HUMAN RIGHTS AS A UNIVERSAL CONCEPT: A CONTRADICTION …

HUMAN RIGHTS AS A UNIVERSAL CONCEPT: A

CONTRADICTION ON STATE’S RESPONSIBILITY TO

PROTECT HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE CASE OF

EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLING IN “WAR ON DRUGS”

CAMPAIGN UNDER DUTERTE’S ADMINISTRATION

(2016-2018)

BY:

ATLINDO RIZKY PUTRANTO

016201400024

A Thesis presented to the Faculty of Humanities President University

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Bachelor Degree in

International Relations Major in Diplomacy

2018

i

THESIS ADVISOR

RECOMMENDATION LETTER

This thesis titled “Human Rights as a Universal Concept: A

Contradiction on State’s Responsibility to Protect Human Rights in the

Case of Extrajudicial Killing in “War on Drugs” Campaign Under

Duterte’s Administration (2016-2018)” prepared and submitted by

Atlindo Rizky Putranto in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the

degree of Bachelor of Arts in International Relations in the Faculty of

Humanities has been reviewed and found to have satisfied the

requirements for a thesis fit to be examined. I therefore recommend this

thesis for Oral Defense.

Cikarang, Indonesia, May 2018

Hendra Manurung, S.IP., MA.

ii

DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY

I declare that this thesis, entitled “Human Rights as a Universal

Concept: A Contradiction on State’s Responsibility to Protect Human

Rights in the Case of Extrajudicial Killing in “War on Drugs”

Campaign Under Duterte’s Administration (2016-2018)” is, to the best

of my knowledge and belief, an original piece of work that has not been

submitted, either in whole or in part, to another university to obtain a

degree.

Cikarang, Indonesia, May 11, 2018

Atlindo Rizky Putranto

iii

PANEL OF EXAMINERS APPROVAL SHEET

The panel of examiners declare that the thesis entitled “Human Rights as

a Universal Concept: A Contradiction on State’s Responsibility to

Protect Human Rights in the Case of Extrajudicial Killing in “War on

Drugs” Campaign Under Duterte’s Administration (2016-2018)” that

was submitted by Atlindo Rizky Putranto majoring in International

Relations from Faculty of Humanities was assessed and approved to have

passed the Oral Examinations of May 14th, 2018.

Drs. Teuku Rezasyah, M.A., Ph.D.

Chair – Panel of Examiner

Natasya Kusumawardani, S.IP., MProfStuds (Hons)

Examiner

Hendra Manurung, S.IP., MA.

Thesis Advisor

iv

ABSTRACT

Thesis Title: Human Rights as a Universal Concept: A Contradiction on State’s

Responsibility to Protect Human Rights in the Case of Extrajudicial Killing in

“War on Drugs” Campaign Under Duterte’s Administration (2016-2018)

Human Rights as a universal concept has been declared by the United Nations (UN)

on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). However, Human Rights as

a Universal concept has been debated by the concept of Cultural Relativism. The

contradiction between both concept has influenced the perception toward Human

Rights as well as the state‟s obligation to promote and protect Human Rights.

In the case of “War on Drugs” campaign by Duterte, the Cultural Relativism concept

of Human Rights can be found. Whereas, the extrajudicial killing practice inside the

campaign has been implemented and supported by the Philippine‟s citizens. In which

the extrajudicial killing has considered as a violation of Human Rights as according

to UDHR. Meanwhile, Philippines has ratified the Human Rights documents as a sign

of state‟s willingness to promote and protect Human Rights universally. However, by

the implementation of extrajudicial killing in “War on Drugs” campaign Philippines

has violated the Human Rights and fail to fulfil state‟s responsibility to protect

Human Rights.

This thesis concludes that the construction reason behind the support on extrajudicial

killing that lead to the failure of state‟s responsibility to protect Human Rights, is the

culture of killing as the cultural fault-lines. Focusing on the practice of death penalty

colonialization era that drive to a practice of killing as a hardened culture. Therefore,

the practice of killing has become common thing on Philippines

Keywords: Philippines, Human Rights violation, extrajudicial killing, Cultural

Relativism, State’s responsibility to protect Human Rights

v

ABSTRAK

Thesis Title: Human Rights as a Universal Concept: A Contradiction on State’s

Responsibility to Protect Human Rights in the Case of Extrajudicial Killing in

“War on Drugs” Campaign Under Duterte’s Administration (2016-2018)

Hak Asasi Manusia telah dideklarasikan sebagain konsep universal oleh Persatuan

Bangsa-bangsa (PBB) dalam Deklarasi Universal Hak Asasi Manusia. Namun, HAM

sebagai konsep universal telah dibantah oleh konsep relativisme budaya. Kontradiksi

antara kedua konsep telah mempengaruhi persepsi terhadap HAM dan kewajiban

negara untuk mendukung dan menjaga HAM.

Konsep relativisme budaya dapat ditemukan dalam kasus “Perang anti Narkoba” oleh

Duterte. Dimana masyarakat Filipina mendukung pembunhan di luar proses hukum

dalam kampanye tersebut. Yang mana pembunhan di luar proses hukum merupakan

bentuk pelanggaran terhadap HAM menurut Deklarasi Universal Hak Asasi Manusia.

Sementara itu, Filipina telah me-ratifikasi perjanjian HAM, sebagai tanda ke-relaan

negara untuk turut mendukung dan menjaga HAM. Namun, dengan pelaksanaan

Pembunhan di luar proses hokum di dalam kampanye “Perang anti Narkoba”,

Filipina telah melanggar HAM dan telah gagal untuk menjaga HAM.

Penelitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa budaya membunuh di Filipina adalah alasan

yang mengkonstruksi tingkah laku masyarakat Filipina untuk mendukung kampanye

tersebut dan menuntun kepada kegagalan negara untuk menjaga HAM. Penelitian ini

akan di fokuskan kepada praktek dari hukuman mati yang terjadi saat zaman kolonial.

Yang mana Prakter dari hukuman mati tersebut telah mandarah-daging sehingga

menjadi budaya membunuh. Oleh karena itu praktek bunuh-membunuh telah menjadi

hal yang biasa di Filipina.

Keywords: Filipina, Pelanggaran HAM, Pembunhan di Luar Proses Hukum,

Relativisme budaya, Kewajiban Negara untuk Menjaga HAM

vi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all, I would like to thank the Creature that dwell within the soul, the Lord of

all mankind, Allah SWT. I am very blessed for all the thing that You have gave to

me. Thank you for teaching me the lesson to surrender, then You give me more than I

desired. Surely, I am nothing without His Greatness.

I also would like to thank my Mother, Erawati Endang Sriwahyuni and my Father,

Kristianto Setyo Lelono. Thank you for always support me until this second. I am

really sorry that there are a lot of Family time that being waste because I have to work

on my thesis, but you always understand me and forgive me, thank you. I hope this

thesis will make you proud of me. Also, to my brothers Renaldy Wahyu Putranto and

Tridanu Simbarjoyo Putranto. Thank you for becoming a good brother that always

ask me to play in the middle of my thesis construction. But then I realize, it is a way

that you guys have done to refresh my mind.

This thesis will never be done without the guidance and suggestion from my advisor,

Mr. Hendra Manurung and Miss. Natasya Kusumawardani. Thank you for all the

guidance and suggestion in my thesis writing process. I am sorry that I made a lot of

mistakes in the process, but I know in every suggestions and every criticism will

make me stronger. Thank you, a lot, for being patience in guiding me. and for Ms

Natasya, I do not forget to mention you this time, and thank you for the wonderful

experience in my thesis consultation.

This paragraph is dedicated for the one that always accompany me, for the one that

always support me, for the one that always cheer me up in every word of give up that

come out of my mouth, I am really grateful to be with you, Dibyana Galih Prakasita.

No one understand me and know my struggle except you. And thank you for always

remind and support me to finished my thesis, but you also not forget to remind me to

take a rest. Above all, thank you that you have introduce me to the Cat! So now I also

vii

love them. And is still cannot believe I can write your name in my thesis, thank you.

And I am really blessed to have you Sita, I really am.

I also would like to expressed my thank you to the hood without the name. To my

very best friend, yet we never take a photo for the three of us, because we know that a

real friend does not need those kinds of things. To Bambang and Ausap. Honestly,

I‟m lazy to make this paragraph for you, because I think it would not make any

different, I don‟t think your heart will be touched because of this. But anyway, thank

you for, wait, I don‟t even know what to thank for. Let just put it this way, just wait

for the stories okay? And thank you for everything.

I also would like to say a lot of thank to my friends in University life that will not be

forgotten. To David, Naufal, Rifqi, Elji, Dicko, Pipiw, thank you for the moments

that we always share and thank you for the lesson you guys have teach me, I learn a

lot of things from you guys. To Jaja, Paksi, Adit, and Dicky thank you for always

listening to my stories and thank you for bring me the joy. To Sultan, Arvin, Sam,

thank you for always become a joker to me and always make me laugh. And also, for

the girls, Fiqa, Amel, Vena, Fanny, Kalya, Ratih, thank you for being annoying and

thank you for becoming a very good friend of mine. Last, thank you for all of you

guys that has made my university life brighter.

Last, thank you for Puhaba Café‟s family, Bang Ebi, Taro, Mas Fano, Mas Wahyu,

Mba Rika and Bang Thomas. Thank you for the nice environment you guys have

shared to me. Thank you Bang Ebi, for providing me a really good quality of coffee,

and a very nice ambience so that I feel comfortable to finished my thesis on Puhaba

Coffee.

Cikarang, May 11, 2018

Atlindo Rizky Putranto

vii

Table of Contents

THESIS ADVISOR ................................................................................................................... i

RECOMMENDATION LETTER ............................................................................................. i

DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY ..................................................................................... ii

ABSTRACT ..............................................................................................................................iii

ABSTRAK ................................................................................................................................ v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ........................................................................................................ vi

LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................. ix

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................................................x

CHAPTER I .............................................................................................................................. 1

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background of Study ................................................................................................ 1

1.2 Problem Identification............................................................................................. 10

1.3 Statement of the Problem ........................................................................................ 15

1.4 Research Objectives ................................................................................................ 15

1.5 Significance of The Study ....................................................................................... 16

1.6 Theoretical Framework ........................................................................................... 16

1.6.1 Universalism ................................................................................................... 17

1.6.2 State‟s Responsibility to Protect Human Rights ............................................. 18

1.6.3 Cultural Relativism ......................................................................................... 20

1.6.4 Constructivism ................................................................................................ 23

1.7 Framework of Research ................................................................................................ 27

1.8 Research Methodology ........................................................................................... 28

1.9 Scope and Limitations of the Study ........................................................................ 29

1.10 Thesis Structure ...................................................................................................... 29

1.11 Literature Review .................................................................................................... 30

1.11.1 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) Document ........................ 31

1.11.2 Wendt, A. (1995). Anarchy is What States Make of it: The Social Construction of

Power Politics (1992). International Theory ................................................................... 32

viii

1.11.2 Relativism and Human Rights (Claudio Coradetti) ........................................ 33

1.11.4 Baylis J., Smith S., Owens P. (2008). The Globalization of World Politics : An

Introduction to International Relations ........................................................................... 34

1.11.5 Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights ............................................... 35

1.11.6 Human Rights Watch: License to Kill ................................................................. 36

1.11.7 Johnson, D. T., & Zimring, F. E. (2009). The next frontier: National

development, political change and the death penalty in Asia. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press

........................................................................................................................................ 37

CHAPTER II ........................................................................................................................... 38

AN OVERVIEW OF EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLING AS A VIOLATION OF HUMAN

RIGHTS .................................................................................................................................. 38

2.1 Extrajudicial Killing on “War on Drugs” decision as a Violation on Ratified Treaties of

Human Rights ..................................................................................................................... 38

2.2 Extrajudicial Killing on “War on Drugs” Campaugn as Violation of R2P ................... 46

2.3. International Responses Toward “War on Drugs” Campaign ..................................... 49

CHAPTER III ......................................................................................................................... 54

AN OVERVIEW OF “WAR ON DRUGS” CAMPAIGN BY DUTERTE‟S

ADMINISTRATION .............................................................................................................. 54

3.1 The Background of “War on Drugs” Campaign. .......................................................... 54

3.2 The Implementation of “War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration .... 58

3.3 The Support toward the “War on Drugs” campaign ..................................................... 62

CHAPTER IV ......................................................................................................................... 69

CULTURAL RELATIVISM ON EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLING IN “WAR ON DRUGS”

CAMPAIGN ........................................................................................................................... 69

4.1 The History of Death Penalty on Philippines ................................................................ 70

4.1.1 Spanish Colonialization Era ............................................................................ 71

4.1.2 America Colonialization Era ........................................................................... 74

4.2. Death Penalty as the Cultural Fault-lines ..................................................................... 76

4.2.1 Practice of Death Penalty as Hardened Culture ......................................................... 77

4.3 Case of Extrajudicial Killing Before Duterte‟s Administration .................................... 82

4.3.1 Marcos administration (1965 - 1986) ..................................................................... 82

4.3.2 Arroyo administration (2001 - 2010) ..................................................................... 83

4.3.3 Benigno Aquino Administration (2010 - 2016) ..................................................... 84

ix

4.4 Human Rights as a Relativism Concept on Philippines ................................................ 87

CHAPTER V .......................................................................................................................... 91

CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................................... 91

BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................... 93

APPENDIX ........................................................................................................................... 99

ix

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Conceptual Framework……………………………………………....27

Figure 2.1 Ratification of 18 Human Rights

Treaties………………………………………………………………………………40

Figure 3.1 Drugs Users in Philippines…….…………………………………….56

Figure 3.2 Duterte Satisfaction Rate….…………………………………………65

Figure 3.3 Filipinos Perception of Change in Number of Drugs

addicts……………………………………………………………………………...66

Figure 4.1 Death Penalty Case During Spanish Colonialization….…………….72

Figure 4.2 Death Penalty Case During American Colonialization……………...75

Figure 4.3 Conceptual Framework………………………………………….......76

Figure 4.4 Case of Death Penalty During Colonialization Era on Philippines….80

Figure 4.5 Extrajudicial Killing on Arroyo Precedency………………………...83

Figure 4.6 Extrajudicial Killing Case on Aquino‟s Administration…………….85

Figure 4.7 Conceptual Framework……………………………………………...87

x

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CAT Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman

Degrading Treatment or Punishment

DDB Dangerous Drugs Board

HRW Human Rights Watch

ICCPR International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

ICESCR International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural

Rights

OHCHR Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights

PNP Philippine National Police

PDEA Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency

R2P Responsibility to Protect

SWS Social Weather Stations

UN United Nations

UDHR Universal Declarations of Human Rights

UNODC United Nations on Drugs and Crime

xi

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of Study

The existence of Human Rights is basically aim to protect the dignity of all

human being regardless their status or their condition in life.1 As according to

United Nations (UN), Human Rights is a right inherent to all human beings,

regardless of race, sex, nationality, ethnicity, language, religion, or any other status.

Human rights include the right to life and liberty, freedom from slavery and torture,

freedom of opinion and expression, the right to work and education.2 Human Rights

and Human dignity are cannot be separated, as according to David P. Forysthe, on

the book of “Human Rights in International Relations”, he emphasizes that Human

Rights are considered as a fundamental moral right of a person to live with human

dignity.3 As explained by Jack Donnelly, Human Rights basically exist since the

human being as well as its nature become the construction of Human Rights itself.4

So that the existence of Human Rights cannot be denied since, the sense of

humanity itself is attached with the Human Being.

The conceptual of Human Rights that emphasize on rights inherent to all

human being, as well as has been brought by the sense of humanity which been

attached with the human itself, has make the Human Rights as a Universal Concept.

It has been Universal since it is applied to all people regardless of nationality,

status, religion, gender, race and so on and so for, besides, Human Rights also can

1 Ibid, p-3-7

2 Human Rights. (2017, October 31). Retrieved from http://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-

depth/human-rights/ 3Forsythe, D. P. (2018). Human rights in international relations (pp. 3-7)

4 Donnelly, J. (2013). Universal human rights in theory and practice. Ithaca: Cornell University

Press.

2

be found on the fundamental principles of culture, religion, and traditions.5 Not

only by the sense of humanity that makes human rights as a universal concept, but

the United Nation has also declared the Universalism of human rights. The

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was proclaimed by the United

Nations General Assembly in Paris on 10 December 1948 on General Assembly

resolution 217 A. it is aim as a standard of achievements for all peoples and all

nations, and as a fundamental to be protected universally by member state.6 The

universal concept of human rights is basically means as a concept that has to be

accepted and obeyed universally by the international system. Human Rights as a

Universal concept also emphasized in this article in some points,

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION

OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples

and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society,

keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and

education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by

progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal

and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of

Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their

jurisdiction.7

The establishment of Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) also

followed by the establishment of two important documents, the International

Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on

Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). Those documents become the

international law on 1976, and also known as the International Bill of Human

Rights.8 Both of the covenants are promoting a different scope of Human Rights

which not specifically declared on the UDHR. Although both of them have

different scope, but their preamble and article 1, 3, and 5 is identical, in which

5 New Zealand. (2008). The New Zealand handbook on international human rights (p. 9).

6 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (2018, January 29). Retrieved from

http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/ 7 Ibid

8 United Nations Universal Declaration, International Covenant: United for Human Rights. (n.d.).

Retrieved from http://www.humanrights.com/what-are-human-rights/international-human-rights-

law/international-human-rights-law-continued.html

3

recall the obligation of States under the Charter of the United Nations to promote

human rights; remind the individual of his responsibility to strive for the promotion

and observance of those rights; and recognize that, in accordance with the

Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the ideal of free human beings enjoying

civil and political freedom and freedom from fear and want can be achieved only if

conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy his civil and political rights, as

well as his economic, social and cultural rights.9 Which indicates the purpose of

both covenants is the same. As has been stated on Article one,

―All peoples have the right of self-determination, including the right to

determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and

cultural development.‖10

The differences between The ICESCR and ICCPR can be seen from the

issues that they put their focused on. The ICESCR are mostly discussed on the

scope of economic, social, and cultural rights. In general, ICESCR are includes the

rights for Work, Enjoyment of just and favorable conditions of work, form and join

trade unions, social security, protection and assistance for family, an adequate

standard of living, education and participation in cultural life, as accordance to

article 6 to 15 of ICESCR.11

On the other hand, ICCPR put focused on the rights in

the scope of Civil and Political Rights. In general, as according to some points from

article 6 to 27, ICCPR are focusing on the rights of living, freedom from torture

cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, freedom from slavery,

freedom from imprisonment for failure to fulfil a contractual obligation, freedom

from retroactive criminal laws, the right to recognition as a person before the law,

and freedom of thought, conscience and religion.12

Human Rights has a Universal concept should be promoted internationally

and be applied to all states. As an action of promoting the Universalism of Human

9 Fact Sheet No.2 (Rev.1), The International Bill of Human Rights. (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FactSheet2Rev.1en.pdf 10

Manual on Human Rights Education with Young People – Council of Europe 11

New Zealand. (2008). The New Zealand handbook on international human rights (p. 47-48). 12

Fact Sheet No.2 (Rev.1), The International Bill of Human Rights. (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FactSheet2Rev.1en.pdf

4

Rights, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) were

established to promote the Human Rights itself. OHCHR leads global human rights

efforts speaks out objectively in the face of human rights violations worldwide.13

To promote the Universalism concept of human rights, OHCHR provides assistance

to Governments, such as expertise and technical trainings in the areas of

administration of justice, legislative reform, and electoral process, to help

implement international human rights law standards on the ground.14

However, Human Rights as a universal concept is still debatable. in reality,

Human Rights as a Universal concept is not fully implemented and acceptable for

some states. the relativity of culture could be one of the factor for states which not

accept the concept of Human Rights. The existence of Cultural Relativism has

become a contradiction for the concept of Universalism in Human Rights. Both

Universal and Relative are obviously have a different concept towards Human

Rights. Universalism perceive Human Rights as a universal concept since the

human nature that has been brought from the very beginning of human being lead

to a sense of humanity. Meanwhile Cultural Relativism perceive human nature

itself is a kind of relative concept, which depend on the culture that construct

them.15

So that the concept of Universalism and Relativism did not match each

other.

In this thesis, to explain the debate between the concept of Universalism and

Cultural Relativism, Philippines will be taken as the case study. Philippines is

currently having such a case of human right violations regarding its domestic

campaign of “War on Drugs” under Rodrigo Roa Duterte administration. The drugs

problem has become a serious problem in Philippines, According to 2016 report of

the Dangerous Drugs Board (DDB) of Philippines, there are at least 1.7 million

13

OHCHR | What we do. (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/AboutUs/Pages/WhatWeDo.aspx 14

Ibid 15

Donnelly, J. (2013). Universal human rights in theory and practice. Ithaca: Cornell University

Press.

5

drugs users, it is almost 1.7% of its populations.16

The DDB also reported that the

range of age among 1.7 million drugs users, are from age 10 until 69 years old, and

44.69% of them are unemployed which means has covered a wide range of ages,

from children to adult.17

On the other hand, Duterte has claimed that there are 4

million drugs users on Philippines as quoted from his speech.18

It is such a big gap

number between DDB‟s report ad Duterte‟s itself claimed. Despite all the contrast

between DDB‟s report and Duterte‟s claim, the Philippines drugs prevalence global

rate is still under United Nations standard. The United station has stated that the

global prevalence of drugs user is 5.2, while Philippines drugs prevalence rate is

2.3, which is still categorized as an urgent drugs abuse problem in a country.19

The “War on Drugs” campaign is established since the drugs problems on

Philippines has become a serious problem. Rodrigo Duterte perceive the drugs

problem in Philippines is the main obstacle to the Philippine‟s social and economic

progress.20

The intention to eradicate the drugs abuser has started before Duterte

elected as the president of Philippines, it has been started from his campaign during

the presidential election.

―If by chance that God will place me there, watch out because the 1,000

[people allegedly executed while Duterte was mayor of Davao City] will

become 100,000. You will see the fish in Manila Bay getting fat. That is

where I will dump you.‖ – Rodrigo Duterte21

16

Dangerous Drugs Board. (n.d.). 2016 Statistics. Retrieved from https://www.ddb.gov.ph/research-

statistics/statistics/45-research-and-statistics/329-2016-statistics 17

Ibid 18

Ranada, P. (2017, May 6). Is Duterte's '4 million drug addicts' a 'real number'? Retrieved from

https://www.rappler.com/rappler-blogs/169009-duterte-drug-addicts-real-number 19

Punongbayan, J. C. (2017, May 26). Why Duterte's ?4 million drug users? is statistically

improbable. Retrieved from https://www.rappler.com/thought-leaders/170975-duterte-drug-users-

statistically-improbable 20

Xu, M. (n.d.). Human Rights and Duterte's War on Drugs. Retrieved from

https://www.cfr.org/interview/human-rights-and-dutertes-war-drugs 21

'License to Kill? | Philippine Police Killings in Duterte's 'War on Drugs? (2017, July 13).

Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/03/02/license-kill/philippine-police-killings-

dutertes-war-drugs

6

Duterte‟s “war on Drugs” campaign or also known as Oplan Tokhang in

Philippines language, where the police of the Philippines directly arrest the drugs

abusers from door to door, as state below,

―OPLAN TOKHANG is a visayan word which means Tok-tok Hangyo.

Where police personnel knock the doors of an alleged drug user or pusher,

asking him/her that he/she will surrender to the police in order that they

will be monitored for further assessment.‖22

The “War on Drugs” campaign has been regulated by the Philippine Drug

Enforcement Agency (PDEA). PDEA was created for the efficient and effective

law enforcement of all the provisions on dangerous drugs and/or precursors and

essential chemicals.23

The regulation of punishment on drugs abusers has been

regulated on the Republic Act 9165 of Philippines,

―Should any dangerous drug be the proximate cause of the death of a

person using the same in such den, dive or resort, the penalty of death and a

fine ranging from One million (P1,000,000.00) to Fifteen million pesos

(P15,000,000.00) shall be imposed on the maintainer, owner and/or

operator.‖24

The PDEA also has to be in-line with the current President‟s program, in which

“War on Drugs” also one of the campaign of Duterte. As the agency that focusing

on drugs enforcement PDEA has already promoting Duterte‟s “War on Drugs”

campaign, as has been stated on the PDEA‟s website,

“Unity is strength, let us all stand and be counted active community

participations in essential in President Rodrigo Roa Duterte‘s war against

Drugs‖25

The “War on Drugs” campaign also called by a Double-Barrel Project by

the Philippines police.26

The campaign is originally aim to reduce and eradicate the

drugs abuser on the country, unfortunately, the War on Drugs campaign has been a

22

Ibid 23

User, S. (n.d.). Laws and Regulations. Retrieved from http://pdea.gov.ph/laws-and-

regulations#executive-order-218 24

Ibid 25

Ibid 26

Ibid

7

controversial issue since the implementation of the campaign has consider as an

extrajudicial killing.27

In accordance to Command Memorandum Circular NO. 16 –

2016 of the Philippine National Police (PNP), with the subject of PNP Anti-illegal

Drugs Campaign Plan Project: “Double Barrel” stated that the campaign is a

Pronouncement of Duterte to get rid of illegal drugs.28

The purpose and mission of

the campaign are quoted as below.29

―PURPOSE:

This Command Memorandum Circular sets forth the general guidelines,

procedures and tasks of police offices/units/stations in the conduct of the

Philippine National Police (PNP) Anti-Illegal Drugs Campaign Plan -

PROJECT: "DOUBLE BARREL" in support to the Barangay Drug Clearing

Strategy of the government and the neutralization of illegal drug

personalities nationwide.

MISSION:

The PNP shall implement the PNP Anti-Illegal Drugs Campaign Plan —

PROJECT: "DOUBLE BARREL" in order to clear all drug affected

barangays across the country, conduct no let-up operations against illegal

drugs personalities and dismantle drug syndicates‖

The drugs personalities as according to the memorandum are including the drugs

Lords, warehousemen, Finance/Admin Officer and their protector, handler,

financier, supporter.30

Duterte‟s intention to reduce the drugs abusers in Philippines by killing

them are not only a gimmick to frighten the drugs abuser, when Rodrigo Duterte

said “to kill the drug abuser” it is literary means by killing them. Rodrigo Duterte

27



PNP ANTI-ILLEGAL DRUGS CAMPAIGN PLAN - PROJECT: "DOUBLE BARREL" (16).

(2016). Retrieved from Republic of the Philippines NATIONAL POLICE COMMISSION

NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF,

PNP website: https://didm.pnp.gov.ph/Command%20Memorandum%20Circulars/CMC%202016-

16%20PNP%20ANTI-ILLEGAL%20DRUGS%20CAMPAIGN%20PLAN%20–

%20PROJECT%20DOUBLE%20BARREL.pdf 29

Ibid 30

Ibid

8

often said the word of “kill” to the drugs abusers in his speech, since he perceived

that drugs will destroy the young generation, as quoted below.

―Do not destroy my country because I will kill you. Do not destroy the young

or the youth because that is our only asset.‖31

According to Human Rights Watch report, Duterte‟s war on drugs campaign

has killed over 7.000 people that assumed as a drug abuser in Philippines, without a

legal procedure.32

Moreover, by some of the report, the implementation of the killing

itself were done not only by the Police of the Philippines but also by the unidentified

gunman, where also has been justified by Rodrigo Duterte itself.33

To assigned an

unidentified gunman which also known as Duterte‟s death squad, has shown really

well how the procedure of “War on Drugs” campaign not implemented through a

legal jurisdiction. Besides, Duterte also repeatedly said the word of “Kill” as a part

of his anti-drugs campaign, which indicates his intention to kill the drugs abusers

through his death squad and ignored he existence of legal jurisdiction.

―I will kill you, I will kill you. I will take the law into my own hands… forget

about the laws of men, forget about the laws of international law whatever.‖

– Rodrigo Duterte.34

The radical action by Duterte regarding the extrajudicial killing as well as

his controversial statement has trigger some International organization to react. In

June 2016, Ban Ki-moon as the secretary General of United Nations, strongly

disagree with the act that done by Duterte, as his statement below,

“I unequivocally condemn his apparent endorsement of extrajudicial killing,

which is illegal and a breach of fundamental rights and freedoms. Such

31

Media Interview with President Rodrigo Roa Duterte during his Visit to Marawi City –

Presidential Communications Operations Office. (2017, September 21). Retrieved from https://pcoo.gov.ph/media_interview/media-interview-president-rodrigo-roa-duterte-visit-marawi-

city/ 32

World Report 2017: Rights Trends in Philippines. (2017, January 20). Retrieved from

https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2017/country-chapters/philippines 33

Human Rights Consequences of the 'War on Drugs? in the Philippines. (2017, July 31). Retrieved

from https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/07/20/human-rights-consequences-war-drugs-philippines 34



dutertes-war-drugs

9

comments are of particular concern in light of ongoing impunity for serious

cases of violence against journalists in the Philippines.‖35

– Ban Ki-Moon

On the other hand, the United Nations on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) also urged the

Philippines to respect human rights and issued a strong rejection on the extrajudicial

killing by Philippines president. As according to Yuro Fedotov, the executive

director of the UNODC,

―UNODC stands ready to further engage with the Philippines and all

countries to bring drug traffickers to justice with the appropriate legal

safeguards in line with international standards and norms, and promote

prevention, treatment, rehabilitation, and reintegration approaches based in

evidence, science, public health and human rights.‖36

Despite all of the pressure from International Organizations, here the

president of Philippines still actively implementing the extrajudicial killing in the

name of “War on Drugs”. Moreover, in some statement of Duterte, he emphasizes

that the killing will still going on for those who still become a drugs abuser in

Philippines. In 6th

August 2016, Duterte also stated a statement as a rejection of

pressure that stated by International Organizations.

―My order is shoot to kill you. I don‘t care about human rights, you better

believe me,‖ – Rodrigo Duterte37

The killing that done by Duterte is not an unusual thing for the Filipinos,

since killing has its own history on Philippines. It has started from colonialization

era by the Spanish on 1521 by Ferdinand Magellan, which brought the medieval

Europe‟s penal system which include the death penalty. The Death penalty during

the Spanish colonialization on Philippines were including burning, decapitation,

35

Ban disturbed by remarks made by President-elect of the Philippines on extrajudicial killings.

(2016, June 8). Retrieved from https://news.un.org/en/story/2016/06/531752-ban-disturbed-remarks-

made-president-elect-philippines-extrajudicial-killings#.WH44jRsrKUk 36



dutertes-war-drugs= 37

Ibid

10

drowning, flaying, garrote, hanging, shooting, stabbing and others.38

The death

Penalty was implement towards Filipinos who challenged the authority of the

colonizers, and it has been running for over 300 years until 1898.39

Not only during

the Spanish period that implement death penalty as a punishment, but during the

American period as well. America has colonialized Philippines since 1898, and

America has adopted the Spanish penal system in which including the death penalty

as well. Moreover on 1932 the Spanish penal system that adopted by the America

has being revised, the revision including the target of the death penalty, which

before only imposed on those who challenged the colonizers, and after the revision

the death penalty also imposed on seven category of crimes which includes

Treason, parricide, piracy, kidnapping, murder, rape, and robbery with homicide.40

Since then, the killing thing on Philippines has become a usual thing and it has been

happen until the Duterte‟s administration.

1.2 Problem Identification

The extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign that done by Rodrigo

Duterte is obviously violating the Human Rights. It is considered as a violation of

Human Rights since the action of extrajudicial killing is considered as an action of

cruel as well as because it is considered as an action of taking the human‟s

freedom.41

Extrajudicial killing itself can be defined as an unlawful killing, or an

action of killing without a legal process that done by government (or with their

complicity) which are not adequately investigated and prosecuted by the

authorities.42

Meanwhile, Extrajudicial killing has become a popular term, which

38

Johnson, D. T., & Zimring, F. E. (2009). The next frontier: National development, political

change and the death penalty in Asia (pp. 105-108). (Next frontier.) Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. 39

Ibid, p-105-108 40

Ibid, p-105-108 41

Disappearances" and extrajudicial executions as violations of international human rights. (n.d.).

Retrieved from https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/188000/act330051993en.pdf 42

Gould, L. A., & Pate, M. (2016). State fragility around the world: Fractured justice and fierce

reprisal (p. 31).

11

Ban Ki-Moon also used the term to condemn Duterte‟s action, as has been stated

above.43

On the other hand, United Nations by the Universal Declaration of Human

Rights (UDHR) also considered extrajudicial killing as a violation of Human

Rights. It is clearly stated on one of the covenant of UDHR, which is the

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). ICCPR as a covenant

that focused on civil and political rights issue, emphasize the rights for person to

life as stated on the Article 6 and 7 of the declaration.

Article 6: Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall

be protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life

Article 7: ―no one is to be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or

degrading treatment or punishment44

The violation of Human Rights in the case of extrajudicial killing also

elaborate on the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman Degrading

Treatment or Punishment (CAT). CAT established to emphasize the obligation UN

members to promote the universal concept of Human Rights especially in the case

of torture and other cruel action. In which CAT remind the states members

obligation that no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or

degrading treatment or punishment.45

CAT clearly emphasizes the state‟s obligation

to promote anti-torture action on the Article 2 of CAT46

,

Article 2:

1. Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial

or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its

jurisdiction.

43






OHCHR | Convention against Torture. (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CAT.aspx 46

Ibid

12

2. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a

threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency,

may be invoked as a justification of torture.

3. An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked

as a justification of torture.

As can be seen on the Article 2 of CAT, that the state should have a responsibility

to set up a measurement to prevent the acts of torture, in which emphasize the

obligation of state to take a judicial process of such kind of torture or cruel action.

Besides CAT as according to Article 2 also emphasize that there is no single reason

as a justification of action of torture.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights that established as a common

standard of Human Rights, has proofed as a Universal concept by the ratifications

which indicates the agreement by the states member of United Nations. Philippines

as the main actor of this thesis, actually in favor to the UDHR on the voting that

held on December 10 1948.47

Besides, according to United Nations Human Rights

Office of the High Commissioner (OHCHR), Philippines has ratified 14 treaties of

Human Rights from totally 18 treaties.48

Among 14 treaties, Philippines has ratified

the ICCPR document on 1989 as well as CAT on 2012, which indicate Philippine‟s

agreement to promote the Human Rights as a universal concept, in which

promoting an anti-torture and cruel action. Since both documents are emphasizing

on the issue of civil and political rights as well as agreement to against torture and

cruel, which related to an extrajudicial killing action.

Even though Philippines has ratified Human Rights treaties that against

extrajudicial killing, however in reality, the action of President Rodrigo Duterte

goes on the other way around. When Philippines ratified the agreement that against

torture, Philippines should implement it to its citizens as well. In reality, the

implementation of “War on Drugs” campaign has led to the action of extrajudicial

killing towards the drugs suspects. Besides, Duterte will continue the killing for the

47

-OHCHR Dashboard. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://indicators.ohchr.org/ 48

Ibid

13

drugs abusers in Philippines, as Duterte guaranteed on his statement regarding

Oplan Tokhang or “War on Drugs” campaign that will be keep going on, ―Droga

(drug war) is a nonissue to me. It will be a policy until the dying days of my

presidency or my life,‖ – Rodrigo Duterte49

Above all the radical action that done by Duterte, here that become the main

question is, whether Duterte implement the “War on drugs” campaign on behalf of

the citizen‟s prosperity or on behalf of his own interest. According to some reports,

most of the Filipino are satisfied with Duterte‟s administration regarding the anti-

drugs campaign. One of the parameter of citizen‟s satisfactions toward Duterte‟s

administration, is the survey that held by the Social Weather Stations (SWS), SWS

is a non-profit and private institution that dealing with social research in

Philippines.50

According to the SWS‟s survey that held on September 2016, 7 from

10 Filipinos were satisfied with Duterte‟s action regarding anti-drugs campaign.

From 1,500 respondents, 77% said they were satisfied, 14% were unsatisfied, and

9% were undecided, and the percentage of satisfaction were declining on 2017,

from 77% to 63%, despite the decreasing percentage of satisfied citizen, however it

is still above 50%, which indicates that mostly the Philippines citizens were

satisfied with Duterte.51

The question that arise after knowing the Filipinos satisfaction toward

Duterte‟s anti-drugs campaign which reach up around 70% is whether the Filipinos

are only satisfied with Duterte‟s anti-drugs campaign, or the Filipinos are also

supporting Duterte‟s anti-drugs campaign? Shockingly, as according to Social

Weather Stations (SWS) survey, there 63% of Filipinos that agreed that the drugs

49

Tubeza, P. C., & Orejas, T. (2017, December 9). Duterte: War on drugs to continue until 2022.

Retrieved from http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/950878/rodrigo-duterte-war-on-drugs-drug-killings-

extrajudicial-killlings 50

Social Weather Stations. (n.d.). Social Weather Stations | Home Page. Retrieved from

https://www.sws.org.ph/ 51

Social Weather Stations. (n.d.). Social Weather Stations | Second Quarter 2017 Social Weather

Survey: Pres. Duterte's net satisfaction rating a new personal record-high of "Very Good" +66.

Retrieved from https://www.sws.org.ph/swsmain/artcldisppage/?artcsyscode=ART-

20170706173742

14

suspects still have to be killed even after they surrender themselves.52

The survey

that held on June 2017, with 1,200 respondents, with the statement of “There are

suspects in the illegal drug trade who already surrendered, yet were still killed”

stated that 9% were strongly disagree, 11% were disagree, 17% were undecided

yet, 32% were agree, and 31% were strongly agree.53

The data that given has shown

well that the Filipinos itself are supporting the anti-drugs campaign, not only

supporting the anti-drugs campaign, moreover 63% of them are agree if the drugs

suspects still have to be killed after surrender, by this mean, the Filipinos are

supporting the extrajudicial killing itself.

By ratified the Human Rights treaties, Philippines should have

implemented the to its citizens, as an action to promote Human Rights. Since the

ratification of the Human Rights treaties indicates the state‟s agreement to take a

role to protect the Human Rights. The ratification of Human Rights documents that

done by Philippines has shown Philippine‟s commitment to protect and promote

Human Rights universally. Besides, the ratification of Human Rights documents by

Philippines also shown its obligation to respect Human Rights under International

Law, as quoted below:

―By becoming parties to international treaties, States assume obligations

and duties under international law to respect, to protect and to fulfil human

rights. The obligation to respect means that States must refrain from

interfering with or curtailing the enjoyment of human rights. The obligation

to protect requires States to protect individuals and groups against human

rights abuses. The obligation to fulfil means that States must take positive

action to facilitate the enjoyment of basic human rights.‖54

However, in fact, Philippines cannot implement it well by violating the Human

Rights by the action of extrajudicial killing to the drugs abusers on the country.

52

Ibid 53

Ibid 54

The Foundation of International Human Rights Law. (2017, October 31). Retrieved from

http://www.un.org/en/sections/universal-declaration/foundation-international-human-rights-

law/index.html

15

On the other hand, the citizens of Philippines reaction towards Duterte‟s action

shows very well that the extrajudicial killing it is not only because of Rodrigo

Duterte‟s personality that tend to use a radical approach, but also supported by

Filipinos itself. In the case of Philippines “War on Drugs” campaign, it has shown

clearly that Human Rights is not recognized as a Universal concept, since the

President of Philippines did not recognize the existence of human rights itself in the

case of extrajudicial killing, as well as the Filipinos itself that being supportive to

the extrajudicial killing that done by their own leader.55

The act of Duterte as well

as the support that given by his citizens has lead to a question of what kind of

things that construct Philippines people on doing such kind of things. This research

will continue the discussion on analyzing the factor behind the implications

extrajudicial killing under “War on Drugs” campaign by Duterte as well as the

support that given by Philippines citizens that lead to the ignorance of state‟s

responsibility to protect Human Rights.

1.3 Statement of the Problem

As have been explain above, the question for this research is stated as follow:

Question: Why did the extrajudicial killing in “War on Drugs” campaign

under Duterte’s administration gain mass approval by the society, but fail

to fulfil state’s responsibility to protect Human Rights?

1.4 Research Objectives

The research objectives in this research are classified based on the type of

research: descriptive research. The aims of the research are following:

55



dutertes-war-drugs

16

1. To identify the reasons of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs”

campaign under Duterte‟s administration

2. To identify the debate on the concept of Universalism and Cultural

Relativism of Human Rights in the case of extrajudicial killing on “War

on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration.

3. To find out the constructing reasons of Philippine‟s people on

implementing and supporting extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs”

campaign under Duterte‟s administration.

1.5 Significance of The Study

As the country that ratified the documents of International Covenant on Civil

and Political Rights (ICCPR) and Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,

Inhuman Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), Philippines should accept

and promote Human Rights as a universal concept. However, on the other hand,

Philippines under Duterte administration cannot implement and promoting Human

Rights as a universal concept. it can be seen through the implementation of “War

on Drugs” campaign that lead to an action of extrajudicial killing, in which

obviously considered as a violation toward Human Rights, as according to

Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This research will become a case study to

understand the debate on the concept of Universalism and Cultural Relativism of

Human Rights. The significant study in the case of the chosen topic aims to

understand that culture is become the driving factor that construct Philippine‟s

people idea towards the implementation and support on extrajudicial killing on

“War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration.

1.6 Theoretical Framework

To have a better understanding toward the thesis, the author will use several

International Relations that related with the case of Human Rights violation on the

17

practice of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s

administration. Therefore, the author will use Universalism theory as a basic for

Human Rights that considered as a universal concept, Cultural Relativism theory as

a contradiction toward the Universalism of Human Rights, and Social

Constructivism by Michael Barnett. The theories will be used to analyze the case

further and will be explained on the next chapter.

1.6.1 Universalism

Universalism theory can be interpreted from the terms of “Universal” itself.

Universalism as also called by moral objectivism is a perception toward some

system of ethics that should be applied universally to all people regardless culture,

sex, religion, race and so on and so for.56

As Noam Chomsky emphasize the

example of universalism concept,

"if we adopt the principle of universality: if an action is right (or wrong) for

others, it is right (or wrong) for us. Those who do not rise to the minimal

moral level of applying to themselves the standards they apply to others—

more stringent ones, in fact—plainly cannot be taken seriously when they

speak of appropriateness of response; or of right and wrong, good and

evil."57

The definition of universalism has shown clearly on how the Human Rights

were constructed as a universal concept. Besides, Claudio Corradetti also

emphasize on the mechanism of universalism concept, he emphasizes on his book

“Relativism and Human Rights a Theory of Pluralistic Universalism” that the

Universalism theory establish since the establishment of agreement should be

supported by a pattern of mutual understanding, which proceed to justification.58

By this mean, the conceptual of Human rights has been through a pattern of mutual

understanding that agreed and should be applied universally. In this case, the

pattern of mutual understanding shown by the ratification of Human Rights treaties.

56

Kemerling, G. (2011). A Dictionary of Philosophical Terms and Name. 57

Chomsky, N. (2002). Terror and Just Response. Retrieved from https://chomsky.info/20020702/ 58

Corradetti, C. (2009). Relativism and human rights: A theory of pluralistic universalism.

Dordrecht: Springer.

18

On the other hand, the universalism of human rights cannot be denied since

the source of Human rights itself is human nature that already been brought since

born of every human being.59

As according to Jack Donnelly, the source of Human

Rights is moral nature which been brought from human nature, meanwhile, moral

nature itself is universal as so called by “Moral universality”. As Jack Donnelly

explain,

“If Human Rights are the rights one has simply because one is a human

being, as they usually thought to be, then they hold ―Universally‖ by all

human being‖60

In conclusion, the existence of Human Rights is simply understood as a universal

concept since it has to be applied to all human being regardless of their status,

gender, race and so on and so for.

In the case of extrajudicial killing by Duterte under his “War on Drugs”

campaign, the conceptual of Human Rights as a universal concept just simply

contradict towards the action that done by Duterte. Since the pattern of mutual

understanding that shown by ratification of Human Rights treaties has been signed

by Philippines itself. by singing the treaties of Human Rights, Philippines has

accepted and agreed to the Universal concept of Human Rights. As also according

to Universalism, Human Rights is a universal concept that should be accepted and

applied to all human being simply because the human nature that brought from the

born of each person, meanwhile the extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs”

campaign that done by Duterte as well as the support by Filipinos is obviously did

not match the concept of Universalism on Human Rights. Therefore, the

Universalism theory will support this thesis in which become a common standard of

Human Rights.

1.6.2 State’s Responsibility to Protect Human Rights

59

Donnelly, J. (2013). Special Features of Human Rights. In Universal human rights in theory and

practice (2nd ed., pp. 10, 11). Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 60

Ibid, p-10-11

19

The State‟s Responsibility to Protect or also known as R2P, is a concept

emphasizing on the responsibility or obligation of state to protect Human Rights.61

The establishment of R2P was followed by the failure of state that unable to protect

of Human Rights is huge scale, then „the world community‟ has a responsibility to

step in and ensure that these rights are protected.62

The state‟s responsibility to

protect Human Rights cannot be separated with the value of Universalism of

Human Rights which make it become International Human Rights, that is why, here

the International Human Rights Law has become the foundation of the

establishment of R2P.63

The State‟s responsibility to protect also called as a

collective responsibility to protect the Universalism of Human Rights.64

The concept of R2P has being supervised under United Nations Human

Rights bodies. By the supervision of the UN Human Right bodies, the state that

having such kind of problem on Human Rights are being directly supervised. Since

then, the UN are required the accountability or report by each state regarding the

Human Rights cases on the country.65

The accountability report by each state to the

UN has considered as a form of contribution by UN to the Human Rights

enforcement, put focused on emphasizing the state‟s obligation to protect Human

Rights.66

The encouragement to enforced the protection of Human Rights shown by

the declaration by UN to remind states that having a Human Rights problems.

There are several examples of the encouragement of R2P that declared by the UN,

on of them is the UN declaration on Human Rights and Transitional Justice, that

declared on 30 September 2016 on the document number A/HRC/RES/33/19,

which stated that,

61

Miller, D. (2006). The Responsibility to Protect Human Rights. 62

Ibid 63

Cohen, R. (2016, July 29). The Responsibility to Protect: Human Rights and Humanitarian

Dimensions. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/on-the-record/the-responsibility-to-protect-

human-rights-and-humanitarian-dimensions/ 64

Ibid 65

Miller, D. (2006). The Responsibility to Protect Human Rights. 66

Ibid

20

―Calls upon States to work to prevent potential situations that could result

in gross violations and abuses of human rights and serious violations of

international humanitarian law, in particular genocide, war crimes, ethnic

cleansing and crimes against humanity, and, in relevant contexts, to timely

and efficiently address the legacy of past atrocities in order to prevent their

recurrence, including through cooperation with the Office of the Special

Advisers of the Secretary-General on the Prevention of Genocide and the

Responsibility to Protect…‖67

With concept of R2P, the case of extrajudicial killing practice inside the

“War on Drugs” decision has clearly violated the concept of Responsibility to

Protect Human Rights. Furthermore, Rodrigo Duterte as the main actor of the

decision are being ignorance towards his responsibility to protect Human Rights as

well as ignored the response from International community. The concept of R2P

will be useful to analyze the violation of responsibility to protect Human Rights by

Philippine‟s government regarding the case of extrajudicial killing on “War on

Drugs” decision by Duterte.

1.6.3 Cultural Relativism

Cultural relativism simply could be defined as a cultural based theory,

which perceives culture as a fundamental aspect of the rules and norms.

Meanwhile, culture itself can be considered as a relationship among individuals

within groups, among groups, and between ideas and perspectives. Culture is

concerned with identity, aspiration, symbolic exchange, coordination, and

structures and practices that serve relational ends, such as ethnicity, ritual, heritage,

norms, meanings and beliefs.68

In the context of International Human Rights,

cultural relativism may be defined as the position according to which local cultural

traditions that properly determine the existence and scope of civil and political

67

R2P REFERENCES IN UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS.

(n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.globalr2p.org/media/files/hrc-resolutions-r2p-10-april.pdf 68

Rao, V., & Walton, M. (2009). Culture and public action.

21

rights enjoyed by individuals in a given society.69

By this mean, the Cultural

Relativism perceive that human rights standards are vary among different cultures,

moreover it can reflect the national identity.70

Some of the scholars of International Relations that put focused on Human

rights cases believe that the relativity of culture is an undeniable fact, which can be

seen from moral rules and social institutions evidence an astonishing cultural and

historical variability. Jack Donnelly emphasize that there are two kinds of Cultural

relativism, the first is Strong Cultural Relativism and the second one is Weak

Cultural Relativism. The Strong Cultural Relativism perceive culture as a

fundamental source of rules and norms, since the culturalism focused on culture as

the source of rules and norms, it is automatically affecting to the validation of rules

and norms that should be accordance to the culture itself. In the other words, the

assumption of rights such as social practices, moral, and values are culturally

determined, which mean the norms and rules that exist should be based on culture.

Meanwhile, here the Weak Cultural Relativism perceive culture is an important

aspect of the validity of moral and rule. By that, the Weak Cultural Relativism point

of view, there is a weak assumption on the universalism of rights.71

Those perception

toward culture has affecting each perception toward the concept of universalism of

rights. It can be seen that the perception of Strong Cultural Relativism is strongly

contradict which the concept of universalism of rights. Meanwhile the Weak Cultural

Relativism still assume the existence of universalism of rights, but the relativism of

human nature, and its rights exist as a potential excess of universalism itself. By this

mean, still both of the Strong Cultural Relativism and Weak Cultural Relativism, still

in the same path of perception towards culture and the concept of universalism.

As has been stated above the conceptual of relativism is strongly contradict

with the concept of universalism, especially on the case of human rights. As the

69

Tesón, F. R. (1985). International Human Rights and Cultural Relativism. Retrieved from

https://ir.law.fsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1038&context=articles 70

Ibid 71

Donnelly, J. (1984). Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights. Human Rights

Quarterly, 6(4), 400-402. doi:10.2307/762182

22

scholars of cultural relativist disagree with the concept of universalism of human

rights, here that become the main question for cultural relativist is, if human rights

are based in human nature, on the simple fact that one is a human being, and if human

nature is universal, then how can human rights be relative? Here as according to Jack

Donnelly, the simple answer is that the human nature itself is relative. It becomes

relative since the beginning of human itself, which is their own biological factor that

could lead to a construction of various culture. It can be said simply that each culture

has different norms and value that attached with themselves from the very beginning,

since then the universalism concept could not match in every culture that exist.72

The importance of culture on shaping the state‟s behavior could be seen from

the effect that given from culture towards individuals at first. As explains by Jack

Donnelly,

―The impact of culture on the shaping of individuals is systematic and may

lead to the predominance of distinctive social types in different cultures.

There can be little doubt that there are important, structurally determined

differences, for example, between the modal "natures" of men and especially

women in modern western and traditional Islamic societies. In any

particular case, "human nature," the realized nature of real human beings,

is a social as well as a "natural" product.‖73

Based on that statement, Jack Donnelly try to emphasize that how each individual‟s

behavior as well as perception toward something are determines by the natural

culture that has been brought by each individual from they were born. In which

those natural culture was constructing the individual to perceive to some certain

phenomenon differently.

The Cultural Relativism is become such a suitable theory to be used on this

research. Cultural Relativism will be used as a contradiction towards universalism

concept of Human Rights, in which as accordance to cultural relativism the Human

Rights itself is considered as a relative concept. In the case of extrajudicial killing

72

Donnelly, J. (1984). Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights. Human Rights

Quarterly, 6(4), 403-406. doi:10.2307/762182 73

Ibid, p-403-406

23

on Philippines under “War on Drugs” campaign by Duterte, Cultural Relativism

theory will give a better understanding on analyzing the role of culture on shaping

the human nature of each human being which produce a different standard of

Human Rights. Constructivism will have the writer regarding analyzing culture as

the main construction of the extrajudicial killing that done on Philippines as well as

being supported by its citizens.

1.6.4 Constructivism

The theory of Constructivism established to emphasize social and relations

construction of what states are and what they want all these approaches might be used

to focus on power politics, cooperation, conflict, or any other substantive

phenomena.74

The constructivists believes that identity, interest, culture, norms, and

idea establish as a leading factor of a state to act differently towards the relations to

another state, by this means the constructivist believe on the importance of idea and

norms as a main factor to construct state‟s behavior. As added by Michael Barnett in

the book of “The Globalization of World Politics”, he emphasizes on the role of

Constructivism perspective as a main core of the path of states.

―Constructivist believes that ideas define the international structure, how

this structure shapes the identities, interests and foreign policy of states and

how state and non – state actors reproduce that structure – and at times

transform it.‖75

The construction of state‟s behavior has been explained very well by the

constructivist. Since the constructivist believe that idea and norms as a main factor

of state‟s construction, here the constructivist emphasizes on two main points as the

construction of state‟s behavior, which are the relations between “Structures” and

“Agents”.76

“Structures” as according to Ian Hurd is some factors that influenced

the International action, such as ideas, and rules, meanwhile “Agents” is the actor 74

Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics.

International Organization 75

Baylis J., Smith S., Owens P. (2008). The Globalization of World Politics : An Introduction to

International Relations, p. 164 Oxford University Press, England. 76

In Reus-Smit, C., & In Snidal, D. (2012). The Oxford handbook of international relations. Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

24

that operates in that context, such as interests and identities.77

The relations between

“Structures” and “Agents” are mutually constituted, which mean both “Structures”

and “Agents” which indicated the states as the actor and context as the system, are

constructing each other, or in the other word, both are being influenced by the

situation their interaction creates.78

The relation between “Agents” and “Structures” also called as the making

process of social structures. However, the social structures cannot be made without

the role of practices between the actors.79

The practices as according to

Constructivism is really important, in which can help to build the social structures,

which develop to build state‟s identity and interests.80

As what Alexander Wendt

emphasize on the book of ―Anarchy is what States Makes of it: The Social

Construction of Power Politics‖ since the process is mutually-constituted, the

practice can affect the social process to constructing and re-constructing them self, as

he explain furthermore, ―Changing the practices will change the intersubjective

knowledge that constitutes the system.‖81

As the constructivist put focused on idea and norms as the leading factor of

state‟s behavior, here Michael Barnett emphasize two main elements as a factor of

social construction especially towards the state‟s identities and interests. The first

element, Michael Barnett emphasize on the role of culture that can produce and idea

and norms which can affecting the state‟s identities and interests.82

The second

element, Michael Barnett emphasize on how knowledge such as symbols and rules

77

Ibid 78

Waltz, K. N. 1959. Man, the State, and War: A Theoretical Analysis. New York: Columbia

University Press 79

Constructivist Theories of IR. (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://www.public.iastate.edu/~pol_s.453/const.htm 80

Wendt, A. (1995). Anarchy is What States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics

(1992). International Theory, 403-407. 81

Ibid, p-, 403-407. 82


International Relations. Oxford University Press, England.

25

that construct an individual to behave and understand towards their world.83

As he

explains furthermore,

―Reality does not exist out there waiting to be discovered, instead,

historically – produced and culturally – bound knowledge enables

individuals to construct and give meaning to reality‖84

To understand the concept of idea that become the main construction of

state‟s behavior, Michael Barnett has already explained it clearly by the concept of

cultural fault-lines, which is something that drive the behavior and interests of the

state. As what Michael Barnett has explained,

―Constructivists attempt to recover the meanings that actors give to their

practices and the objects that they construct. These derive not from private

beliefs but rather from culture. In contrast to the rationalist presumption

that culture, at most, constrains action, Constructivists argue that culture

informs the meanings that people give to their action. Sometimes

Constructivists have presumed that such meanings derive from hardened

culture. But because culture is fractured and because society is comprised

of different interpretations of what is meaningful activity, scholars need to

consider these cultural fault – lines and treat the fixing of meanings as an

accomplishment that is at the essence of politics…‖85

As can be seen on the statement above, Michael Barnett emphasize that the

constructivist believe that culture informs the meaning that people to their action,

and sometimes those meaning derive from the hardened culture. The process of the

state‟s construction is mutually-constituted which emphasized that the practice can

affect the social process to constructing and re-constructing them self. Since the

social process can construct and re-construct again, the making of hardened culture

is one of the result of re-construction process which derive from practice. Simply,

the practice as according to constructivist can construct a culture, and the culture

83

Jackson, R and Sorensen, G(2006). Introduction to International RelationsTheories and

Approaches. Oxford university press. 84


International Relations. Oxford University Press, England. 85


International Relations. Oxford University Press, England

26

has been through a re-construct process, so that resulting a practice or also called as

a hardened culture.86

The Constructivism that focused on Ideas and norms as a main factor of

social construction as well as a factor that construct states‟ behavior, is such a

suitable theory to be used on the topic of the extrajudicial killing by Duterte

regarding his “War on Drugs” campaign. As stated before, the case of extrajudicial

killing on Philippines were gained mass support from its citizens, here the theory of

constructivism will give a better explanation on the background of Filipinos

behavior, especially towards “War on Drugs” campaign. Furthermore, on finding

the cultural fault – lines constituted the interests and also identity of Philippines that

are historically and socially constructed that lead to an action of extrajudicial killing

by Duterte as well as the ideas that construct Filipinos to support the “War on

Drugs” campaign, in which also supporting the extrajudicial killing itself.

\

86

Ibid

27

1.7 Framework of Research

Figure 1

Conceptual Framework

Source: Research Framework constructed by Atlindo Rizky Putranto

28

Based on the framework of the research constructed by the writer and Ms.

Natasya Kusumawardani, S.IP., the framework of this research will put focused on

culture as a leading factor of Philippines‟ extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs”

campaign, which has violate the Universalism concept of Human Rights. Especially

on the practice of death penalty that has been exist since the colonialization era,

which has been brought by the Spanish. the figure above explains on how the

practice of Death Penalty on Philippine‟s has create norms and values in which

taking an important role on the making of culture of killing on Philippines. As

according to Michael Barnett regarding Social Constructivism, the cultural fault-

lines has take a role on shaping the state‟s behavior, and here the culture of Killing

on Philippines has become the cultural fault-lines that affecting the Filipino‟s

perception toward Human Rights, in which they perceive it as a relative concept,

instead of as an Universal concept that has to be applied to all Human being. The

figure above has explained, since Human Rights considered as a Relative concept

for the Filipinos, so that the Filipinos being supportive toward the “War on Drugs”

campaign that done by Duterte. Therefore, this thesis will have a further discussion

on the violation of Human Rights by the extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs”

campaign that done by Duterte and supported by the Filipinos and put the practice

of Death Penalty as the main factor of the culture of killing (cultural fault-lines)

which create the Relativism concept toward Human Rights on the perception of

Philippine‟s citizens.

1.8 Research Methodology

This research is designed as a descriptive research, focusing on fact finding

inquiry. In order to answer the core problem presented in this research, literature

review is conducted concerning in the debate on Universalism and Relativism

concept of Human Rights, in the case of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs”

campaign under Duterte‟s administration on Philippines. The writer will use the

report of Human Rights Watch (HRW) (an international non-governmental

29

organization that conducts research and advocacy on human rights), as well as

Report on Philippine Extrajudicial Killings from 2001-2010 by Atty. Al A. Parreño

as a primary source, since both reports give a clear data on current situation of

extrajudicial killing on Philippines and the history of extrajudicial killing on

Philippines. The instrument used in this research are not limited to printed version,

but also helped by electronics sources, especially from the internet.

1.9 Scope and Limitations of the Study

This thesis will focus on the implications of “War on Drugs” campaign on

Philippines under Duterte‟s administration on 2016 until 2018, as a case of

contradiction towards the universalism concept of Human Rights, regarding the

extrajudicial killing on the implications of “War on Drugs” campaign. This thesis will

discuss the role of culture on constructing Philippine‟s behavior including the leader

as well as its citizens regarding the implementation of “War on Drugs” campaign as

well as the support given by the citizens towards the “War on Drugs” campaign. This

thesis will limit to analyze the extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign in

Philippines as case of the violation of Human Rights.

1.10 Thesis Structure

Chapter I – Introduction

In this chapter, the writer will discuss more about the foundation of the topic

problems which includes of the background of the study, problems identification,

research question, significance of the study, theoretical framework which used to

analyze the problems, scope and limitation of the study, and also thesis structure. As

the fundamental of the thesis, the first chapter will focus on explain the way of

thinking how the problems exist and solved on that time frame.

30

Chapter II – Overview: Extrajudicial Killing as a Violation of Human Rights

In this Chapter, the writer will discuss about extrajudicial killing as a form of Human

Rights violations. The discussion will elaborate the Philippines government failure to

protect Human Rights.

Chapter III – War on Drugs Campaign on Philippines

In this chapter, the writer will discuss about the case of “War on Drugs” campaign on

Philippines. The discussion will elaborate the current “War on Drugs” campaign as

well as the background of the implementation of “War on Drugs” campaign on

Philippines

Chapter IV – Analysis

In this chapter, the writer will analyze the relation between the case and the

theoretical framework that used which has support this research.

Chapter VI – Conclusion

The conclusion of this thesis will be written in this chapter, which can be used to the

civil society to enrich the view about the motives and the causing factor behind the

implication of “War on Drugs” campaign.

1.11 Literature Review

In order to support the research, there are some books and journal as well as

articles that providing a better understanding regarding this thesis. The books will

mostly discuss about human rights, the theories that has been discussed above, and

obviously about Philippines “War on Drugs” itself. Here are some books and

journals that important for this research.

31

1.11.1 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) Document

Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a document that become a

milestone in the history of human rights. the Declaration was proclaimed by the

United Nations General Assembly in Paris on 10 December 1948. It has giving a

clear understanding on the definition of human rights. As according to the UDHR

document, human rights consider as ―the inherent dignity and of the equal and

inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom,

justice and peace in the world....‖.87

besides, the UDHR also give a further

understanding of human rights regarding things that so called as rights. UDHR

emphasize that human rights consider as a right inherent to all human beings,

regardless of race, sex, nationality, ethnicity, language, religion, or any other status.

Human rights include the right to life and liberty, freedom from slavery and torture,

freedom of opinion and expression, the right to work and education, and so on and

so for.88

Above all, the UDHR establish as a declaration of the universalism of

human rights, which has become the source this research in terms of supporting the

existence of human rights as a universal concept. The universalism of human rights

has been clearly stated on UDHR document, in which stated on the preamble of

UDHR,

―THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL

DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of

achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual

and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind,

shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights

and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to

secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among

the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of

territories under their jurisdiction.‖89

87

Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (2018, January 29). Retrieved from

http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/ 88

Ibid 89

Ibid

32

As stated above, which clearly stated that the UDHR establish as a common

standard it is obviously stated the universalism of Human Rights. Therefore, the

UDHR has become one of the literature since it has gave a better understanding to

define Human Rights as well as its universalism concept.

1.11.2 Wendt, A. (1995). Anarchy is What States Make of it: The Social

Construction of Power Politics (1992). International Theory

Anarchy is What States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power

Politics is a book by Alexander Wendt, who best known regarding constructivism.

On the book of Anarchy is What States Make of it: The Social Construction of

Power Politics, Alexander Wendt has clearly explained the constructivism itself, he

believes that constructivism is a theory that important to conceived the social

construction. As he explained on his book, that the power, interests and identity on

International Relations are shaped by the behavior of the state, which the process is

mutually-constituted or on the other word, the behavior and those elements

(identity, power, interests) are constituted each other.90

As he explained on his book, the process of shaping the behavior and the

elements is also known by shaping the social structures. In which social structures

is important to shape the behavior of the state, since it is a mutually-constituted

process. However, the process cannot be done without the practice or praxes of the

actors.91

Moreover, he explained that practice is really important to shape the state‟s

behavior, since practice is something that done over and over again so that it has

construct the state;s behavior.

The book of “Anarchy is What States Make of it: The Social Construction

of Power” will support this thesis regarding giving a clear understanding to analyze

the idea behind the practice of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign

90


(1992). International Theory 91

Ibid

33

under Duterte‟s Administration. In which to put focused on the role of practice as a

driving factor to the state‟s behavior and social structures.

1.11.2 Relativism and Human Rights (Claudio Coradetti)

The Relativism and Human Rights is a book by Claudio Coradetti. The

book of Relativism and Human Rights explains on how the concept of Relativism

and Universalism of Human Rights were established. both of the Universalism and

Relativism of Human Rights were explained on this book in a philosophical way. In

which Claudio Coradetti explained on how the Universalism concept was made, as

he mentions on his book that that the Universalism theory establish since the

establishment of agreement should be supported by a pattern of mutual

understanding, which proceed to justification.92

In which the Human Rights concept

has been through a pattern of mutual understanding so that it can accepted and

applied Universally.

On the other hand, Claudio Coradetti also emphasize that the concept of

Relativism is was established from a morality of human in which tend to relative.

He emphasizes that the perspective of morality is able to provide a qualified proof

towards the concept of relativism, in which the Relativism also can be called as a

“standard-related” which indicates the standard of something is relative. In which

the Human Rights concept also can be considered as “standard-related” concept, or

on the other words, considered as relative.93

The book of Relativism and Human Rights by Claudio Coradetti, will

support this thesis due to give a clear philosophical understanding towards the

concept of Universalism and Relativism of Human Rights. In the case of

extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration,

to understand the concept of Universalism and Relativism is really important, by

understanding the concept of Universalism and Relativism the writer is able to

92

Corradetti, C. (2009). Relativism and human rights: A theory of pluralistic universalism.

Dordrecht: Springer. 93

Ibid.

34

analyze on the Filipinos perception towards Human Rights, whether considered as a

Universal or Relative concept.

1.11.4 Baylis J., Smith S., Owens P. (2008). The Globalization of World Politics

: An Introduction to International Relations

The Globalization of World Politics is a book by John Baylis, Steve Smith,

and Patricia Owens. The writer would like to focused on page 169 – 184 regarding

the constructivism theory provided by Michael Barnett, as a scholars of

Constructivism theory. As stated on the book, according to Michael Barnett

Constructivism is a theory that perceiving ideas as the main factor of international

structure. As quoted below,

―Constructivist believes that ideas define the international structure, how

this structure shapes the identities, interests and foreign policy of states and

how state and non – state actors reproduce that structure – and at times

transform it.‖94

Furthermore, the book also providing a clear conception on Constructivism as

according to Michael Barnett. Michael Barnett emphasize two main elements as a

factor of social construction especially towards the state‟s identities and interests.

The first element, Michael Barnett emphasize on the role of culture that can

produce and idea and norms which can affecting the state‟s identities and

interests.95

The second element, Michael Barnett emphasize on how knowledge

such as symbols and rules that construct an individual to behave and understand

towards their world.

The theory of constructivism that provided by Michael Barnett will support

this thesis due to the theoretical framework of this thesis. It will give a clear

understanding on ideas as the construction of state‟s behavior, in this case the

constructivism theory will focused on ideas as the background or something that

94



Ibid, p-164

35

construct the action of extrajudicial killing done by Duterte under “War on Drugs”

campaign, as well as the support by Philippines‟ citizens towards the campaign.

1.11.5 Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights

Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights is a book by Jack

Donnelly, which is a political science scholar from the University of California. In

the book of Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights, Jack Donnelly

emphasizes on the contradiction between the concept of Universalism and

Relativism, in which giving a clear understanding on the differences between both

conception. In the book of Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights, Jack

Donnelly emphasize on the role of culture as a supportive factor for the relativity

concept, which so called as cultural relativism. As according to Jack Donnelly,

Cultural relativism simply can be interpreted as a perception on culture as a

fundamental aspect of the rules and norms. Jack Donnelly believe that the relativity

of culture is an undeniable fact, which can be seen from moral rules and social

institutions evidence an astonishing cultural and historical variability.96

Furthermore, due to supporting a clear conception of Cultural Relativism,

Jack Donnelly explains the importance of Cultural Relativism on shaping the

individual behavior, in which can lead to drives the state‟s behavior. As quoted

from the book of Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights,

―The impact of culture on the shaping of individuals is systematic and may

lead to the predominance of distinctive social types in different cultures.

There can be little doubt that there are important, structurally determined

differences, for example, between the modal "natures" of men and especially

women in modern western and traditional Islamic societies. In any

particular case, "human nature," the realized nature of real human beings,

is a social as well as a "natural" product‖97

96

Donnelly, J. (2013). Universal human rights in theory and practice. Ithaca: Cornell University

Press. 97

Ibid

36

The Cultural Relativism theory that provided by Jack Donnelly will give a

clear and better understanding on the role of culture as source of construction of the

idea on the implication of “War on Drugs” campaign. Since the “War on Drugs”

campaign that refer to the extrajudicial killing are also being supported by

Philippines‟ citizens, the Cultural relativism is become a suitable theory to used, to

find out the motives behind the extrajudicial killing, in which put culture as the

main source of the state‟s behavior.

1.11.6 Human Rights Watch: License to Kill

“License to Kill” is a report by human rights watch regarding the “War on

Drugs” campaign on Philippines, emphasizing on the extrajudicial killing inside the

“War on Drugs” activity itself. The report that given by Human Rights Watch

clearly giving a clear information about the data regarding the killing under

Duterte‟s “War on Drugs” campaign. The report that given is supporting the fact of

extrajudicial killing on Duterte‟s anti-drugs campaign

As reported by Human Rights Watch, there are over 7,000 people that

being killed on the anti-drugs campaign of Duterte since Duterte was elected as the

President of Philippines. Human Rights Watch also stated that the killing under

Duterte‟s administration was done not only by the official police of Philippines but

also done by some un-identified gunman, which so called as Duterte‟s death

squad.98

The data that given was supported by the interview that has done by

Human Right Watch towards the victim as well as the officer that conducting the

killing under Duterte‟s anti-drug campaign.99

Besides Human Rights Watch also giving a clear information towards the

response from some International Organization regarding the extrajudicial killing

under Duterte‟s “War on Drugs” campaign that already been discussed above.

98



dutertes-war-drugs 99

Ibid

37

Those data and information that given by Human Rights Watch are really important

as a source of this research regarding the extrajudicial killing that done under

Duterte‟s administration.

1.11.7 Johnson, D. T., & Zimring, F. E. (2009). The next frontier: National

development, political change and the death penalty in Asia. Oxford: Oxford

Univ. Press

The book of “The next frontier: National development, political change

and the death penalty in Asia” is a book by David T Johnson, Franklin E Zimring.

The book discussed the istory of death penalty especially in Asia region. In which

Philippines also discussed on the book. The book has give a clear discussion on

historical background and practices of death penalty that happen on Philippines. it

emphasized that Spain, America, and Japan as a pioneer country that implement the

death penalty during the colonialization era.100

Regarding the case of Human Rights violation by extrajudicial killing on

“War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration, to understand the

historical background on the practice of death penalty on Philippines is really

important. So that the author can analyze further regarding the factor behind the

practice of extrajudicial killing that happen on Duterte‟s administration. The book

of “The next frontier: National development, political change and the death penalty

in Asia” will support this thesis regarding giving some information on the history

and practice of death penalty on Philippines.

100

7 Johnson, D. T., & Zimring, F. E. (2009). The next frontier: National development, political

change and the death penalty in Asia (pp. 105-108). (Next frontier.) Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press

38

CHAPTER II

AN OVERVIEW OF EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLING AS A

VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

Human Rights as a universal concept should be applied to all human being.

The Universalism of Human Rights has been declared on the Universal Declaration

of Human Rights (UDHR) which stated that Human Rights work as a universal

concept and has to be protected for those who ratified the declaration. As has been

explain on the previous chapter, Philippines is one of the country who ratified the

UDHR, however Human Rights still cannot be implemented fully on Philippines.

the act of Duterte on violating the Human Rights has trigger the response from

several International organization that promoting the Human Rights. This chapter

will discuss the overview of the ratification on Human Rights documents that done

by Philippines and the practice after the ratification, whether Philippines has

promoting Human Rights or not regarding the case of “War on Drugs” campaign

under Duterte‟s administration

2.1 Extrajudicial Killing on “War on Drugs” decision as a Violation

on Ratified Treaties of Human Rights

Human Rights is a right inherent to all human beings, regardless of race,

sex, nationality, ethnicity, language, religion, or any other status. Human rights

include the right to life and liberty, freedom from slavery and torture, freedom of

opinion and expression, the right to work and education and many more.101

since

Human Rights is a right inherent to all human being, it has become a universal

concept and have to be applied universally. the Universalism concept has been

101

Human Rights. (2017, October 31). Retrieved from http://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-

depth/human-rights/

39

declared on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). UDHR The

UDHR was proclaimed on 10 December 1948 and has been translated into 500

languages and has been ratified by forty-eight members of the United Nations.102

It

is a document that declared by the United Nations (UN) as a common standard of

achievements for all peoples and all nations and to be applied for all human being

and universally protected.103

The UDHR has been agreed as the foundation of

International Human Rights law, and it has become an international standard of

Human Rights. So that the Human Rights has become a universal concept because

the declaration of UDHR. As quoted below:

―The core principles of human rights first set out in the UDHR, such as

universality, interdependence and indivisibility, equality and non-

discrimination, and that human rights simultaneously entail both rights

and obligations from duty bearers and rights owners, have been

reiterated in numerous international human rights conventions,

declarations, and resolutions. Today, all United Nations Members States

have ratified at least one of the nine core international human rights

treaties, and 80 percent have ratified four or more, giving concrete

expression to the universality of the UDHR and international human

rights.‖104

The UDHR that proclaimed on 10 December 1948, has translated into 500

languages and has been ratified by forty-eight members of the United Nations.

Among forty-eight members of the UN that ratified the Human Rights documents,

Philippines has become one of the who ratified the UDHR.105

The ratification of

Human Rights documents that done by Philippines has shown Philippine‟s

commitment to protect and promote Human Rights universally. Besides, the

ratification of Human Rights documents by Philippines also shown its obligation to

102

Ibid 103

Ibid 104



law/index.html 105

History of the Document. (2017, October 31). Retrieved from

http://www.un.org/en/sections/universal-declaration/history-document/index.html

40

respect Human Rights under International Law. As according to Office of the High

Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), a United Nations agency that

established to promote and protect Human Rights that guaranteed under

International Law and UDHR, Philippines has ratified 14 documents of

International Human Rights treaties from totally 18 treaties. By the ratification of

14 treaties Philippines is actually has portraying a good image on the status of

ratification that set up by UN, as what shown on the figure below.106

Figure 2

Source: OHCHR Dashboard

As can be seen in the figure above on the mapping of Ratification of 18

International treaties, the color indicates the range amount of treaties that has been

signed of the state‟s members of UN. And Philippines has portrayed a good image

in the status of the ratifications. Since Philippines has signed 14 treaties from totally

18 treaties of International Human Rights treaties.

106

OHCHR Dashboard. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://indicators.ohchr.org/

41

Among 14 documents of International Human Rights treaties Philippines

has signed several documents with different form of Human Rights. The documents

that Philippines has ratified are shown as below107

:

- International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial

Discrimination :1969

- International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights :1976

- Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political

Rights :1976

- Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and

Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty :1991

- International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights :1976

- Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against

Women :1981

- Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of

Discrimination against Women :2000

- Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading

Treatment or Punishment :1987

- Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,

Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment :2006

- Convention on the Rights of the Child :1990

- Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the

involvement of children in armed conflict :2002

- Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale

of children, child prostitution and child pornography :2002

- International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant

Workers and Members of their Families :2003

- Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities :2008

107

Ibid

42

UDHR that discussed on Human Rights in general has two covenants,

International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), and

International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), both covenant along

with the UDHR also known as International bill of Human Rights.108

The ICESCR

and ICCPR focusing on different aspect of Human Rights. The ICESCR are

focusing on the rights of economic, social, and cultural rights, meanwhile the

ICCPR are focusing on the rights of civil and political rights, however both of them

are still in the same path of promoting the Universalism of Human Rights. The

separation between ICCPR and ICESCR that based on different aspect was aimed

to achieve the goals of Human Rights. As according to the Fact Sheet No.2 (Rev.1),

The International Bill of Human Rights, to achieve the goals of Human Rights is

based on the freedom of civil and economical rights.109

As stated on the Fact Sheet

No.2 (Rev.1), The International Bill of Human Rights.

―in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the ideal of

free human beings enjoying freedom from fear and want can only be achieved

if conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy his economic, social

and cultural rights, as well as his civil and political rights.‖110

There are many forms of Human Rights violation, regarding to the case of

“War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration, extrajudicial killing was

found on the practice of the campaign. And extrajudicial killing is one of the form

of the violation of Human Rights. Extrajudicial killing can be defined as an

unlawful killing, or an action of killing without a legal process that done by

government (or with their complicity) which are not adequately investigated and

prosecuted by the authorities.111

It is considered as a violation of Human Rights

since the action of extrajudicial killing is considered as an action of cruel as well as

because it is considered as an action of taking the human‟s freedom.

108



Ibid 110

Ibid 111

Gould, L. A., & Pate, M. (2016). State fragility around the world: Fractured justice and fierce

reprisal (p. 31).

43

Extrajudicial killing as a form of Human Rights violation actually not stated

clearly in any Human Rights documents. Even though there is no clear statement

regarding extrajudicial killing as a form of Human Rights violation, however,

extrajudicial killing still considered as a form of Human Rights violation. it can be

seen from the Article 3 of UDHR, "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and

security of person", and Article 5 of UDHR that stated that ―No one shall be

subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or

punishment‖.112

From those articles, it can be seen that extrajudicial killing clearly

violate the Human Rights since it has deprived the right to life, liberty and security

of person and subjected to a degrading punishment.113

As has been stated above, it

is simply considered as a violation Human Rights since extrajudicial killing has

take the human‟s freedom and in practice the killing is not through a legal

procedure.

The violation of Human Rights by extrajudicial killing has been discussed

clearly on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The

ICCPR reiterates the right to life, liberty and security of person, and prohibit the

action that violate those rights.114

Extrajudicial killing as an action of violation on

Human Rights, has been emphasized further on Article 6 and 7 of ICCPR.115

- Article 6

Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be

protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life. ...

- Article 7

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading

treatment or punishment.

112

Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (2018, April 23). Retrieved from

http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/index.html 113

"Disappearances" and extrajudicial executions as violations of international human rights. (n.d.).

Retrieved from https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/188000/act330051993en.pdf 114

Ibid 115



44

The right to life, liberty, and security of person reiterated on the Article 6 and 7 of

ICCPR. In which emphasize that no one shall be subjected to cruel punishment that

lead to a deprivation to right to life.

Furthermore, ICCPR emphasize again the extrajudicial killing as a form of

Human Rights violation in terms of killing without a legal procedure on the part 3

Article 9 of the covenant.116

Article 9.

1. Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be

subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention. No one shall be deprived of his

liberty except on such grounds and in accordance with such procedure as

are established by law.

2. Anyone who is arrested shall be informed, at the time of arrest, of the

reasons for his arrest and shall be promptly informed of any charges

against him.

3. Anyone arrested or detained on a criminal charge shall be brought

promptly before a judge or other officer authorized by law to exercise

judicial power and shall be entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to

release. It shall not be the general rule that persons awaiting trial shall be

detained in custody, but release may be subject to guarantees to appear for

trial, at any other stage of the judicial proceedings, and, should occasion

arise, for execution of the judgement.

The Article 9 of Part 3 of the covenant, has clearly emphasize the extrajudicial

killing as a form of Human Rights violation. As can be seen above on the number 3

of Article 9, that anyone that being arrest because of a criminal charge shall be

authorized by law to exercise judicial power or process. Meanwhile the practice of

extrajudicial killing is not through a legal procedure. Since extrajudicial killing is a

killing without a legal procedure and it has clearly violate the Human Rights as

according to Article 9 of Part 3 of ICCPR.

Besides the ICCPR, to consider extrajudicial killing as form of Human

Rights violation, Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman Degrading

Treatment or Punishment (CAT) also emphasize the action of extrajudicial killing

116

Ibid

45

as a violation of Human Rights. CAT established to promote the Universalism

concept of Human Rights, to aim the freedom of human through Protection of All

Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading

Treatment or Punishment.117

The establishment of CAT is in line with the point of

UDHR and ICCPR regarding to an action against torture and cruel action. As

quoted below:

―Having regard to article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

and article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,

both of which provide that no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel,

inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.‖118

Regarding the extrajudicial killing practice, CAT has emphasized that

state‟s should prohibit and promote anti torture and cruel action on the article 2 of

CAT, which extrajudicial killing also considered as a cruel action.119

Article 2:

1. Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial

or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its

jurisdiction.

2. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a

threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency,

may be invoked as a justification of torture.

3. An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked

as a justification of torture.

As can be seen above, the CAT emphasize that state should take a judicial process

to prevent act of torture and cruel to be happen.

Regarding the case of “War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s

administration considered as a violation of Human Rights. Since The extrajudicial

killing practice that found inside the “War on Drugs” campaign. The extrajudicial

killing on “War on Drugs” campaign has clearly violated the Universalism concept

117


http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CAT.aspx 118

Ibid 119

Ibid

46

of Human Rights, since the practice of the extrajudicial killing has taken the

human‟s freedom which violate the article 3 and 5 of the UDHR. The extrajudicial

killing on “War on Drugs” campaign also violate Article 9 of ICCPR. In which the

extrajudicial killing practice has conduct a killing without a legal procedure.

Furthermore, Philippines has also violates the ratified documents of Human Rights

by implementing the “War on Drugs” campaign, which extrajudicial killing were

inside the practice of the campaign. Its become worst since Philippines also ratified

the Human Rights treaties that discuss the extrajudicial killing as a violation of

Human Rights. Therefore, the “War on Drugs” campaign has considered as a

violation of Human Rights, and in the other hand, Philippines has violated the

Human Rights treaties that they already ratified.

2.2 Extrajudicial Killing on “War on Drugs” Campaugn as

Violation of R2P

The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) established since the states cannot fulfil

their obligation regarding to be responsible to protect Human Rights. Precisely,

R2P established because of the case of mass killing that happens on 1990‟s, such as

the mass killing case on Kosovo, Rwanda, Bosnia, and many other places.120

Since

then, states have begun to advocating a right to undertake interventions to stop mass

violations of Human Rights.121

Then, on 54th

session of United Nation General

Assembly on 1999, Kofi Anan as the UN Secretary General ask the member states

to prevent such a case of mass Human Rights violation.122

Therefore, the R2P

concept was established to encourage the state‟s obligation to protect Human

Rights. On the other hand, the concept of R2P also established in order to support

120

Badescu, C. G. (2012). Humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect: Security and

human rights (pp. 1 - 3). London: Routledge. 121

Ibid, p-1 – p-3 122


human rights (p. 6). London: Routledge.

47

the implementation of Universalism of Human Rights, therefore, the R2P concept

also called by “collective responsibility” to protect Human Rights.123

The concept of R2P emphasizing on state‟s responsibility to protect Human

Rights has two main frameworks. Those are sovereignty as responsibility and

international responsibility. Both of the frameworks are connected each other, a

sovereign state entails a responsibility to protect its citizens from a deprivation of

their Human Rights, that is why in the case of Responsibility to protect of Human

Rights, a sovereign state that cannot protect their citizens from a deprivation of

Human Rights, then the responsibility to protect falls to the International

community.124

Furthermore it is also supported by three pillars, the protection

responsibility of the state, the responsibility of International Community to assist

states to fulfill their obligation, and the commitment to collective action.125

To enforced the implementation of Human Rights protection, R2P is being

supervised under the UN Human Rights bodies, which encourage the states member

to protect Human Rights and encourage to give a report on Human Rights cases in

the country as a contribution toward the implementation of R2P.126

meanwhile the

state contribution toward R2P also shown by the ratification of Human Rights

treaties. In which the states have given their agreement on promoting and protecting

the Universalism of Human Rights by the ratification.127

The United Nations also

emphasize the importance and the state‟s responsibilities after the ratification as

quoted below.

123



human-rights-and-humanitarian-dimensions/ 124




human rights (p. 110). London: Routledge. 126

Ibid, p-110 127



law/index.html

48

―By becoming parties to international treaties, States assume

obligations and duties under international law to respect, to protect and

to fulfil human rights. The obligation to respect means that States must

refrain from interfering with or curtailing the enjoyment of human

rights. The obligation to protect requires States to protect individuals

and groups against human rights abuses. The obligation to fulfil means

that States must take positive action to facilitate the enjoyment of basic

human rights.‖128

However, Philippines as one of the country that ratified several Human

Rights treaties still cannot fulfil its obligation to protect the Human Rights in the

country by having an extrajudicial practice inside the “War on Drugs” decision on

Duterte‟s administration. Meanwhile, Philippines as the state who ratified should

have known the obligation and responsibility to protect Human Rights in the

country. On the other Hand, the attitude of Duterte indicates the government‟s

ignorance toward the obligation to protect Human Rights.

Philippines also has been under supervision and investigation by The Global

Centre for the Responsibility to Protect, which a NGO to promote value of

“Responsibility to protect”.129

In the report of Global Centre for the Responsibility

to Protect, it is clearly stated that Philippines currently having a violation toward

the concept of R2P by implementing the “War on Drugs” decision, as stated on the

R2P monitor 15 November 2017 Issue 36,

―The government of the Philippines is failing to uphold its Responsibility to

Protect all Filipinos from crimes against humanity, including those accused

of drug offenses.‖130

The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect also has declared a necessary

action toward Philippines government as stated below.

128



law/index.html 129

R2P MONITOR 15 NOVEMBER 2017 ISSUE 36 A bimonthly bulletin by the Global Centre for

the Responsibility to Protect. (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://www.globalr2p.org/media/files/r2p_monitor_nov2017.pdf 130

Ibid

49

―National authorities in the Philippines must restore the rule of law and

immediately halt widespread extrajudicial killings. The Philippines Senate

should ensure that a substantial and credible investigation into extrajudicial

killings and the "war on drugs" is undertaken. The UN Human Rights

Council should continue to closely monitor the situation in the

Philippines.‖131

The action of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign by Duterte

has clearly violated the R2P concept. It is simply considered as a violation toward

R2P because Duterte cannot fulfil the frameworks and pillars of R2P. As mention

before, that the framework of R2P is sovereignty as responsibility and international

responsibility, meanwhile, Duterte cannot fulfil the responsibility to protect its

citizens from Human Rights violation as a sovereign state, as well as being

ignorance to the international community regarding responses on responsibility to

protect Human Rights.132

On the other hand, Duterte also cannot fulfil the three

pillars of R2P, in which emphasize on the protection responsibility of the state, the

responsibility of International Community to assist states to fulfill their obligation,

and the commitment to collective action.133

By implementing the extrajudicial

killing on “War on Drugs” campaign, Philippines has clearly violates its

responsibility to protect Human Rights as well as being ignorance toward the

responses of International community.

2.3. International Responses Toward “War on Drugs” Campaign

As a state that ratified the Human Rights treaties, Philippines should protect

its citizens from the action of Human Rights deprivation. The concept of R2P also

has clearly emphasizes that the International community have a responsible to assist

131

Ibid 132





human-rights-and-humanitarian-dimensions/

50

the states to fulfil their obligations.134

Meanwhile, in the case of “War on Drugs”

campaign, Duterte as the President of Philippines has ignored the responses from

International Community. And still conducting the “War on Drugs” campaign

without paying attention to the responses and condemnation from International

Community.

The implementation of “War on Drugs‟ campaign under Duterte‟s

administration has triggered the International Community to respond. The

responses are coming from several International Organizations and several states.

Some of the response are asking Duterte to stop the extrajudicial killing inside the

“War on Drugs” campaign in the name of Human Rights. In June 2016, Ban Ki

moon as the Secretary General of UN expressed his disturbed feeling toward the act

of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign In an annual meeting of the

UN Correspondents Association, as he stated below,

“I unequivocally condemn his apparent endorsement of extrajudicial killing,

which is illegal and a breach of fundamental rights and freedoms. Such

comments are of particular concern in light of ongoing impunity for serious

cases of violence against journalists in the Philippines.‖135

The condemnation that given by UN also stated by Yuro Fedotov, the executive

director of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). He strongly

rejects the act of extrajudicial killing by Duterte as he said on August 2016,

―The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) remains greatly

concerned by the reports of extrajudicial killing of suspected drug dealers

and users in the Philippines. I join the United Nations Secretary-General in

condemning the apparent endorsement of extrajudicial killing, which is

illegal and a breach of fundamental rights and freedoms.‖136

134








dutertes-war-drugs

51

The action of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign also being

criticized as an action of lack of understanding on the Universalism concept of

Human Rights. Moreover, Zeid Bin Ra‟ad Al-hussein the current United Nations

High Commissioner for Human Rights stated that the act by Duterte is such a scorn

for International Human Rights law. As he stated below,

―The President of the Philippines's statements of scorn for international

human rights law display a striking lack of understanding of our human

rights institutions and the principles which keep societies safe. Fair and

impartial rule of law is the foundation of public confidence and security.

Empowering police forces to shoot to kill any individual whom they claim to

suspect of drug crimes, with or without evidence, undermines justice. The

people of the Philippines have a right to judicial institutions that are

impartial and operate under due process guarantees; and they have a right

to a police force that serves justice. I strongly encourage the Philippines to

extend an invitation to the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or

arbitrary executions. My Office is ready to assist, including with respect to

rule of law institutions and the prevention and treatment of drug use in

accordance with international norms.‖137

The responses and rejections toward Duterte is not only came from the UN,

there are several states that also showed the expression of rejection regarding the

case of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign. One of the example is

the United States. As a country that have a good cooperation with Philippines, in

terms of “War on Drugs” campaign, US also show their rejection by the statement

of Anna Richey-Allen, as the State Department spokesperson. ―We strongly urge

the Philippines to ensure its law enforcement efforts are consistent with its human

rights obligations.‖ As the state Department spokesperson said.138

The US Senators

Cardin and Patrick Leahy, author of a provision of US law also show the expression

of rejection toward Duterte‟s action,

137




Ibid

52

―Duterte‘s ―war on drugs‖ is not a situation in which there is occasional

error or over-zealous application of force. This is systematic, widespread,

brutal, and beyond the bounds for a constitutional democracy.‖139

Meanwhile, in responding the response that given by the International

community Duterte showed no fear. As he response the US statement regarding the

“War on Drugs” rejection ―Why are you shooting the black people when they are

on the ground? [You] can do it, but we can‘t? … Do not pretend to be the moral

conscience of the world.‖140

Moreover, in some statement he response the

International Community statement with an insulting statement. As the example

when he response toward the UN High Commissioner requirement to open an

investigation on Duterte “War on Drugs” campaign.

―There‘s one United Nations official, [in charge of] human rights. He said

Duterte is a murderer and must be charged for murder. This guy is ever a

joker or a bit insane. What‘s difficult with the United Nations, you guys, you

are employed by an organ composed of nations whose officials are elected

by the people. You officials sitting there on your asses, we pay your salaries.

You idiot. You do not tell me what to do. I am your employer. Who gave you

the right? You lack knowledge of international law. We are the ones who

contribute to the United Nations. You shameless sons of a whore. I pay your

salaries. Don‘t talk to me like I‘m your employee. I am [the head of] a

member state, a sovereign state. Please shut up. Your brains are small. Do

not do that. You‘re just an employee there. You‘re appointed‖141

The act of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign under

Duterte‟s administration has considered as a violation of Human Rights, as has

been explain previously. Meanwhile, the response from International Community

toward the action of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign by Duterte

shown very well on how the Human Rights has considered as a universal concept,

since the International Community has seriously reject the action of extrajudicial

killing by Duterte. On the other hand, the action of Duterte regarding responding

back the rejection that given by the International community has showed

139




Ibid 141

Ibid

53

Philippine‟s violation toward the concept of R2P. In which Duterte has ignored the

international responsibility to assist the state to fulfil their obligation to protect

Human Rights, that can be seen from Duterte‟s rejection on the call for

investigation from UN. Those fact has lead to a question on whether the concept of

Human Rights has considered as a Universalism or Relativism by the Philippines,

that will be explain on next chapter.

54

CHAPTER III

AN OVERVIEW OF “WAR ON DRUGS” CAMPAIGN

BY DUTERTE’S ADMINISTRATION

The extrajudicial killing in “War on Drugs” campaign has become an

international issue, since it has violated the Human Rights as a Universal concept.

To be precise, the “War on Drugs” campaign has violated the Human Rights

treaties which Philippines has already ratified regarding the protection of citizens,

and Duterte violates it with implementing the extrajudicial killing in “War on

Drugs” campaign. The “War on Drugs” campaign has established since the very

beginning of Duterte‟s presidency, since then the practice of extrajudicial killing

were numerous. Besides, the “War on Drugs” campaigns have made pros and cons

from the Filipinos itself. However, the approval rate of Duterte cannot be

underestimated, since the majority of Filipinos were satisfied with Duterte‟s action.

This chapter will discuss the overview of the practice of “War on Drugs” campaign,

as well as the Filipinos perception toward Duterte.

3.1 The Background of “War on Drugs” Campaign.

As has been explained before, the “War on Drugs” campaign has become an

international issue, because the practice of extrajudicial killing was found inside the

implementation of the campaign. The practice of extrajudicial killing inside the

“War on Drugs” campaign has made the rejection and condemnation from

international community. However, the rejection and condemnation from

international community just being ignored by Duterte. Rodrigo Duterte as the

Philippines president still implement and keep the radical action as the practice of

the “War on Drugs” campaign. This sub-chapter will give a supportive data

55

regarding the background and reasons behind the implementation of the “War on

Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration.

The main reason of the implementation of “War on Drugs” campaign is

because the drugs problem on Philippines has become a serious problem. The data

regarding the drugs abusers on Philippines has been counted by the Dangerous

Drugs Board (DDB) Philippines, a government agency tasked to control and

prevent the drugs abuse on Philippines.142

To control and prevent the drugs abuse

on Philippines, DDB also being supported by another government agency such as

Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) that tasked to enhance for the

efficient and effective law enforcement of all the provisions on dangerous drugs

and/or precursors and essential chemicals.143

The DDB also supported by the

Philippine National Police (PNP), which also tasked to assist the DDB and PDEA

to eradicate the drugs abusers on Philippines.144

PDEA and PNP has claimed that

the drugs abusers in Philippines has increased year by year, the PDEA stated that

―There is an increase in the incidence of drug abuse in terms of persons arrested

for drug use for the period 2010-2015.‖145

On the other hand PNP also stated that

―There is an increase in the incidence of drug abuse in terms of persons arrested

for drug trafficking and use for the period 2011-2015.‖146

The claim by PDEA and

PNP showed very well that the drugs abusers on Philippines has increased year by

year, and its indicates that the drugs abusers on Philippines has become a serious

problem.

However, the year of 2015 is not the peak of drugs problem on Philippines.

The drugs problem on Philippines has comes to the peak on 2016. As according to

142

Dangerous Drugs Board. (n.d.). Vision, Mission, Mandate. Retrieved from

https://www.ddb.gov.ph/about-ddb/vision-mission-mandate 143

User, S. (n.d.). Mandate and Functions. Retrieved from http://pdea.gov.ph/transparency/mandate-

and-functions 144

Nationwide Survey on the Nature and Extent of Drugs Abuse in the Philippines. (n.d.). Retrieved

from Dangerous Drugs Board (DDB) website: http://pcij.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/DDB-

2015-Nationwide-Survey-Final-Reportc.pdf 145

Ibid 146

Ibid

56

DDB statistic on 2016, the drugs abusers on Philippines has reached the number of

1.7 million, it is almost 1.7% of Philippine‟s populations.147

The DDB also

reported that the range of age among 1.7 million drugs users were various. The

range age from the 1.7 million drugs abusers are ranged from age 10 until 69 years

old, and 44.69% of them are unemployed which means has covered a wide range of

ages, from children to adult.148

On the other hand, Rodrigo Duterte has claimed a

different number with DDB regarding the drugs abusers on Philippines. Duterte

itself has claimed that the drugs abusers in Philippines has reached to the number of

4 million.149

Even though there is a big difference between Duterte‟s number and DDB‟s

number, the drugs abusers still considered as a serious problem.150

With the age rate

from 10 years old to 69 years old, the drugs problems is clearly has become a

serious problem on Philippines.151

Since the users of drugs on Philippines has

reached the various range of age, which mean the users of drugs on Philippines

started from the early teenagers up to an adult.152

According to DDB Chairperson

Benjamin Reyes, the government‟s anti-illegal drug campaign are also focusing on

the prevention of the drugs abusers on Philippines on getting wider. As he stated

below,

―As much as possible, we are trying to prevent the 4.8 million to not try

using illegal drugs again, our key message is to not use and do not try

illegal drugs because retention rate is high.‖153

The drugs problem on Philippines has become the main reason of Duterte to

established the “War on Drugs” campaign. Since Duterte perceived that the drugs

147

Dangerous Drugs Board. (n.d.). 2016 Statistics. Retrieved from

https://www.ddb.gov.ph/research-statistics/statistics/45-research-and-statistics/329-2016-statistics 148

Ibid 149

Ibid 150


https://www.ddb.gov.ph/research-statistics/statistics/45-research-and-statistics/329-2016-statistics 151

Ibid 152

Ibid 153

DDB: Philippines has 1.8 million current drug users. (2016, September 19). Retrieved from

https://www.rappler.com/nation/146654-drug-use-survey-results-dangerous-drugs-board-

philippines-2015

57

problem is the main obstacle to Philippine‟s development, moreover, he emphasizes

that the drugs problem will inhibit the progress of social and economic sector of

Philippines.154

Since then, the “War on Drugs” campaign was established to

imposed the drugs abusers on Philippines. From his disturbance feeling regarding

the drugs abusers on Philippines, Duterte‟s ambition to eradicate the drugs abusers

is so strong. It can be seen from the action that Duterte take long before he was

inaugurated as the president of Philippines. His intention to promote the “War on

Drugs” campaign actually has started since he became the Major of Davao city for

two decades.155

When he was the Major of Davao city, Duterte has started his

campaign on “War on Drugs”, the campaign was imposed to the drugs dealers on

Davao City at first and he considered that the killing is an effective way to combat

the drugs abusers.156

As his statement on Davao City on June 4 2016, ―If you are

still into drugs, I am going to kill you. Don‘t take this as a joke. I‘m not trying to

make you laugh. Sons of bi**hes, I‘ll really kill you.‖157

The statement has

indicated his ambition to eradicate the drugs abusers on Philippines. Besides,

Duterte also used his “War on Drugs” campaign as campaign tool for the

presidential election. As he said on May 2016 on a presidential election occasion,

―If by chance that God will place me there, watch out because the 1,000

[people allegedly executed while Duterte was mayor of Davao City] will

become 100,000. You will see the fish in Manila Bay getting fat. That is

where I will dump you.‖158

From the statement above, it can be seen on how Duterte‟s ambition to eradicate the

drugs abusers on Philippines by implementing the “War on Drugs” campaign. By

154



Andreas, R. D. (2016). Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs The Early Duterte Presidency

in the Philippines. The Spectacle of Violence in Duterte‘s ―War on Drugs‖,. Retrieved from

http://nbn-resolving.org/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:gbv:18-4-10128 156

Ibid 157




Ibid

58

eradicating the drugs problem, Duterte also eradicate the obstacle of the

development on social an economic progress on Philippines.

3.2 The Implementation of “War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte’s

administration

As has been explain before, Duterte‟s ambition to eradicate the drugs

abusers on Philippines is very high. Since Duterte perceive the drugs abuser has

become the main obstacle of Philippine‟s social and economic progress. Besides,

Duterte‟s ambition to eradicate the drugs abusers also can be seen from his

statement long ago before he was inaugurated as the president of Philippines.

Unfortunately, the “War on Drugs” campaign that aim to eradicate the drugs

abusers on Philippines, tend to a mass murder and an extrajudicial killing practice.

Moreover, Human Rights Watch (HRW) stated that, Philippines is such having a

justification of killing as so called by “License to kill”.159

In which Rodrigo Duterte

can kill Philippine‟s citizens in the name of “eradicating the drugs problem”

without a legal procedure.

Since the inauguration of Duterte as the president of Philippines, “War on

Drugs” campaign has become his priority. The priority also followed by his strong

ambition to eradicate the drugs problem on Philippines, as he stated below on

March 15 2016, before his inauguration become the President. ―When I become

president, I will order the police to find those people [dealing or using drugs] and

kill them. The funeral parlors will be packed.‖ Besides, Duterte also promised that

the “War on Drugs” campaign will use a radical approached as the practice of the

campaign. As he stated on April 26th

2016,

―It is going to be bloody. I will use the military and the police to go out and

arrest them, hunt for them. And if they offer a violent resistance, and

thereby placing the lives of the law enforcers and the military whom I would

159

Ibid

59

task for a job to do, I will simply say, ‗Kill them all and end the

problem.‖160

The “War on Drugs” campaign also known as Oplan Tokhang in

Philippines language. The Oplan Tokhang campaign has been officially stated by

the PNP as an action for President Rodrigo Roa Duterte in his fight against illegal

drugs and other forms of criminality in the country.161

It was firstly implemented on

Davao City, and now it has been implemented for all over Philippines.162

Besides,

Oplan Tokhang also known as a Double Barrel operation which tasked to eradicate

the drugs abusers by a direct action by the PNP under supervision of PNP chief

General Ronald "Bato" Dela Rosa. Oplan Tokhang is basically mean by (tok-tok

[knock], hangyo [request]), then the police will visit the house of the drugs suspect

and ask to stop using and selling drugs.163

However, the implementation of Oplan Tokhang is not as smooth as its

purposed, where the police will visit and ask the drugs suspect to stop. The

implementation of Oplan Tokhang have another side, it is considered as a bloody

operation which extrajudicial killing was found inside the campaign.164

As

according to HRW report, the implementation of “War on Drugs” campaign has

already killed more than 7.000 people that assumed as a drugs abuser. As quoted

from HRW report,

―Since the inauguration of President Rodrigo Duterte on June 30, 2016,

and his call for a ―war on drugs,‖ Philippine National Police officers and

unidentified ―vigilantes‖ have killed over 7,000 people. The anti-drug

campaign dubbed ―Operation Double Barrel‖ has targeted suspected drug

dealers and users ostensibly for arrest but in practice has been a campaign

of extrajudicial execution in impoverished areas of Manila and other urban

160

Berehulak, D. (2016, December 7). 'They Are Slaughtering Us Like Animals? Retrieved from

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/12/07/world/asia/rodrigo-duterte-philippines-drugs-

killings.html 161

Lgu. (n.d.). PNP OPLAN - DOUBLE BARREL PROJECT TOKHANG. Retrieved from

http://www.calambamisocc.gov.ph/index.php/60-capital-outlay/411-pnp-oplan-tokhang 162

Ibid 163

Ibid 164



dutertes-war-drugs

60

areas. Duterte‘s outspoken endorsement of the campaign implicates him

and other senior officials in possible incitement to violence, instigation of

murder, and in command responsibility for crimes against humanity.‖165

It has showed clearly that the “War on Drugs” campaign has a bloody practice

inside the implementation.

Moreover, as according to the report of HRW, the killing inside “War on

Drugs” campaign also done by an “unidentified gunman”, which actually not the

member of the PNP. As the report of HRW, on one of the case of extrajudicial

killing by “War on Drugs” campaign that done by the unidentified gunman.

―Six masked armed men burst into a Manila home where a small group,

including several teenagers, were watching television. The men arrested

and beat drug suspects Aljon Mesa and Jimboy Bolasa, and then took them

away on motorcycles. A half hour later, after hearing from a uniformed

policeman, relatives rushed to a nearby bridge to find Aljon and Bolasa‘s

bodies, both with gunshot wounds to the head, their hands tied with cloth.

The gunmen were still at the scene, while uniformed police cordoned off the

area. The police report, headed ―Found Bodies,‖ claims that a ―concerned

citizen‖ alerted the police to the presence of two dead bodies. A week after

Aljon Mesa‘s killing, 10 police officers, some in civilian clothes, arrested

his brother Danilo Mesa and took him to the local barangay office. That

evening masked armed men abducted him from the barangay office; shortly

afterwards, his body was found under a bridge a block away. His relatives

said that his entire head had been wrapped in packing tape, and his hands

had been tied behind his back. He had been shot execution-style through the

mouth.‖166

The report showed that the practice of “War on Drugs” campaign also involved by

the unidentified gunman. The involvement of unidentified gunman could worsen

the implementation of the campaign regarding the killing without a legal

procedure.167

Duterte‟s intention to eradicate drugs problem by killing the drugs abusers

on Philippines is so strong, it can be seen from the statement of Duterte. Duterte

165

Ibid 166




Ibid

61

himself often use the word of “Kill” in his statement, when he said “kill” it is

literary means kill, which indicates that his ambition to eradicate the drugs problem

by a radical approach which is killing. As his statement on 24th

May 2016,

―I will definitely kill you. I will win because of breakdown in law and order.

I do not want to commit a crime. But if by chance per chance God will place

me there, stay on guard because that 1,000 will become 100,000. You will

see the fish in Manila Bay becoming fatter. That is where I will throw

you.168

‖

The radical approach of Duterte to eradicate the drugs problem also followed by

some controversial statement, which stated that he would be happy to slaughter the

drugs abusers on Philippines. As he stated on 30th

September 2017,

―Hitler massacred three million Jews. Now, there are three million drug

addicts. I‘d be happy to slaughter them. If Germany had Hitler, the

Philippines would have (me).‖169

The “War on Drugs” campaign will be continued until the end of Duterte‟s

presidency era, since he perceives that the “War on Drugs” campaign is an effective

way to eradicate the drugs problem on Philippines. As he stated that, ―Droga (drug

war) is a nonissue to me. It will be a policy until the dying days of my presidency or

my life,‖170

he also stated that he will not stop the “War on Drugs” campaign untl

the drugs lord killed or surrender. As his statement below,

"My campaign against drugs will not stop until the end of my term... until

the last pusher and last drug lord (is killed), We will not stop until the last

drug lord, financier, pusher is put behind bars... or below the ground if they

so wish,"171

His ambition to arrest the drug lord is so strong, moreover, he also announced to the

Philippine‟s citizens to also take a role to eradicate the drugs abusers. On June 5

168

Ibid 169




Tubeza, P. C., & Orejas, T. (2017, December 9). Duterte: War on drugs to continue until 2022.

Retrieved from http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/950878/rodrigo-duterte-war-on-drugs-drug-killings-

extrajudicial-killlings 171

Ibid

62

2016, he announced that he would pay 5 million PHP (USD 100,000) as a reward to

anyone who could kill a drug lord and 3 million PHP (USD 60,000) as a reward to

anyone who could kill their distributor.172

Besides, those factors of ambition that

makes Duterte will keep the “War on Drugs” campaign until the end of his era,

Duterte himself considered that the “War on Drugs” campaign is the best way to

eradicate the drugs problem.173

Duterte considered the amount of killed drugs

suspects as an indicator of the campaign successes. As stated on the report of HRW,

―He praised the soaring body count of victims of police killings as proof of the

―success‖ of his ―war on drugs.‖174

3.3 The Support toward the “War on Drugs” campaign

The “War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration that

criticized by International community does not makes Duterte to stand back from

his campaign. Besides, even though his action has ream the criticism and

condemnation from International community, his approval rate on the country is

still high. Shockingly, Duterte‟s “War on Drugs” campaign has gain mass support

and approval from the government as well as from the Philippine‟s citizens. The

implementation of “War on Drugs” campaign that imposed for the drugs abusers, in

the other hand has bring a safe environment on Philippines.175

Therefore, besides

reap a lot of criticism, the “War on Drugs” campaign also gain mass support from

the Philippine‟s citizens.

172







Ibid 175

Why are Filipinos supporting Duterte's drug war? (2017, October 14). Retrieved from

https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/185271-majority-filipinos-support-duterte-drug-war

63

The “War on Drugs” campaign has gain the support from Philippine‟s

government. The establishment of Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA),

Dangerous Drugs Board (DDB), and Philippine National Police (PNP) has

obviously support the “War on Drugs” campaign, since all of the government

agency has to in-line and support the current program of government. besides,

regarding the case of eradicating the drugs problem on Philippines, those

government agencies that tasked to prevent the drugs problem has to refer to the

Republic Act 9165 of Philippines. The Republic Act 9165 of Philippines is an act

that regulating the punishment imposed to the drugs abusers on Philippines.176

As

stated on the Republic Act 9165 of Philippines regarding the punishment for the

drugs abusers,

―Should any dangerous drug be the proximate cause of the death of a

person using the same in such den, dive or resort, the penalty of death and a

fine ranging from One million (P1,000,000.00) to Fifteen million pesos

(P15,000,000.00) shall be imposed on the maintainer, owner and/or

operator.‖177

In-line with the Republic Act 9165 of Philippines, the PDEA strongly

confirm their support toward Duterte‟s “War on Drugs” campaign. As the agency

that focusing on drugs enforcement PDEA has already promoting Duterte‟s “War

on Drugs” campaign, as has been stated on the PDEA‟s website.

“Unity is strength, let us all stand and be counted active community

participations in essential in President Rodrigo Roa Duterte‘s war against

Drugs‖178

As according the Republic Act 9165 of Philippines, DDB has been mandated to

also take charge to prevent and control the drugs abusers on Philippines. Therefore,

the DDB as a government agency specializing on drugs prevention and control has

to be in-line with current government program. As stated by the DDB‟s executive

director,

176


regulations#executive-order-218 177

Ibid 178

Ibid

64

―Recent appointments made by President Rodrigo Duterte brought about

changes in the administration of the Dangerous Drugs Board, the country‘s

policy-making and strategy-formulating body on drug abuse prevention and

control. The DDB leadership is grateful for the recent appointments, which

will help the agency pursue the anti-illegal drugs agenda of the Duterte

Administration.‖179

The support on “War on Drugs” campaign not only came from the

government agencies. On the other hand, most of the Philippines citizens also

support the current government program, which is the “War on Drugs” campaign.

Since Duterte‟s “War on Drugs” campaign has brought a safe environment without

drugs abusers on Philippines. As according to Social Weather Stations, a non-profit

and private institution that dealing with social research in Philippines, most of

Filipinos are satisfied with Duterte‟s “War on Drugs” campaign.180

According to

the SWS‟s survey that held on September 2016, 7 from 10 Filipinos were satisfied

with Duterte‟s action regarding anti-drugs campaign. From 1,500 respondents, 77%

said they were satisfied, 14% were unsatisfied, and 9% were undecided.181

The

percentage of satisfaction were declining on 2017, from 77% to 63%, As shown on

the figure below.182

179

Dangerous Drugs Board. (n.d.). Malacañang implements reorganization at the DDB. Retrieved

from https://www.ddb.gov.ph/newsroom/345-malacanang-implements-reorganization-at-the-ddb 180




20170706173742 181

Ibid 182



65

Figure 3.1

The figure above has shown that Duterte‟s satisfaction rate is really high. Even

though his satisfaction rate is decreased from 2016 – 2017, however, it is still above

50%. Which indicates that most of the Filipinos are satisfied with Duterte‟s

campaign on “War on Drugs”.183

One of the reason of the high satisfaction rate toward Duterte‟s “War on

Drugs” campaign was based on citizens perception on a safe environment because

of the implementation of “War on Drugs” campaign. 71% of Filipinos perceive that

the drugs abusers on Philippines are decreasing as can be seen on the figure

below.184

183

Ibid 184



66

Figure 3.2

The figure above has shown that 71% of Filipinos perceived that the drugs addict is

decreasing, 9% of Filipinos perceive that the drugs addict is increasing, and 12% of

Filipinos perceive that the drugs addicts is same as before.185

Therefore, the

decreasing percentage of drugs addict on Philippine‟s society could be one of the

reason of Duterte‟s high satisfaction rate.

185




20170706173742

67

Moreover, Presidential Communications Secretary Martin Andanar also

stated that the crime rate oh Philippines also decreasing since the implementation of

“War on Drugs” campaign.186

As he stated below,

―It is evident we are hitting the mark in our campaign against illegal drugs.

But more than the statistics, the real score in the government‘s intensified

anti-drug operations is that it has pulled down the country‘s crime rate by

32%,‖187

On the other hand, the data from SWS also has shockingly showed that the

Philippine‟s citizens not only satisfied with the “War on Drugs” campaign by

Duterte, but also support the extrajudicial killing itself. It can be seen from the SWS

survey report regarding Filipinos approval rate toward drugs suspect that already

surrendered but still have to be killed. as according to Social Weather Situations

(SWS) survey, there 63% of Filipinos that agreed that the drugs suspects still have

to be killed even after they surrendered.188

The SWS has conduct a survey that held

on June 2017, with the question ―There are suspects in the illegal drug trade who

already surrendered yet were still killed‖, the result form 1,200 respondents, are

9% were strongly disagree, 11% were disagree, 17% were undecided yet, 32% were

agree, and 31% were strongly agree.189

The survey has showed clearly that the

Filipinos are also support the practice of “War on Drugs” campaign which contain a

practice of extrajudicial killing.

Moreover, the satisfaction rate toward Duterte‟s “War on Drugs” campaign

also has been stated by the president spokesperson. In which emphasizing that even

though the Filipinos already knew that there are extrajudicial killing on the

campaign, however, they still satisfied with Duterte‟s campaign. As stated above by

the spokesperson of the president,

186

Drug war nets a million mark surrenderers, 31 Dec. 2016 – Presidential Communications

Operations Office. (2017, June 1). Retrieved from https://pcoo.gov.ph/uncategorized/drug-war-nets-

a-million-mark-surrenderers-31-dec-2016/ 187

Ibid 188

Ibid 189

Ibid

68

―And if you recall, there was also a survey ‗no that 88 percent of the

Filipinos support the drug war. [inaudible] around 70 plus believe that

there are extra-legal killings ‗no. To me it‘s unfortunate that people know

that there are EJKs and despite this knowledge, you know, the support for

the war against drugs is still at 88 percent ‗no. So let us not underestimate

the success of the President in the war against drugs. As in fact, other

countries now look to us as a model.‖

The “War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration has gain

mass support from the government as well as from the Philippines citizens. As has

been explained before, the government has supported the “War on Drugs”

campaign since those government agencies has to be in-line with the current

president‟s program. Meanwhile, the support also given by the Philippine‟s citizens

itself. Duterte‟s satisfaction rate has indicates the Philippine‟s willingness to

support the “War on Drugs” campaign since most of the Filipinos perceive that the

“War on Drugs” campaign has succeeded to decreased the drugs addiction on

Philippines. Moreover, The Filipinos also support the practice of extrajudicial

killing on “War on Drugs” campaign, that can be seen from Duterte‟s approval rate.

The support that given by government and the citizens has led to a question of

whether the Human Rights considered as a universal or relative concept as

according to Philippines, that will be explain on the next chapter.

69

CHAPTER IV

CULTURAL RELATIVISM ON EXTRAJUDICIAL

KILLING IN “WAR ON DRUGS” CAMPAIGN

The “War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration has become

an International issue. Since the practice of extrajudicial killing inside the campaign

has reap the criticism and condemnation from the International Community. The

extrajudicial killing in “War on Drugs” campaign has clearly violated Human

Rights in term of the deprivation on human right to life and liberty. Moreover, by

the implementation of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign, Duterte

has already violated the Human Rights treaties that Philippines has already ratified.

As well as violated the concept of Responsibility to protect Human Rights (R2P), as

an obligation of the states who in favor with the ratification of Human Rights

treaties.

On the other hand, Duterte‟s approval and satisfaction rate has indicates that

the most of Philippine‟s citizens has support the “War on Drugs” campaign.

Moreover, not only support the “War on Drugs” campaign, as according to the

survey by Social Weather Stations (SWS), most of the Filipinos indirectly has

support the extrajudicial killing itself. The extrajudicial killing in “War on Drugs”

campaign that clearly violates the Universalism concept of Human Rights has led to

a question on whether the Philippines perceive Human Rights as universal concept

or a relative concept, since the killing has become a usual thing on Philippines. This

chapter will analyze the reason behind the extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs”

campaign that gain mass approval by the society which led to the ignorance of the

state to have the responsibility to protect Human Rights.

70

4.1 The History of Death Penalty on Philippines

The “War on Drugs” campaign that contain an extrajudicial killing as the

practice shockingly has become a usual thing on Philippines. The culture of killing

on Philippines actually has occur since the era of colonialization of Philippines.

Where the death penalty and death sentences are numerous. Death penalty or also

known as capital punishment is a government action to give a death sanction to the

person as a punishment for a crime. The sentence that someone be punished so

called by death sentence, and the act of carrying out the sentence is known as an

execution.190

Before discussing the role of the death penalty as the main factor of

Philippine‟s and its citizens behavior construction, to know the history of the

practice of death penalty in Philippines is important to give a better understanding

regarding the background of the death penalty practice.

As a country that independent on 12th

June 1989, Philippines independence

cannot be separated from the bloody history from the colonialization era.

Philippines has been colonialized for more over than 300 years. Philippines has

through the era of colonialization that brought by several country, such as Spanish,

America, and Japan. Spanish has colonialized Philippines for 300 year, meanwhile

America has colonialized Philippines for…. Spanish and America colonialization

has brought a big impact to the culture and law of Philippines. One of the most

important law that brought by Spanish and Spain is the death penalty system. The

death penalty system during the colonialization were include the punishment of

burning, decapitation, drowning, flaying, garrote, hanging, shooting, stabbing and

others.191

The death penalty system actually also was ever mentioned on the

Kalantiaw Code. Kalantiaw Code is a common code of the indigenous people on

190

Kronenwetter, M. (2001). Capital punishment: A reference handbook (p. 202). Santa Barbara,

CA: ABC-CLIO. 191


change and the death penalty in Asia (pp. 105-108). (Next frontier.) Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.

71

Philippines. It was firstly written by Datu Kalantiaw on 1433, as the chief of

Negros Island on Philippines.192

The Kalantiaw Code regulates the punishment for

the people of Philippines that break the law.193

Here are several examples of the

article of Kalantiaw Code that contain the death punishment and other cruel

punishment:194

―Article XII

They shall be drowned, all slaves who assault their superiors or their lords

and masters; all those who abuse their luxury; those who kill their anitos by

breaking them or throwing them away.

Article XVII

They shall be killed, who profane places where sacred objects of their

diwatas or headmen are buried. He who gives way to the call of nature at

such places shall be burned."

From Article 12 and 17 of the Kalantiaw code has showed that the culture of death

penalty and other cruel punishment. However, the Kalantiaw code is not enough to

proof the culture of Death penalty came from. Here the writer would like to

emphasize more on the role of Spanish and America colonialization that become

the main actor of the implementation of the practice of death penalty on

Philippines.

4.1.1 Spanish Colonialization Era

Spanish that become the longest country that colonialized Philippines, has

brought a significant impact toward the Philippines society and law. Regarding the

implementation of death penalty, Spanish has become the first country that brought

the death penalty system in Philippine‟s history. It was brought firstly by Ferdinand

Magellan on 1521, that implementing the Medieval Europe system, which include

192

Duka, C. (2008), Struggle for Freedom, Rex Bookstore, Inc., ISBN 978-971-23-5045-0. 193

Ibid 194

Ibid

72

the death penalty system.195

As explained before, the death penalty during the

Spanish colonialization era were including the punishment of burning, decapitation,

drowning, flaying, garrote, hanging, shooting, stabbing and others.196

The death

punishment was imposed to the Filipinos that being rebel to the colonial, which is

to toward the Spanish colonial.197

Spanish that took more than 300 years from 1521

to 1898 has done a lot of death penalty and deaths sentences for the rebelled

Filipinos. As can be seen on the figure below.198

Figure 4.1

Death Penalty Case During Spanish Colonialization

Source: The next frontier: National development, political change and the death penalty in Asia

195

Abinales, P. N.; Amoroso, Donna J. (2005), State and Society in the Philippines (p. 55). Rowman

& Littlefield, ISBN 978-0-7425-1024-1. 196

Ibid. P-55 197



Ibid, p-105-108

73

Based on the Figure above, it has showed that the Spanish colonial has

imposed 1703 murder case and 46 death sentences.199

As explain on the book ―The

next frontier: National development, political change and the death penalty in

Asia‖ the 1703 murder case that happen on Spanish colonialization during 1840 –

1885 were also done by the Spanish colonialization.200

And it was imposed to the

Filipinos that being rebel to the Spanish colonialization.201

It can be seen that

during the Spanish colonialization era, Filipinos that rebelled are being shut down

by the Spanish. Therefore, the Filipinos nationalist does not have any choices

except death, if they were being rebel to the colonial government of the Spanish.202

As has been explain above, that the death penalty during Spanish

colonialization has took several forms of executions, from the punishment of

burning, decapitation, drowning, flaying, garrote, hanging, shooting, until the

punishment of stabbing and others.203

Those various forms of executions has

occurred on different era of Spanish colonialization. On 1832, the common

execution from that used by the Spanish colonialization to punished the rebelled

Filipinos is hanging.204

The hanging executions was changed to the execution of

garroting, since the hanging executions was abolished by the Spanish government

because it can make a bad reputation on the international world.205

Even though the

executions were changed from hanging into garroting, but it is still considered as a

form of death penalty that imposed to the Filipinos. Then, after the year of 1832,

the other forms executions such as burning, decapitation, drowning, flaying,

199

Ibid, p-105-108 200

Ibid, p-105-108 201

A timeline of death penalty in the Philippines. (2006, April 18). Retrieved from

http://pcij.org/blog/2006/04/18/a-timeline-of-death-penalty-in-the-philippines 202

Ibid 203

Ibid 204



Ibid, p-105-108

74

shooting, until the punishment of stabbing were implemented to the rebelled

Filipinos.206

4.1.2 America Colonialization Era

As a country that also brought a big impact to the Philippine‟s society,

America colonialization era also implanted the death penalty system to Philippines.

Basically, the America colonialization was adopted the law of Spanish during its

era of colonialization, which also included the death penalty system.207

As a

country who continue the medieval Europe penal system, the death penalty during

American colonialization still happen. The change can only be seen from the

Spanish penal system that America colonialization revised on 1932. The revision is

regarding the target of the death penalty, or in other word the to whom the death

penalty should be imposed.208

As has been explained before, the death penalty

during Spanish colonialization was imposed to the Filipinos that being rebel to the

Spanish colonialization, but on 1932 America has revised the target of the death

penalty, from only imposed to the rebel Filipinos to also imposed on seven

category of crimes which includes Treason, parricide, piracy, kidnapping, murder,

rape, and robbery with homicide.209

Even though the America colonialization also implemented the death

penalty system, however the death penalty cases during America colonialization is

not many as the Spanish colonialization era. As according the book of ―The next

frontier: National development, political change and the death penalty in Asia‖ the

death penalty that occurred on America colonialization era just a few rather than

206

Ibid, p-105-108 207

Ibid, p-105-108 208


http://pcij.org/blog/2006/04/18/a-timeline-of-death-penalty-in-the-philippines 209

Ibid

75

during the Spanish colonialization era.210

It was only reached the 1.8 average case

per year, which mean there were only 18 cases of death penalty during 1924to

1933.211

And there were no data record regarding death penalty execution from

1898 to 1923, as can be seen on the figure below.212

Figure 4.2

Death Penalty Case During American Colonialization


It can be seen clearly from the figure above that the death penalty

executions during the America colonialization is just a few, and not many as

happen during the Spanish colonialization era. However, the decreasing case of

death penalty during the America colonialization era does not automatically means

that the America does not implement the death executions as cruel as Spanish does,

moreover as has been explained before, the America just added seven categories of

crimes as become the target of the death penalty executions. Even though America

colonialization does not show a mass death penalty execution as the Spanish does,

however, the death penalty during the America colonialization era still

implemented.

210



Ibid, p-105-108 212

Ibid, p-105-108

76

4.2. Death Penalty as the Cultural Fault-lines

Figure 4.3


As the constructivist believes on idea as the main factor of state‟s

construction, the role of culture and historical background also cannot be forgotten

as factor of states and its citizens behavior. As stated by Michael Barnett,

―Reality does not exist out there waiting to be discovered, instead,

historically – produced and culturally – bound knowledge enables

individuals to construct and give meaning to reality‖213

213


International Relations, p. 164 Oxford University Press, England.

Human Rights as a

Relative Concept on

Philippines

77

Here, as according to Michael Barnett, that the reality was produced by the role of

culture and historical background of the Country. Moreover, the historical

background is really important to shape the interpretation of society toward an

issue.214

Meanwhile, the society are consist of different interpretations, the

different interpretation of the society are so called as a cultural fault-lines.215

Therefore, Philippine‟s citizens interpretation is really important to construct the

state‟s behavior.

In the case of extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” campaign, to analyze

the factor behind the support of extrajudicial killing on Philippines is really

important. Here the writer would like to put focused on the practice of death

penalty as the cultural fault-lines of Philippine‟s history. Which emphasize that

because of the practice of death penalty, it may produce a perception of

compromised toward the action of killing, so that the practice of killing has become

a common thing on Philippines.

The “War on Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration has led to a

question on what is the factor that make the Philippine‟s citizens to justify the

action of killing and perceive it as a common thing on Philippines. Since the

campaign contain the practice of killing without a legal procedure. Which so called

as an extrajudicial killing. Since the satisfaction rate toward Duterte‟s campaign

that given by the Filipinos has showed clearly that Philippine‟s citizens are also

support the extrajudicial killing. This sub-chapter will analyze the existence of

death penalty as a hardened culture of Philippines and make it as a cultural fault-

lines.

4.2.1 Practice of Death Penalty as Hardened Culture

As showed from the figure above, the practice of death penalty has become

a culture of killing on Philippines. The culture killing on Philippines has considered

214

Ibid, p-164 215

Ibid, p-164

78

as the cultural fault lines in Philippines history, that lead to the perception of killing

as a common thing to do on Philippines. As can be seen above, the practice of

killing has made the norms and values that can be accepted by the Philippine‟s

citizens. As the practice of death penalty has been introduced since the era of

colonialization on Philippine, the Philippine‟s citizens were not shocked with the

practice of Death penalty. Moreover, they were easily accepting the practice of

killing since it has become a common values and norms on Philippines.

To proofed the practice of death penalty has become common norms and

values that lead to the creation of culture of killing on Philippines, this framework

of research will be based on the theory of Constructivism of Alexander Wendt and

Michael Barnett. Before knowing the importance of culture on constructing the

state‟s and its citizens behavior, here, Alexander Wendt has emphasized the

importance of practice on constructing the culture. As what Alexander Wendt

emphasize on the book of ―Anarchy is what States Makes of it: The Social

Construction of Power Politics‖ ―Changing the practices will change the

intersubjective knowledge that constitutes the system.‖216

It can be seen from the

statement that the role of practice is really important, since changing the practice

will change the knowledges of the people that constitutes the system. Meanwhile,

here the practice of death penalty has succeeded on changing the system and

citizens behavior of Philippines.

The changes of the system also interpreted as a cultural fault-lines as

according to Michael Barnett. As has been explained by Michael Barnett regarding

the cultural fault-lines,

―But because culture is fractured and because society is comprised of

different interpretations of what is meaningful activity, scholars need to

216


(1992). International Theory, 403-407.

79

consider these cultural fault – lines and treat the fixing of meanings as an

accomplishment that is at the essence of politics…‖217

It can be seen clearly that according to Michael Barnett, culture is fractured, but

since the society comprised or consist from different interpretations, it may produce

the cultural fault-lines. And here again, the practice of death penalty on Philippines

has give a contribution on making the cultural fault-lines, since the practice of death

penalty has change the interpretation of Philippine‟s citizens toward their culture.

To be precise, the culture of killing.

On the other hand, Michael Barnett also emphasized that the hardened

culture also can produce the cultural fault-lines. As stated by Michael Barnett,

―Constructivists attempt to recover the meanings that actors give to their

practices and the objects that they construct. These derive not from private

beliefs but rather from culture. In contrast to the rationalist presumption

that culture, at most, constrains action, Constructivists argue that culture

informs the meanings that people give to their action. Sometimes

Constructivists have presumed that such meanings derive from hardened

culture.‖218

Since the making process of social construction is mutually constituted, which

means that there is a process of practice that mutually-constituted and give meaning

to each other between the identity (History, Culture) and the actor itself, the

practice can affect the social process to constructing and re-constructing them

self.219

Since the practice can affect the social process to constructing and re-

constructing them self, by this mean, the practice of killing has become a hardened

culture on Philippines. To be precise, the practice of death penalty on Philippines

that brought by Spanish and America colonialization, has become the main factor

of Philippine‟s culture construction, since it has construct the norms and values that

can make the culture of killing on Philippines. Meanwhile, the practice of

217



Ibid, p-164 219


(1992). International Theory, 403-407.

80

extrajudicial killing on Philippines is the output of re-construction process that

drives from the culture of killing on Philippines.

Even though extrajudicial killing has different meaning with death penalty,

in which extrajudicial killing interpreted as a killing without a legal procedure,

meanwhile death penalty is a killing sanction by the government through a legal

procedure, however, the death penalty practice has make a culture of killing in

Philippines as a hardened culture. So that has produce the practice of extrajudicial

killing on Philippines as a common thing. To proofed the killing practice as a

hardened culture which also drive to the practice of extrajudicial killing, the Japan

colonialization era will be taken as supportive data to proofed the analysis.

During the colonialization of Japan on 1941 to 1945, The death Penalty

were stop. There was no documented case for judicial executions. The Japanese that

came with a propaganda of liberating its fellow Asian country from Western

colonialization was accepted at first by the Philippines. Therefore, the death penalty

system was stop during the Japanese era of colonialization as can be seen on the

figure below.220

220


change and the death penalty in Asia (pp. 105-108). (Next frontier.) Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.

81

Figure 4.4

Case of Death Penalty During Colonialization Era on Philippines


As can be seen above, that there were no executions during the Japanese

colonialization era. However, stopping the death penalty doesn‟t mean that the

killing also being stop in practice. For the Filipinos, the Japanese period is just

another form of a colonialization. The Filipinos saw the Japanese period as a

“brutal conquerors” instead of “liberating” the Filipinos as its own Asian fellow.221

Since that, the extrajudicial killing during the Japanese period were numerous,

because there is no death penalty as a judicial platform for killing the rebel

Filipinos toward Japanese authority.222

From the figure above it can be seen that

even after the independence of the Philippines, there were still several executions. It

has showed that the culture of killing has become a hardened culture, since even if

the death penalty was stop during the Japanese era, the killing practice keep going

until the era of Duterte by the “War on Drugs” campaign.

221

Ibid, p-105-108 222

Ibid, p-105-108

82

4.3 Case of Extrajudicial Killing Before Duterte’s Administration

In order to support the argument of killing as a hardened culture of

Philippines, the writer would like to give several cases of extrajudicial killing that

done before Duterte‟s administration. The case of extrajudicial killing that will be

showed was done by several president before Duterte and has considered as an

International issue since it has violated the universalism of Human Rights. Besides,

the Presidents below also have a controversial issue, which will become a

supportive data to strengthen the argument of the killing practice as a hardened

culture.

4.3.1 Marcos administration (1965 - 1986)

Ferdinand Marcos is the 10th

President of Philippines that has been ruled

since 1965-1986.223

As the president of Philippines, Marcos has ruled Filipinos

with a dictatorship-style. He also has take over and control or cause the taking over

and control of all such newspapers, magazines, radio and television facilities and all

other media communications.224

Since during his presidency, there were a lot of

Communism that threatening the political interest of Ferdinand Marcos.225

One of the controversial issue during Marcos administration is the

establishment of Martial Law. The Martial law of Philippines is a law that regulated

to armed and give power to the armed force to prevent the Communism rebellion to

be ruled the Philippines.226

Since the implementation of Martial Law by Marcos

there are several cases of Human Rights violation. As has been recorded, there were

223

Celoza, A. F. (1998). Ferdinand Marcos and the Philippines: The political economy of

authoritarianism (pp. 1 - 6). Singapore: Toppan. 224

Ibid, pp. 1 - 6 225

Ibid, pp. 1 - 6 226

Nik de Ynchausti. (2016, September 24). The tallies of Martial Law. Retrieved from

https://www.esquiremag.ph/politics/martial-law-tallies-a1576-20160924-lfrm4

83

398 case of disappearances, and 1,388 cases of extrajudicial killings.227

His

campaign against communism rebellion called by Oplan Katatagan.228

4.3.2 Arroyo administration (2001 - 2010)

Gloria Macapagal Arroyo is the 14th

President of Philippines, and she has

become the President of Philippines from 2001 to 2010.229

Similar with Marcos,

Arroyo also has a controversial issue on Human Rights violation. The Human

Rights violation During Arroyo administration was also because the existence of

communism rebellion that threatening the presidency of Arroyo.230

Most of the

killings case during Arroyo administration has occurred from the period March

2005 until mid-2006 where close to 40 incidents of extrajudicial killings are

reported.231

As can be seen on the figure below.232

227

3,257: Fact checking the Marcos killings, 1975-1985. (2018, May 3). Retrieved from

http://www.manilatimes.net/3257-fact-checking-the-marcos-killings-1975-1985/255735/ 228

Celoza, A. F. (1998). Ferdinand Marcos and the Philippines: The political economy of

authoritarianism (pp. 1 - 6). Singapore: Toppan. 229

Skard, T. (2015). Women of power: Half a century of female presidents and prime ministers

worldwide. 230

Parre o, A. A. (2011). Report on the Philippine extrajudicial killings: (2001 - August

2010)(pp. 13 - 15). Makati City: Asia Foundation. 231

Ibid, p-13 – p-15 232

Ibid, p-13 – p-15

84

Figure 4.5

Extrajudicial Killing Case on Arroyo’s Administration

Source: Report on the Philippine extrajudicial killings: (2001 - August 2010)

As can be seen from the figure above, that the highest reported case of

extrajudicial killing on Arroyo administration was occurred on 2005 to 2006, where

they were 66 cases of extrajudicial killing on 2005 and 70 cases of extrajudicial

killing on 2006.233

Even though the case of extrajudicial killing on Arroyo

administration is not many as occurred on Marcos administration, however, the

extrajudicial killing still happens on Arroyo administration. The campaign to fight

against rebelled communism on Arroyo administration called by Oplan Bantay

laya.234

4.3.3 Benigno Simeon Cojuangco Aquino III Administration (2010 - 2016)

Benigno Aquino III is the 15th

President of Philippines, that become the

President from 2010 to 2016. As the president after Arroyo administration that

233

Ibid, p-13 – p-15 234

Parre o, A. A. (2011). Report on the Philippine extrajudicial killings: (2001 - August 2010 )(p.

20). Makati City: Asia Foundation.

85

being controversial because of her campaign, Aquino was promised to stop the

extrajudicial killing. As he stated, “will not tolerate extrajudicial killings in my

administration.‖235

Even though he promised to stop the extrajudicial killing in his

era, however the case of extrajudicial killing still can be found during his

administration. As can be seen from the figure that Aquino has 8 cases of

extrajudicial killing in 2010.236

On the other hand, the rate of extrajudicial killing during Aquino and

Arroyo is quite similar. As can be seen on the figure below.237

Figure 4.6

Extrajudicial Killing Case on Aquino’s Administration

Source: Report on the Philippine extrajudicial killings: (2001 - August 2010)

Compared to Arroyo‟s 2.5 killings per week in 2006, the rate of killings for Aquino

is at 2 per week, which indicates that the extrajudicial killing cases that found

during Aquino administration is quite similar with the Arroyo administration

does.238

235

Parre o, A. A. (2011). Report on the Philippine extrajudicial killings: (2001 - August 2010 )(p.

21). Makati City: Asia Foundation. 236

Parre o, A. A. (2011). Report on the Philippine extrajudicial killings: (2001 - August 2010 )(pp.

20 - 22). Makati City: Asia Foundation. 237

Ibid, p-20 – p-22 238

Ibid, p-20 – p-22

86

The extrajudicial killing cases that happen after the independence of

Philippines has showed that killing practice has become a common thing on

Philippines. It can be seen from the data that given regarding extrajudicial case

during the president before Duterte, such as Ferdinand Marcos, Arroyo and Aquino.

It has indicated that the “War on Drugs” campaign by Duterte is only a continuity

of killing practice culture that already done before his administration. On the other

hand, the data also has showed that killing practice has become an output of

reconstruction process of culture of killing which drives from death penalty

practice, that has been explained before. Therefore, the extrajudicial killing on

“War on Drugs” campaign by Duterte has been supported by the society since the

killing practice has become a common thing to do, as well as the Filipinos already

get used with the killing practice.

87

4.4 Human Rights as a Relativism Concept on Philippines

Figure 4.7


Human Rights as a universal concept that has been declared on the

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) should be applied to all human

being. But in reality, there are several states that cannot applied and implement the

universal concept of Human Rights. One of the example is Philippines. As can be

seen on the figure above, Human Rights is a relative concept as according to

Philippine‟s perception. Therefore, by the implementation of extrajudicial killing

on “War on Drugs” campaign by Duterte, Philippines has obviously violated the

universalism concept of Human Rights. Moreover, as a state that ratified 14

documents of Human Rights treaties, Philippines also has ignored its obligation to

88

protect Human Rights.239

And it has been stated on the concept of Responsibility to

Protect (R2P).

The existence of Cultural Relativism has become a clear contradiction

toward the conceptual of Universalism. In the context of Human Rights, Cultural

Relativist argue that cultural traditions that properly determine the existence and

scope of civil and political rights enjoyed by individuals in a given society.240

By

this mean, the Cultural Relativism perceive that human rights standards are vary

among different cultures, moreover it can reflect the national identity.241

However,

the existence of Cultural relativism cannot be a justification of a violation of

Human Rights that done by a state.

As has been stated before, by the implementation of extrajudicial killing on

“War on Drugs” campaign by Duterte, Philippines has clearly violated Human

Rights and its obligation to protect Human Rights, since Philippines has already

ratified several Human Rights treaties. As become the state that ratified Human

Rights, Philippines should responsible to protect Human Rights, as has been stated

by the United Nations,

―By becoming parties to international treaties, States assume obligations

and duties under international law to respect, to protect and to fulfil human

rights. The obligation to respect means that States must refrain from

interfering with or curtailing the enjoyment of human rights. The obligation

to protect requires States to protect individuals and groups against human

rights abuses. The obligation to fulfil means that States must take positive

action to facilitate the enjoyment of basic human rights.‖242

However, in reality Philippines cannot fulfil its obligation to protect Human

Rights by implementing “War on Drugs” campaign which the practice of

extrajudicial killing was found inside the implementation of the campaign.

239

OHCHR Dashboard. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://indicators.ohchr.org/ 240

Tesón, F. R. (1985). International Human Rights and Cultural Relativism. Retrieved from

https://ir.law.fsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1038&context=articles 241

Ibid 242



law/index.html

89

Moreover, Philippines also has ignored the criticism and rejection by international

community. Meanwhile as according to R2P concept, a sovereign state that cannot

protect their citizens from a deprivation of Human Rights, then the responsibility to

protect falls to the International community.243

On the other hand, the support that given by the society toward Duterte‟s

campaign has showed clearly that the Filipinos are also support the extrajudicial

killing itself. It can be seen from the data from Social Whether Stations (SWS)

which stated that 77% of Filipinos were satisfied with Duterte‟s “War on Drugs”

campaign, and 63% of Filipinos were agreed that the drugs suspects that already

surrendered still have to be killed.244

The high support rate toward Duterte‟s

campaign was because most of Filipino perceive that Duterte‟s “War on Drugs”

campaign has made a safe environment on Philippines.

The high satisfaction rate as well as the high approval rate by the most

Filipinos toward Duterte‟s “War on Drugs” campaign has led to a question whether

the Filipinos perceive the Human Rights as a universal concept or a relative

concept. Then the answer would be the Philippines has considered Human Rights

as a relative concept. It can be seen from the high satisfaction and high approval

rate toward Duterte‟s “War on Drugs” campaign. The practice of death penalty that

create a culture of killing practice on Philippines has also support the relativism of

Human Rights on Philippines. Since then, the practice of killing has become a

common and usual thing on Philippines. As the Cultural Relativism believes that

the civil and political rights is referred to the position according to local culture

traditions, by this mean, the conceptual of Human Rights has become a relative

concept on Philippines, and the Filipinos rights are referred to its local traditions,

243






20170706173742

90

which is the culture of killing as a hardened culture. The indicators can be seen

from the practice of killing that has been done before Duterte‟s administration. The

extrajudicial killing that become a hardened culture has impacting to the Filipinos

perception that the practice of killing is a common thing on Philippines. Besides,

the perception of the practice of killing is a common thing to do on Philippines has

also led to the perception of relativism concept toward Human Rights on

Philippines.

Since the Filipinos has get used to the practice of extrajudicial killing and

led to the perception of Relativism concept toward Human Rights, so that the

Filipinos were accept the extrajudicial killing as a part of eradicating the drugs

abusers by the “War on Drugs” campaign of Duterte. Therefore, the conceptual of

R2P, whereas Philippines should be responsible to protect Human Rights has been

ignored by Philippines because Philippines has perceived Human Rights as a

Relative concept. By this mean, Duterte himself has ignored his responsible to

protect Human Rights since Duterte perceived that the action of extrajudicial killing

that he has done is not a form of violation on Human Rights, since the cultural

Relativist argue that the local traditions determine the civil rights that enjoyed by

the society. Here it can be seen that the local traditions that determine civil rights on

Philippines was created by the practice of killing as a hardened culture on

Philippines, that enjoyed by the society of the Philippines. Therefore, the

Relativism concept toward Human Rights on Philippines has led to the State‟s

responsibility to protect Human Rights to be relativism concept as well. Because

the

91

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION

Human Rights is a right inherent to all human being. It is simply become a

right inherent to all human being since the human were born as a human. The

Human Rights that inherent to all human being has made Human Rights as a

universal concept. The sense of humanity that attached with the human, also

strengthen the concept of Universalism of Human Rights. In which by the name of

humanity, people are willing to stand against something that deprive the rights from

human being. Human Rights as a universal concept also has been declared by the

United Nation (UN) with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).

Since then, the UDHR has become a common standard of Human Rights that have

to applied and promote universally by the states members of UN that ratified the

Human Rights documents. On the other hand, Human Rights as a universal concept

were being debated by the existence of Cultural Relativism concept. The Cultural

Relativism that exist as a contradiction toward the concept of Universalism of

Human Rights, emphasized that there is a cultural sense that made Human Rights as

a Relative concept.

However, even though Human Rights has been declared as a universal

concept by the UN, Philippines do not promote and implement the values of Human

Rights in the country. By the implementation of extrajudicial killing on “War on

Drugs” campaign under Duterte‟s administration, Philippines are obviously

violated the Human Rights. Since the extrajudicial killing has considered as a

violation of Human Rights as according to UDHR and International Covenant on

Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

On the other hand, Philippines has already ratified the Human Rights

documents, which stated the state participation to promote and implement Human

Rights universally. By the implement the extrajudicial killing on “War on Drugs” it

92

is also has become a contradiction of State‟s responsibility to protect concept. Since

Philippines cannot fulfil its obligation to protect Human Rights in the country. By

this mean, besides violating the Human Rights, Philippines also already failed to

fulfil its responsibility to protect Human Rights.

Shockingly, the “War on Drugs” campaign by Duterte has gained mass

approval that can be seen from the high satisfaction rate toward Duterte‟s

campaign. Since most of Filipinos perceive that Duterte has succeed to eradicate

the drugs problem and make a safe environment on Philippines. The high approval

rate has indicated that Filipinos are supporting the practice of extrajudicial killing

itself. By that, its indicates that Human Rights were perceived as a Relative concept

on Philippines.

Not only the support from the citizens that made Human Rights perceived as

a relative concept on Philippines, the practice of death penalty also has a role as a

constructing reasons of Filipinos behavior. The practice of death penalty that

brought the colonialization era of Spanish and America has become a hardened

culture which become the fault-lines on Philippine‟s culture. It has proved on the

Japanese colonialization era which stop the death penalty, but the extrajudicial

killing was numerous. Besides, the extrajudicial killing also happens on the

presidential era before Duterte. Therefore, the practice of killing has become a

culture and a common thing on Philippines.

Since the practice of killing has become a common thing on Philippines and

the Filipinos are supporting the extrajudicial killing on Duterte‟s “War on Drugs”

campaign, it has become an indication that Human Rights has become a Relative

concept on Philippines. Therefore, by the perception of Relativism concept of

Human Rights on Philippines, the Filipinos were accepting the form of Human

Rights violation by extrajudicial killing practice on “War on Drugs” campaign.

Besides, since the Human Rights perceived a relative concept on Philippines, it

leads to an ignorance to fulfil on implementing and promoting Human Rights

universally as well as fail to fulfil state‟s responsibility to protect Human Rights

93

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Book

Abinales, P. N.; Amoroso, Donna J. (2005), State and Society in the Philippines (p.

55). Rowman & Littlefield, ISBN 978-0-7425-1024-1.

Badescu, C. G. (2012). Humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect:

Security and human rights. London: Routledge.

Baylis J., Smith S., Owens P. (2008). The Globalization of World Politics: An

Introduction to International Relations, p. 164 Oxford University Press,

England.

Celoza, A. F. (1998). Ferdinand Marcos and the Philippines: The political

economy of authoritarianism. Singapore: Toppan

Chomsky, N. (2002). Terror and Just Response.

Donnelly, J. (1984). Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights. Human

Rights Quarterly, 6(4), 400-402. doi:10.2307/762182

Donnelly, J. (2013). Special Features of Human Rights. In Universal human rights

in theory and practice (2nd ed., pp. 10, 11). Ithaca: Cornell University

Press.

Duka, C. (2008), Struggle for Freedom, Rex Bookstore, Inc., ISBN 978-971-23-

5045-0.

Forsythe, D. P. (2018). Human rights in international relations

Gould, L. A., & Pate, M. (2016). State fragility around the world: Fractured justice

and fierce reprisal.

Johnson, D. T., & Zimring, F. E. (2009). The next frontier: National development,

political change and the death penalty in Asia. (Next frontier.) Oxford:

Oxford Univ. Press.

Kemerling, G. (2011). A Dictionary of Philosophical Terms and Name.

Kronenwetter, M. (2001). Capital punishment: A reference handbook. Santa

Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.

Rao, V., & Walton, M. (2009). Culture and public action.

Skard, T. (2015). Women of power: Half a century of female presidents and prime

ministers worldwide.

Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of

Power Politics. International Organization

94

New Zealand. (2008). The New Zealand handbook on international human rights.

Journal

Andreas, R. D. (2016). Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs The Early

Duterte Presidency in the Philippines. The Spectacle of Violence in

Duterte‘s ―War on Drugs‖,. Retrieved from http://nbn-

resolving.org/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:gbv:18-4-10128

Corradetti, C. (2009). Relativism and human rights: A theory of pluralistic

universalism. Dordrecht: Springer

Donnelly, J. (2013). Universal human rights in theory and practice. Ithaca: Cornell

University Press.

In Reus-Smit, C., & In Snidal, D. (2012). The Oxford handbook of international

relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jackson, R and Sorensen, G(2006). Introduction to International RelationsTheories

and Approaches. Oxford university press.

Miller, D. (2006). The Responsibility to Protect Human Rights.

Tesón, F. R. (1985). International Human Rights and Cultural Relativism.

Retrieved from

https://ir.law.fsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1038&context=articles

Waltz, K. N. 1959. Man, the State, and War: A Theoretical Analysis. New York:

Columbia University Press

Report

'License to Kill? | Philippine Police Killings in Duterte's 'War on Drugs? (2017,

July 13). Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/03/02/license-

kill/philippine-police-killings-dutertes-war-drugs

Nationwide Survey on the Nature and Extent of Drugs Abuse in the Philippines.

(n.d.). Retrieved from Dangerous Drugs Board (DDB) website:

http://pcij.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/DDB-2015-Nationwide-Survey-

Final-Reportc.pdf

Parre o, A. A. (2011). Report on the Philippine extrajudicial killings: (2001 -

August 2010). Makati City: Asia Foundation.

Social Weather Stations. (n.d.). Social Weather Stations | Second Quarter 2017

Social Weather Survey: Pres. Duterte's net satisfaction rating a new personal

record-high of "Very Good" +66. Retrieved from

https://www.sws.org.ph/swsmain/artcldisppage/?artcsyscode=ART-

20170706173742

http://nbn-resolving.org/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:gbv:18-4-10128

http://nbn-resolving.org/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:gbv:18-4-10128

https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/03/02/license-kill/philippine-police-killings-dutertes-war-drugs

https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/03/02/license-kill/philippine-police-killings-dutertes-war-drugs

http://pcij.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/DDB-2015-Nationwide-Survey-Final-Reportc.pdf

http://pcij.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/DDB-2015-Nationwide-Survey-Final-Reportc.pdf

https://www.sws.org.ph/swsmain/artcldisppage/?artcsyscode=ART-20170706173742

https://www.sws.org.ph/swsmain/artcldisppage/?artcsyscode=ART-20170706173742

95

World Report 2017: Rights Trends in Philippines. (2017, January 20). Retrieved

from https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2017/country-chapters/philippines

Website

3,257: Fact checking the Marcos killings, 1975-1985. (2018, May 3). Retrieved

from http://www.manilatimes.net/3257-fact-checking-the-marcos-killings-

1975-1985/255735/


http://pcij.org/blog/2006/04/18/a-timeline-of-death-penalty-in-the-

philippines

Berehulak, D. (2016, December 7). 'They Are Slaughtering Us Like Animals?

Retrieved from

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/12/07/world/asia/rodrigo-

duterte-philippines-drugs-killings.html

Cohen, R. (2016, July 29). The Responsibility to Protect: Human Rights and

Humanitarian Dimensions. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/on-

the-record/the-responsibility-to-protect-human-rights-and-humanitarian-

dimensions/

Constructivist Theories of IR. (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://www.public.iastate.edu/~pol_s.453/const.htm

DDB: Philippines has 1.8 million current drug users. (2016, September 19).

Retrieved from https://www.rappler.com/nation/146654-drug-use-survey-

results-dangerous-drugs-board-philippines-2015

Disappearances" and extrajudicial executions as violations of international human

rights. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/188000/act330051993en.pd

f

Duterte fires drugs board chair for 'contradicting government' | Philstar.com. (2017,

May24). Retrieved from

https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2017/05/24/1703250/duterte-fires-

drugs-board-chair-contradicting-government

Human Rights Consequences of the 'War on Drugs? in the Philippines. (2017, July

31). Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/07/20/human-rights-

consequences-war-drugs-philippines


https://www.cfr.org/interview/human-rights-and-dutertes-war-drugs

http://www.manilatimes.net/3257-fact-checking-the-marcos-killings-1975-1985/255735/

http://www.manilatimes.net/3257-fact-checking-the-marcos-killings-1975-1985/255735/

http://pcij.org/blog/2006/04/18/a-timeline-of-death-penalty-in-the-philippines

http://pcij.org/blog/2006/04/18/a-timeline-of-death-penalty-in-the-philippines

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/12/07/world/asia/rodrigo-duterte-philippines-drugs-killings.html

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/12/07/world/asia/rodrigo-duterte-philippines-drugs-killings.html

https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/188000/act330051993en.pdf

https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/188000/act330051993en.pdf

https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/07/20/human-rights-consequences-war-drugs-philippines

https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/07/20/human-rights-consequences-war-drugs-philippines

96

Nik de Ynchausti. (2016, September 24). The tallies of Martial Law. Retrieved

from https://www.esquiremag.ph/politics/martial-law-tallies-a1576-

20160924-lfrm4

Punongbayan, J. C. (2017, May 26). Why Duterte's ?4 million drug users? is

statistically improbable. Retrieved from https://www.rappler.com/thought-

leaders/170975-duterte-drug-users-statistically-improbable

Ranada, P. (2017, May 6). Is Duterte's '4 million drug addicts' a 'real number'?

Retrieved from https://www.rappler.com/rappler-blogs/169009-duterte-

drug-addicts-real-number

Tubeza, P. C., & Orejas, T. (2017, December 9). Duterte: War on drugs to continue

until 2022. Retrieved from http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/950878/rodrigo-

duterte-war-on-drugs-drug-killings-extrajudicial-killlings

United Nations Universal Declaration, International Covenant: United for Human

Rights. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.humanrights.com/what-are-

human-rights/international-human-rights-law/international-human-rights-

law-continued.html

Why are Filipinos supporting Duterte's drug war? (2017, October 14). Retrieved

from https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/185271-majority-filipinos-

support-duterte-drug-war

Official Site

Ban disturbed by remarks made by President-elect of the Philippines on

extrajudicial killings. (2016, June 8). Retrieved from

https://news.un.org/en/story/2016/06/531752-ban-disturbed-remarks-made-

president-elect-philippines-extrajudicial-killings#.WH44jRsrKUk


https://www.ddb.gov.ph/research-statistics/statistics/45-research-and-

statistics/329-2016-statistics

Dangerous Drugs Board. (n.d.). Malacañang implements reorganization at the

DDB. Retrieved from https://www.ddb.gov.ph/newsroom/345-malacanang-

implements-reorganization-at-the-ddb

Dangerous Drugs Board. (n.d.). Vision, Mission, Mandate. Retrieved from

https://www.ddb.gov.ph/about-ddb/vision-mission-mandate

Drug war nets a million mark surrenderers, 31 Dec. 2016 – Presidential

Communications Operations Office. (2017, June 1). Retrieved from

https://pcoo.gov.ph/uncategorized/drug-war-nets-a-million-mark-

surrenderers-31-dec-2016/



https://www.rappler.com/thought-leaders/170975-duterte-drug-users-statistically-improbable

https://www.rappler.com/thought-leaders/170975-duterte-drug-users-statistically-improbable

https://www.rappler.com/rappler-blogs/169009-duterte-drug-addicts-real-number

https://www.rappler.com/rappler-blogs/169009-duterte-drug-addicts-real-number

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/950878/rodrigo-duterte-war-on-drugs-drug-killings-extrajudicial-killlings

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/950878/rodrigo-duterte-war-on-drugs-drug-killings-extrajudicial-killlings

https://news.un.org/en/story/2016/06/531752-ban-disturbed-remarks-made-president-elect-philippines-extrajudicial-killings#.WH44jRsrKUk

https://news.un.org/en/story/2016/06/531752-ban-disturbed-remarks-made-president-elect-philippines-extrajudicial-killings#.WH44jRsrKUk

https://www.ddb.gov.ph/research-statistics/statistics/45-research-and-statistics/329-2016-statistics

https://www.ddb.gov.ph/research-statistics/statistics/45-research-and-statistics/329-2016-statistics

https://www.ddb.gov.ph/about-ddb/vision-mission-mandate

https://pcoo.gov.ph/uncategorized/drug-war-nets-a-million-

97

Fact Sheet No.2 (Rev.1), The International Bill of Human Rights. (n.d.). Retrieved

from http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FactSheet2Rev.1en.pdf

History of the Document. (2017, October 31). Retrieved from

http://www.un.org/en/sections/universal-declaration/history-

document/index.html

Human Rights. (2017, October 31). Retrieved from

http://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/human-rights/

Lgu. (n.d.). PNP OPLAN - DOUBLE BARREL PROJECT TOKHANG. Retrieved

from http://www.calambamisocc.gov.ph/index.php/60-capital-outlay/411-

pnp-oplan-tokhang

Media Interview with President Rodrigo Roa Duterte during his Visit to Marawi

City – Presidential Communications Operations Office. (2017, September

21). Retrieved from https://pcoo.gov.ph/media_interview/media-interview-

president-rodrigo-roa-duterte-visit-marawi-city/


http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CAT.aspx

OHCHR Dashboard. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://indicators.ohchr.org/

OHCHR | What we do. (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/AboutUs/Pages/WhatWeDo.aspx

R2P MONITOR 15 NOVEMBER 2017 ISSUE 36 A bimonthly bulletin by the

Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect. (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://www.globalr2p.org/media/files/r2p_monitor_nov2017.pdf

R2P REFERENCES IN UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL

RESOLUTIONS. (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://www.globalr2p.org/media/files/hrc-resolutions-r2p-10-april.pdf

Social Weather Stations. (n.d.). Social Weather Stations | Home Page. Retrieved

from https://www.sws.org.ph/

The Foundation of International Human Rights Law. (2017, October 31). Retrieved

from http://www.un.org/en/sections/universal-declaration/foundation-

international-human-rights-law/index.html

The Foundation of International Human Rights Law. (2017, October 31). Retrieved

from http://www.un.org/en/sections/universal-declaration/foundation-

international-human-rights-law/index.html




http://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/human-rights/

http://www.calambamisocc.gov.ph/index.php/60-capital-outlay/411-pnp-oplan-tokhang

http://www.calambamisocc.gov.ph/index.php/60-capital-outlay/411-pnp-oplan-tokhang

https://pcoo.gov.ph/media_interview/media-interview-president-rodrigo-roa-duterte-visit-marawi-city/

https://pcoo.gov.ph/media_interview/media-interview-president-rodrigo-roa-duterte-visit-marawi-city/

http://indicators.ohchr.org/

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/AboutUs/Pages/WhatWeDo.aspx

http://www.globalr2p.org/media/files/r2p_monitor_nov2017.pdf

http://www.globalr2p.org/media/files/hrc-resolutions-r2p-10-april.pdf

https://www.sws.org.ph/

http://www.un.org/en/sections/universal-declaration/foundation-international-human-rights-law/index.html

http://www.un.org/en/sections/universal-declaration/foundation-international-human-rights-law/index.html

98

Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (2018, January 29). Retrieved from

http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/


regulations#executive-order-218

User, S. (n.d.). Mandate and Functions. Retrieved from

http://pdea.gov.ph/transparency/mandate-and-functions

Government Publication

PNP ANTI-ILLEGAL DRUGS CAMPAIGN PLAN - PROJECT: "DOUBLE

BARREL" (16). (2016). Retrieved from Republic of the Philippines

NATIONAL POLICE COMMISSION NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS

PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF, PNP

website:

https://didm.pnp.gov.ph/Command%20Memorandum%20Circulars/CMC%

202016-16%20PNP%20ANTI-

ILLEGAL%20DRUGS%20CAMPAIGN%20PLAN%20–

%20PROJECT%20DOUBLE%20BARREL.pdf

http://pdea.gov.ph/laws-and-regulations#executive-order-218

http://pdea.gov.ph/laws-and-regulations#executive-order-218

http://pdea.gov.ph/transparency/mandate-and-functions

https://didm.pnp.gov.ph/Command%20Memorandum%20Circulars/CMC%202016-16%20PNP%20ANTI-ILLEGAL%20DRUGS%20CAMPAIGN%20PLAN%20–%20PROJECT%20DOUBLE%20BARREL.pdf




99

APPENDICES

100

101

102

103

104