themselves from their status of abject poverty. In a country that inherently makes the poor “invisible”, it’s extremely difficult to find ways to make it better for your family. With the rampant exploitation of workers through
55
contractualization and minimal openings for people with low educational attainment, the established system plays its favorites. She wishes for her children a future wherein they do not have to experience the current financial hardship they are experiencing; she wants to believe that she can fight for a proper source of income and a better education for her children. It gives her a bittersweet feeling that she and her family might be spending the Christmas season homeless and cold.
A.1.1 - Photo Documentation, Homeless Camp in Mendiola
Pic. 1 – this depicts one of the tents that the residents reside in along with their call of proper housing. Pic. 2 – this is in the middle of the camp with another banner calling for the return of their place of residence. Also the “Crisis-mas Tree” an installation created by UGATLahi Artist Collective can be seen. Pic. 3 – this is taken in closer to the entrance; tents perched in on the streets with a bustling city in the background.
56
Pic. 4 – this is the entrance to the entire homeless camp with two residents standing guard. Two paintings also donated by UGATLahi Artist Collective depicting the calls of workers and poverty stricken urban residents are displayed.
B.1.0 - Survey Background The primary data collected for this study through a survey regarding public perception about Oplan Tokhang is merely supplementary information to the previously established facts in the literature review as confirmation. A survey was conducted from October 25, 2017 to November 1, 2017 as a part of this study to collect first hand data with purpose of gauging the respondents’ perception of the actions taken in by the police in Duterte’s War on Drugs through quantitative data. It is important to note that Oplan Tokhang by this time was already replaced by anti-drug operations under the jurisdiction of PDEA. The survey garnered 70 respondents and utilized the method of “convenient sampling”. The inquiry was primarily conducted on the Internet through forums such as “Pinoy Exchange” and social media outlets such as “Facebook”. The survey contained five (5) questions answerable by yes or no; the questions listed on the survey are as follows: (1) Do you support the Duterte Administration’s War on Dr ugs? (2) Do you believe that the deaths drug suspects during police operations are justified? (3) Do you believe that drug addiction is a question of moral weakness? (4) Do you believe the claims the police that drug suspects fired at them with firearms during their encounters? (5) Do you believe that Oplan Tokhang was an effective answer to the Drug Problem in the Philippines? The survey also asked the respondents to indicate their gender and age in order to establish stratifications with the results; the participants were also asked to “self rate” their financial standing as either part of the (a) “lower class”, (b) “middle class” and (c) “upper class”.
A.1.1 - About the Respondents The survey exclusively featured Filipinos as a sample. Of the 70 respondents, 58 (83%) are male and 12 (17%) are female. The age brackets of respondents are as follows: * * * * *
People in their early to late 30’s; 38 respondents (54%) People in their early to late 20’s; 14 respondents (20 %) People in their early to late 40’s: 11 respondents (16%) People older than 50: 5 respondents (7%) People younger than 20: 2 respondents (3%)
57
In the self-rated classes, wherein the respondents were asked to classify themselves based on their financial standing, most of the respondents with 62 individuals (88%) classified themselves as “middle class”, 6 individuals (9%) as “upper class” and 2 individuals (3%) as “lower class”.
B.2.0 - Survey Results The results will be compiled for each question and will be sorted by gender; age group and self rated financial standing to further draw conclusions about the results in regards to stratification. 1.) Do you support the Duterte Administration’s War on Drugs?
(a) Respondents that answered “YES” * * * *
(63/70) Total respondents (90%) By Gender – (56) Males and (7) Females By Age Group – 30’s (38), 20’s (11), 40’s (11), Older than 50 (2), Younger than 20 (1) By Financial Standing – (5) Upper Class, (58) Middle Class
(b) Respondents that answered “NO” * * * *
(7/70) Total respondents (10%) By Gender – (2) Males and (5) Females By Age Group – 20’s (3), Older than 50 (3), Younger than 20 (1) By Financial Standing – (1) Upper Class, (4) Middle Class, (2) Lower Class.
2.) Do you believe that the deaths drug suspects during police operations are justified?
(a) Respondents that answered “YES” * * * *
(60/70) Total respondents (86%) By Gender – (55) Males and (5) Females By Age Group – 30’s (38), 20’s (9), 40’s (10), Older than 50 (2), Younger than 20 (1) By Financial Standing – (5) Upper Class, (58) Middle Class
(b) Respondents that answered “NO” * * * *
(10/70) Total respondents (14%) By Gender – (3) Males and (7) Females, By Age Group – 20’s (5), 40’s (1), Older than 50 (3), Younger th an 20 (1) By Financial Standing – (1) Upper Class, (7) Middle Class, (2) Lower Class.
3.) Do you believe drug addiction is a question of moral weakness?
58
(a) Respondents that answered “YES” * * * *
(65/70) Total respondents (93%) By Gender – (57) Males and (8) Females By Age Group – 30’s (38), 20’s (11), 40’s (10), Older than 50 (5), Younger than 20 (1) By Financial Standing – (5) Upper Class, (58) Middle Class
(b) Respondents that answered “NO” * * * *
(5/70) Total respondents (7%) By Gender – (1) Male and (4) Females, By Age Group – 20’s (3), 40’s (1), Younger than 20 (1) By Financial Standing – (1) Upper Class, (2) Middle Class, (2) Lower Class.
4.) Do you believe the claims the police that drug suspects fired at them with firearms during their encounters?
(a) Respondents that answered “YES” * * * *
(52/70) Total respondents (74%) By Gender – (48) males and (4) females By Age Group – 30’s (34), 20’s (7), 40’s (8), Older than 50 (2), Younger than 20 (1) By Financial Standing – (3) Upper Class, (49) Middle Class
(b) Respondents that answered “NO” * * * *
(18/70) Total respondents (26%) By Gender – (10) Males and (8) Females By Age Group – 30’s (4), 20’s (7), 40’s (3), Older than 50 (3), Younger than 20 (1) By Financial Standing – (3) Upper Class, (13) Middle Class, (2) Lower Class
5.) Do you believe that Oplan Tokhang was an effective answer to the Drug Problem in the Philippines?
(c) Respondents that answered “YES” * * * *
(60/70) Total respondents (86%) By Gender – (54) Males and (6) Females By Age Group – 30’s (36), 20’s (11), 40’s (11), Older than 50 (1), Younger than 20 (1) By Financial Standing – (4) Upper Class, (56) Middle Class
59
(d) Respondents that answered “NO” * * * *
(10/70) Total respondents (14%) By Gender – (4) Males and (6) Females By Age Group – 30’s (2) 20’s (3), Older than 50 (4), Younger than 20 (1) By Financial Standing – (2) Upper Class, (6) Middle Class, (2) Lower Class.
C. - Analysis The results of the survey in an admittedly limited sample size of seventy (70) respondents, is still a somewhat of a valid demonstration of the apparent public support that the Duterte administration garners in their anti-drug campaigns despite the alarming cases of extrajudicial killings. This support is a daunting sign of many Filipinos turning a blind eye to the ill effects of Duterte’s War on Drugs and the failure of the war on drugs model in general. However it is important to note in the survey results that there are two (2) respondents that had rated themselves as “lower class” and consistently answered “no” to the questions on this survey. The acquired results from the survey mirrors the data previously outlined in the literature review; these numbers further establish the perceived apathy for the poor. Many among the poor sectors, according to the gathered data, commonly display a distinct aversion to the current policies, especially the policy of Oplan Tokhang being put forth by the administration; this outward aversion can be tagged as a consequence of the recent actions taken by the state that further alienated the urban poor sectors. There is an apparent disconnect between the poor and higher classes in terms of general perception on the drug war. The middle to upper classes sees Oplan Tokhang as a way to keep the neighborhood clean and safe from drug offenders, while the lower class have a perspective of fear and oppression from the state due to the threat of extrajudicial killings. The integration within the homeless camp in Mendiola provided insight into a direct example of the state pandering to the higher classes in society; these people hold legitimate concerns that need to be addressed by the government yet are seemingly ignored. These people are almost not considered to be actual people, as they do not receive proper care and respect by the government through addressing the root of their problems.
X.) Conclusion The question remains whether or not Oplan Tokhang can be considered an effective answer to the drug problem in the Philippines; this policy by the Duterte administration put to death thousands of people due to alleged addiction and alleged affiliations to the illicit drug trade. It has already been proven that incarceration for drug offenses are catalysts for the destruction of an afflicted individual’s lifestyle and overall path in life; if prison sentences for non-violent drug offenders are proven to be unacceptable solutions,
60
what more could we take from actually resorting to murdering addicts as part of a social cleansing? Oplan Tokhang does not take into consideration the factors that can make a person more susceptible to addiction and treats the brain sickness as some sort of a sin, a criminal offense deserving of violent death; it does not acknowledge the influence of widespread poverty in the Philippines as a cause for addiction. The government should first take the necessary steps to address the issues rooted with the system that further worsens the situation of income inequality in the country; the advent of national industrialization and genuine agrarian reform must take priority to lift the economical disparage. Addressing the problems with poverty is an effective prevention method to alleviate the drug problem; the government should be championing economical reforms that benefit the majority, not enact polices that further widen the gap between the rich and the poor. As a final assessment, Oplan Tokhang as a measure to counter the growing drug problem in the Philippines is a complete and utter failure. This grave mistake stemmed from the lack of understanding of the drug problem’s complexity and the narrow-minded perception of the government to the variables that are involved with drug addiction . It is a completely haphazard method that led to the deaths of thousands of predominantly poor citizens without showing actual results in alleviating the dilemma. It has already been proven that the “War on Drugs” model patented by Richard Nixon of the United States in 1971 does not work and will never work; it is an impossibility to win a war on eradicating drug supply as illicit drugs will always be manufactured at a higher quality and faster rate. Duterte’s version of this drug war is not only less effective but more prone to human rights violations and generally spreading human misery all over the country. Drug addicts should never be treated as criminals unless they participate in violent acts; these individuals should instead be perceived as patients in need of proper medical treatment; effective rehabilitation methods always be put in the forefront of any policy that concerns the problem with illicit drugs. Addiction is a brain illness that arises from genetic and environmental factors and should be treated as such; capital punishment should never be an option to address this dilemma, even more so the type of death that is administered through illegal means.
XI.) Visual Communication Recommendation The proposed output for this research is the use of a comic/visual novel that depicts the narrative of the poor as marginalized sectors of Philippine society; the primary supporters of Oplan Tokhang and the Duterte administration are the uninformed and apathetic members of the middle to upper classes, which makes a visual interpretation more effective. The intended goal is to elicit empathy and comprehension from the normally apathetic perception of the general public to the poor through sympathetic characterization in a visual narrative; the use of a realistic and grounded story through visual panels is an optimal teaching tool that further educates the masses about the truths behind drug addiction, the drug war and the general state of the Philippines at large.
61
Bibliography/Cited Works 1.
Agoncillo, J. “Witnesses in Pasig Teen’s Slay Heard Gunman Say: It’s Not Him” Philippine Daily Inquirer, 2016, December 21. Online News Article. Retrieved from: “http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/855216/wi tnesses-in-pasig-teens-slay-heard gunman-say-its-not-him”
2.
Asia Development Bank (ADB) “Poverty in the Philippines: Causes, Contraints, and Opportunities” . Mandaluyong City, Philippines, 2011. Print.
3.
Ateneo Human Rights Center (AHRC) “Summary and Extrajudicial Killings in the Philippines, a Submission to the United Nations Human Rights Council for the Universal Periodic Review of the Philippines (3rd Cycle, 27 th Session, 2017)” Rockwell Center, Makati City, Philippines, 2017. Report. PDF File.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Amnesty International (AI) “ If You Are Poor You Are Killed: Extrajudicial Executions in the Philippines, War on Drugs” Peter Benenson House, 1 Easton Street, London, United Kingdom, 2017. Print. Andrade, J. “6 out 10 Filipinos Believe Some Drug Suspects Were Killed By Cops After Surrendering” Philippine Daily Inquirer, 2017, September 30. Online News Article. Retrieved from: “http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/934417/ph ilippine-news-updates-oplan-tokhangejk-war-on-drugs-sws- survey” Ayano, G. “Dopamine: Receptors, Functions, Synthesis, Pathways, Locations and Mental Disorders: Review of Literatures” Amaneul Specialized Mental Hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 20I6. Research Article. PDF File. Ballaran, J. “SWS: Most Filipinos Believe Not All Summoned for Oplan Tokhang are Addicts, Pushers” Philippine Daily Inquirer, 2017, October 28. Online News Article.
Retrieved from: “http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/941177/sw s-most-filipinos-believe-not-all summoned-for-oplan-tokhang-areaddicts-pushers-sws-survey-illegaldrugs-oplan-tokhang” 8.
Ballaran, J. “War on Drugs: The Unheard Stories, Cops Gun Down Suspects Begging For Their Lives, First of A Series” ABS-CBN News Agency, 2016. Online News Article. Retrieved from: “http://news.abs-cbn.com/waron-drugs/part1”
9.
Baume, P. “A Dissident Liberal: The Polictical Writings of Peter Baume, Madness and Hypocrisy” Australian National University Press (ANU Press), Australia, 2000. Print.
10. Bettinardi-Angres K. and Angres D. “Understanding the Disease of Addiction” Journal of Nursing Regulation, 2010. PDF File. 11. Bevins, V. “Duterte’s Drug War is Horrifically Violent. So Why Do Many Young, Liberal Filipinos Support It?” The Washington Post, 2017, April 18. Online News Article. Retrieved from: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/ asia_pacific/dutertes-drug-war-ishorrifically-violent-so-why-do-many young-liberal-filipinos-supportit/2017/04/16/9d589198-1ef1-11e7be2a3a1fb24d4671_story.html?utm_term=.e e5e256bd128
12. Bloomberg. “ Broad Support for Duterte Drug War in the Philippines, Pew Finds” 2017, September 22. Online News Article. Retrieved from: “https://ph.news.yahoo.com/broad support-duterte-drug-war-philippines pew-finds-063300796.html” 13. Castañeda, J. “Mexico’s Failed Drug War, CATO Institute Economic Bulletin, Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity No. 13” CATO Institute,
62
Massachusetts, Washington DC, United States of America, 2010. Research Article. PDF File. 14. Chambers, R. “ Poverty in Focus: What is Povery? Concepts and Measures” United Nations Development Program, International Poverty Center, Brazil, 2006. Print. 15. Copenhagen, M. “The Social Impact of Drug Abuse” United Nations International Drug Control Programme, World Summit for Social Development, 1995. Presentation. PDF File. 16. Corrigan, D. “Physical Impact of Drugs, Misuse and Abuse” Communique: An Garda Síochána Management Journal, 1995. Research Article. PDF File. 17. Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) “Maikling Kurso sa Lipunan at Rebolusyong Pilipino, Ikatlong Edisyon (MKLRP)” (Short Course on Society and Philippine Revolution. 3rd Edition), National Commission on Education – Primary School of the Communist Party, 2005. Print. 18. Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) “Batayang Kursong Partido (BKP)” (Basic Party Course), National Commission on Education – Primary School of the Communist Party, 2010. Print. 19. Cullen, B. “Community and Drugs: A Discussion on the Contexts of Community Drug Problems in Ireland, 1976 – 2001” Addiction Research Center, Trinity College, Ireland, United Kingdom, 2003. Research Article. PDF File. 20. Dangerous Drugs Board (DDB) “National Anti-Drug Plan of Action 2015-2020” National Government Center, Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines, 2015. Report. PDF File.
21. Dick D. and Agrawal A. “The Genetics of Alcohol and Other Drug Dependence” Alcohol, Research and Health. Vol. 31, No. 2, 2008. Research
Article. PDF File. 22. Epps C. and Wright L.“The Genetic Basis of Addiction” Department of Clinical and Diagnostic Sciences, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, United States of America, 2011. Print. 23. Fonbuena, C. “Understanding Public Support for Duterte’s Drug War” Rappler, 2017 April 6. Online News Article. Retrieved from: “https://www.rappler.com/thought leaders/166092-philippines-drugs-war pulse-sws-public- perception” 24. Gauthier, J. et.al “The War on Mexican Cartels: Options for US and Mexican Policy- Makers” Institute of Politics National Security Policy Group, Harvard University, United States of America, 2012. Research Report. PDF File. 25. Greenfield, A. “Treatment of Drug Addiction” Public Health Reports (1896-1970), Vol. 34, No. 29, Sage Publications Inc., 1919. Print 26. Gonzales, Y. “: “Police Paid to Kill Drug Suspects, Plant Evidence – Reuters Report” Philippine Daily Inquirer, 2017, April 19. Online News Article. Retrieved from: “http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/890257/po lice-paid-to-kill-drug-suspects-plantevidence-reuters-report” 27. Haase, T. and Pratschke, J. “Risk and Protection Factors for Substance Use Among Young People: A Comparative Study of Early School Leavers and School Attending Students” National Advisory Committee on Drugs (NACD), Dublin Stationary Office, Ireland, United Kingdom, 2010. Print. 28. Hitchens, K . “Addiction is a Family Problem: The Process of Addiction for Families”, 2011. Research Article. PDF File. 29. Horn, G. “Brain Science, Addiction and Drugs: An Academy of Medical Sciences Group Report” Academy of
63
Medical Sciences, United Kingdom, 2008. Research Report. PDF File. 30. Hough, M. and Natarajan M. “Introduction: Illegal Drug Markets, Research and Policy” Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 11, South Bank University, London, United Kingdom, 2000. Print. 31. Human Rights Watch (HRW) “License To Kill: Philippine Police Killings in Duterte’s War on Drugs” United States of America, 2017. Print. 32. Jêdrzejczak, M. “Family and Enviromental Factors of Drug Addiction Among Young Recruits” Military Medicine, 2005. Research Article. PDF File. 33. Jones, L. and Sumnall H. “Understanding the Relation Between Poverty and Alcohol Misuse ” Center for Public Health, Liverpool John Moores University, England, United Kingdom, 2016. Print.
Education” Department of Applied Social Studies, National University of Ireland, Cork, United Kingdom, 2000. Print. 38. Koeppel, H. M.D. “The Four Pillar Drug Policy in Switzerland – 20 Years Later” Scientific Advisory Board of EURAD, Swiss Physicians Against Drugs, Baden, Switzerland, n.d. Research Report. PDF File. 39. Kurzgesagt. “Why the War on Drugs is a Huge Failure” 2016, March 1. Educational Video File. Retrieved from: “https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJ UXLqNHCaI”
40. Laffiteau, C. “The Balloon Effect: The Failure of Supply Side Strategies in the War on Drugs” European Consortium for Political Research, Dublin, Ireland, United Kingdom, 2010. Research Report. PDF File. 41. Lenin, V. “State and Revolution” Russian Provisional Government, Soviet Union, 1917. Print.
34. KARAPATAN, Alliance for the
Advancement of People’s Rights . “ Alternative Report on the Philippines, Submitted to the Office of High Commissioner on Human Rights, For the 27 th Session of the Universal Periodic Review in the United Nations Human Rights Council in May 2017, Third Cycle of UPR on the Philippines” Quezon City, Philippines, 2017. Report. PDF File. 35. Keshav, A. et.al “Addiction – Its Impact on Urban Poor Households” Faculty of Social Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India, 2015. Report. PDF File. 36. Khrushchev, N. “The Secret Speech – On the Cult of Personality, 1956” Communist Party of the Soviet Union, 20th Party Congress, Modern History Sourcebook, 1956. Translated Speech Transcript. PDF File. 37. Kiely E. and Egan E. “Harm Reduction – An Information and Resource Booklet for Agencies Engaged in Drug
42. Lu, X. et.al “Personality Cults in Modern Politics: Cases from Russia to China” Center for Global Politics, CGP Working Paper Series, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany, 2014. Research Paper. PDF File 43. Marx, K. and Engels F. “The Capital – A Critique on Political Economy” Vol. 1, Book One: the Process of Production of Capital, First English Edition, Progress Publishers, Moscow, Russia, 1887. Print. 44. Marx, K. “The Communist Manifesto” United Kingdom, 1848. Print. 45. Mateo, J. “Callamard: Kian’s Death Turning Point in Duterte’s Drug War” The Philippine Star, 2017, September 20. Online News Article. Retrieved from: “http://www.philstar.com/headlines/201 7/09/20/1740917/callamard-kiansdeath-turning-point-dutertes-drug-war” 46. Mc Govern, J. “The Human Rights
64
Consequences of the War on Drugs in the Phillippines” Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission Hearing, Rayburn House Office Building, United States of America, 2017. Speech Transcript. PDF File. 47. Mindanews. “ Keyboard Army Amplifying Impression of Support for Duterte’s Drug War – Report” Mindanao News, 2017, November 25. Online News Article. Retrieved from: “http://www.mindanews.com/top stories/2017/11/keyboard-armyamplifying-impression-of-support-fordutertes-drug-war-report/” 48. Morales, N. et.al. “ Police Say Kian Was Killed Before Drug Links Known” ABS-CBN News Agency, 2017, August 24. Online News Article. Retrieved from: “http://news.abscbn.com/news/08/24/17/police-saykian-was-killed-before-drug-linksknown” 49. Muller, J. “Capitalism and Inequality, What the Right and Left Get Wrong” Catholic University of America, United States of America, 2013. Article. PDF File. 50. National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) “Research Monograph Series: Theories on Drug Abuse, Selected Contemporary Perspectives” US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Health Administration, Rockville, Maryland, United States of America, 1980. Print.
Fighting Drugs, Fifth of A Series” ABS-CBN News Agency, 2016. Online News Article. Retrieved from: “http://news.abs-cbn.com/war-ondrugs/part5” 54. Niazi, M. et.al. “ Is Poverty To Be Blamed For Drug Abuse? A Case Study of Pakistan” International Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, Vol. 9, No. 10, 2009. Research Article. PDF File 55. O’ Higgins, K. “ Review of Related Literature and Policy on the Links Between Poverty and Drug Abuse” The Economic and Social Research Institute, Dublin, Ireland, United Kingdom, 1998. Research Paper. PDF File. 56. Parsons, T. “Social Classes and Class Conflict in Light of Recent Sociological Theory” The American Economic Review, Vol. 39, Issue 3, Papers and
Proceedings of the 61’st Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association, United States of America, 1949. Print. 57. “Paul, C. et.al “ Mexico is not Colombia: Alternative Historical Analagies for Responding to the Challenge of Violent Drug-Trafficking Organizations, Supporting Case Studies” RAND Corporation, United States of America, 2014. Print. 58. Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) “The Philippine Drug Situation” Annual Report 2012, National Capital Region, Philippines, 2012. Report. PDF File.
51. National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA ) “ Drugs, Brains and Behavior – The Science of Addiction” Rockville, Maryland, United States of America, 2014. Print.
59. Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) “The Philippine Drug Situation” Annual Report 2013, National Capital Region, Philippines, 2013. Report. PDF File.
52. National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) “Understanding Abuse and Addiction” Rockvillle, Maryland, United States of America, 2011. Research Pamphlet. PDF File.
60. Philippine National Police (PNP) “Command Memorandum Circular No. 16 – 2016, PNP Anti-Illegal Drugs Campaign Plan – Project Double Barrel” National Headquarters, Philippine National Police, Office of the Chief, Camp Crame, Quezon City Phillippines, 2016. Police Document.
53. Navallo, M. “War on Drugs: The Unheard Stories – No Cop Should Die
65
Print. 61. Philippine National Police (PNP) “DIDM IMPLAN re: Anti-Illegal Drugs Campaign Plan – Double Barrel” National Headquarters, Philippine National Police, Directorate For Investigation and Detective Management, Camp Crame, Quezon City, Philippines, 2016. Police Document. Print. 62. Philippine Star . “Bato: PNP Now Hands Off On the Drug War” The Philippine Star, 2017, October 12. Online News Article. Retrieved from: “http:/ /www.philstar.com/headlines/201 7/10/12/1748074/bato-pnp-now-handsdrug-war” 63. Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) “Current Labor Statistics National Capital Region, Philippines, 2017. Statistics Report. PDF File. 64. Piper, B. “A Four -Pillars Approach to Methamphetamine: Policies for Effective Drug Prevention, Treating, Policing and Harm Reduction” Drug Policy Alliance, United States of America, 2008. Print. 65. Quaino, K. and Perry J. “Why I Still
Support Duterte” CNN Philippines, 2016, October 19. Online News Article. Retrieved from: “http://edition.cnn.com/2016/10/18/asia /philippines-duterte supporters/index.html” 66. Regalado, E. “Killings For Both Rich, Poor” The Philippine Star, 2017, March 4. Online News Article. Retrieved from: “http://www.philstar.com/headlines/201 7/03/04/1677776/duterte-killings-bothrich- poor” 67. Rhodes, T. et.al “ Risk Factors Associated With Drug Use: The Importance of Risk Environment” Drugs, Education, Prevention and Policy, Vol.10, No. 4, Carfax Publishing Company, Taylor and Francis, London, United Kingdom, 2003. Print.
68. Robson, S. and Salcedo N. “Behavioral Fitness and Resilience: A Review of Relevant Constructs, Measures and Links to Well Being”RAND Corporation, United States of America, 2014. Print. 69. Santiago, M. et.al. “ Kill Them All: The Government’s War on Drugs” The Bedan Review, Philippines, 2016. Essay. PDF File. 70. Sauler, E.“Pasay Police Kill Another Drug Suspect, Gun Grabber, Cops Claim” Philippine Daily Inquirer, 2016, August 16. Online News Article. Retrieved from: “http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/805705/pa say-cops-kill-another-gun-grabber-avillage-chair” 71. Sauler E. “Execution at Pasay Police Station” Philippine Daily Inquirer, 2017, April 27. Online News Article. Retrieved from: “http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/892287/ex ecution-at-pasay-police- station” 72. Scottish Drugs Forum (SDF) “Drugs and Poverty – A Literature Review” Scottish Association of Alcohol and Drug Action Teams, Scotland, United Kingdom, 2007. Research Article. PDF File. 73. See, N. “Models and Theories of Addiction and the Rehabilitation Counselor” Southern Illinois University Carbondale, United States of America, 2013. Research Paper. PDF File. 74. Shirk, D. “The Drug War in Mexico – Confronting A Shared Threat” Council Special Report No. 60, Council on Foreign Relations, Center for Preventive Action, New York, United States of America, 2011. Print. 75. Silverman, K. and Robles, E. “Employment as a Drug Abuse Treatment Intervention: A Behavioral Economical Analysis” The Economic Analysis of Substance Use and Abuse: An Integration of Econometrics and Behavioral Economic Research, University of Chicago Press, United
