Duterte and Dela Rosa Must Rid the Police of their Rogue Elements if their War on Drugs was to Succeed

“Si Melvin nakita pa namin na nakatayo, dumaan pa pero hindi namin makausap. Nakita namin dumaan naka-posas pinasok sa sasakyan. Tapos dinala ng hospital. Pumunta kami sa Kalibo pero ‘yon pala dinala sa Malay hospital. So noong bumalik kami sa Malay, patay na silang dalawa. Tinanong namin ‘yong doctor, dead on arrival na raw,” he said.

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/810854/death-of-melvin-odicta-puzzles-lawyer

If the above account of the Odictas' lawyer is true, then we have a serious reason to be concerned. All this time, the police have always debunked claims that they have authorized the summary killing of suspected pushers, users, and drug lords on the surfeited and overused excuse of resisting arrest and shooting out with police officers endangering their lives. We have always given the police the benefit of the doubt. After all, they enjoy the presumption of regularity in the performance of duty.

President Duterte, whose sincerity you can almost tangibly feel and smell when he speaks, has always vowed to uphold due process despite his penchant for the I will kill you! line, and that suspects will be killed only if they resist arrest, and fight it out with the arresting police officers. PNP chief Ronald Dela Rosa has consistently echoed Duterte’s pronouncement.

This incident, though, impugns the president’s claim of respect for law. This gives the drug users more reasons to doubt the prudence of turning themselves in to the police. If Melvin Odicta, a powerful regional drug lord and viewed as a high-value target, after being seen in handcuffs while being led into a patrol car, could inexplicably turned up dead, what more the small players in this elaborate drug trade scheme? What could these foot soldiers reasonably hope for when they surrender to the police?

I don't doubt the president, but this unbridled killings of arrestees despite the obvious improbability of resistance knowing they would be killed suggest that rogue members of the police force--yes they still exist even among those who actively take part in this war on drugs, or at least make it look like it; even the president has expressed this view--are putting one over Duterte and Dela Rosa by silencing their erstwhile cohorts to keep them from snitching on them and their bosses, or standing witness against them in court using the very program (double barrel and tokhang) that the president has designed to net them.

It is in this aspect that the narco capitalists are outsmarting and outplaying Duterte and Dela Rosa. They are intelligently exploiting this presumption of regularity in the performance of their duty. Who’s pulling the strings on these rogue policemen is anybody’s guess.

The president must neither tire out, nor take these extra-judicial killings for granted. He has to put Dela Rosa to task in investigating these dubious custodial killings. We know there are legitimate kills, but a thousand or so deaths from a template “nanlaban” must merit a deep and resolute investigation into their circumstances. The same goes to the now ubiquitous riding-in-tandem shootings of suspected drug offenders. It does not help that Dela Rosa, in the early goings, expressed his favour for these summary or extra-judicial killings treating them as a boon to their campaign, although he has since repeatedly clarified that he, like the president, hated and would not tolerate extra-judicial killings. His actions, however, continue to play catch-up with his declarations.

 If these rampant extra-judicial killings continue unchecked they may backfire on the president's anti-illegal drugs campaign. When the poor, who have been cheering the initial inroads made on this war on drugs, realize that most of the deaths come from their ranks, they may become disillusioned and turn against the president. When the president alienates the support of his main constituency base, he will lose his political capital and his command may shed off and lose the carte blanche character that it presently enjoys. He may find his order and policies, all of a sudden, susceptible to questions and challenges, and that could derail his efforts. And let’s not forget that the narco capitalists out there are all eyes and ears on any opening that could leave the president vulnerable, and would definitely seize on it.

This unprecedented war on drugs has opened a Pandora’s box that could set us back many years and leave this country a lot worse than Duterte found it if he fails to finish it. Duterte has unleashed the monster we have not seen in these narco capitalists, and they are now more than ever at a heightened alert for a shot at Duterte, and ever ready to mobilize all of their resources to eliminate him by any means.

A Duterte death or removal by any means will leave a leadership vacuum that the narco capitalists would undoubtedly swiftly exploit. It is easy to think that these narco capitalists must be kicking themselves for not going all out in planting themselves in the government when they had the chance. But they have learned their lessons, and they would not make the same mistake.

They lurk around ready to pounce at the slightest opportunity. They believe that, with the exception of Duterte, they could easily snap up a political scoundrel willing to take money, bankroll their bid to power and control them. Before Duterte came into power we had not known how close we came to becoming a narco-state. Until Duterte, we vaguely had a grasp of the enormity of the drug problem. Until Duterte came we had only speculated on how many people in positions of power were on the narco capitalists’ payroll.

Now we know more, and are appaled.  

For the nation’s sake Mr. President, stay safe and alive. We know you are a working president, and it is in your nature to go where your presence matters like attending to a funeral of a fallen policeman or soldier, but you have to take extra precaution. The entire force of the enemy is mobilized round the clock for that one mistake or chance to take you out, and take the country captive, again.

The Odicta killing incident, like the many similar incidents of killing while in police or imminent police custody, reveals that the president has enemies in the midst of his key organizations. He must unmask and bring them to justice.

The police are a good place to start poring over.

The Verdict: By inference, there were substantial deposits made to Duterte's accounts.

Anything less than an absolute waiver to Duterte’s secrecy of bank deposit authorizing BPI to disclose the complete history of all of Duterte’s accounts for the year 2014, to establish the P193M deposits made on March 28, 2014, Duterte’s birthday, and the rest of P211M, and for the 9-year period before 2014, to establish the P2.4B accumulated deposits, is tantamount to admitting the accusation.

According to Trillanes, Duterte's lawyer, Sal Panelo, had only a SPA authorizing Panelo to look into, and a waiver authorizing BPI to disclose, the OUTSTANDING BALANCE of ONE of Duterte’s accounts, despite the fact that Trillanes has always claimed that Duterte has seven (7) accounts with BPI Julia Vargas branch. The authority goes further to state that BPI is authorized to disclose the balance ONLY to Panelo, not even to Trillanes, much less the public. The balance allegedly showed P17k plus.

Let us break it down. A Duterte bank account information disclosed to a Duterte surrogate? It is like Duterte showing the account to himself, and calling it transparency and disclosure. Regardless, Duterte’s legions erupt in ecstasy and call it victory. How pathetic!

It is clear that the Duterte camp is playing on the general collective credulity of Duterte’s supporters.

Again, an outstanding balance does not tell the whole story. In fact, it tells no valuable story at all that could help shed light on the controversy. If Duterte’s accounts indeed received deposits on March 28, 2014, or any date, Duterte could withdraw them just as soon as they came in. He could request a transfer of any amount, or he could do it himself if his account is enrolled online, to another person’s or persons’ account or accounts. They could also do a transfer to layers of accounts to throw any investigation off their tracks.

As if the gambit did not look stupid enough, and to top it all, Panelo claims Duterte has made a  deciding move to prove that he did not have these deposits in his account: Panelo challenges BPI to release a certification saying that Duterte NEVER HAD P211M in that ONE account.

The problem with this is it leaves BPI no choice but to certify to what the Duterte camp has always wanted the public to hear—and hopefully believe. That Duterte did not have at any one time P211M in this ONE account, period.

To demonstrate here’s what BPI is being limited do: if Duterte had P210,999,000.00 in that ONE account, BPI would issue a certification saying Duterte never had P211M in that account—it is less. If Duterte had P500M in that account BPI would also issue a certification saying Duterte never had P211M in that account—it is more. If Duterte had a consolidated balance of P1.7B in all his accounts with BPI Julia Vargas, but only P200M in that ONE account, BPI would still be forced to certify that Duterte never had P211M in that account.

In other words, the Duterte camp is hemming BPI in a situation where its answer could only be what the Duterte camp has always wanted the public to hear and believe, that is, Duterte never had P211M in that one account, as if it makes Duterte less dishonourable if he only had P200M in questionable deposits in his ONE account, or innocent, and Trillanes untruthful, if he had P500M.

Neither does it help that Duterte keeps on harping on the legality of Trillanes baring his bank records to the public, crying over his right to secrecy of bank deposit. The laws are designed to protect the innocent, not to allow one to perpetrate, or hide a crime; to promote justice, not to frustrate or defeat it. For crying out loud Duterte is running for the country’s highest office, and he complains when one controverts his claims, or when one calls his bluffs. Remember, it was he and Cayetano who paraded and flaunted to media their manifesto for transparency calling on all candidates to execute waiver to allow scrutiny of their bank accounts, and all other assets.

Duterte knows very well that the rule in public office is disclosure; secrecy the exception. As a mayor, he was already entitled to less privacy. As a presidential candidate he completely sheds off his privacy protection, although he keeps his rights, that is why he can sue. His claim to his right to privacy cannot override the right of the public, which he proposes to lead, to know everything that touches on his overall fitness to assume the highest office, especially on issues of hidden wealth, since he has always portrayed himself to be of modest means, and live a simple lifestyle.

Another thing that hurts Duterte is his legal contingents. Alvarez and Panelo blabber to the media about how Trillanes violated the law, hearsay, double hearsay, inadmissible evidence, so forth and so on. Haven’t they noticed? Neither Duterte, Alvarez, nor Panelo is in court.

Trillanes came in possession of a material information that the public has an inherent interest to know, considering that Duterte is running for president. Trillanes asserts it is his duty as a senator to take the information to the public, and he willingly took the risk and courted lawsuit. He even vowed to quit the race for the vice-presidency, and resign from senate if he is proven wrong. That shows the substance of his claims.

Why do they need to ask Trillanes to incriminate himself by signing an affidavit on who gave him the information, and how it was obtained? Trillanes may not be a lawyer, but he is not stupid, but then Trillanes did it anyway: he signed an affidavit stating who his source was and the circumstances on how the information was obtained. That puts him another base past Duterte.

Duterte should stop nitpicking and quibbling over his right to secrecy. He may sue Trillanes if he wants, but he must give the public a straight answer to dispel their doubts. Duterte might argue that the public does not believe the allegations. He must be reminded that the public is not only all of his followers who worship him regardless. There are other members of the public who clamour to get to the bottom of the controversy.

Instead of whining over privacy issues, he should bare all and finally put these issues to rest with only days to elections.

Unfortunately for the Duterte camp, the more they make the story circuitous to hide the truth, the more the people see it.