The Philippines' drug war, led by President Rodrigo Duterte, is both morally and legally unjustifiable.

It amounts to state-sanctioned murder because it results in outrageous and widespread violations of

human

rights. To set up brutal death squads carrying out non-judicial executions for people not or not linked to

dealing drugs. Despite this, the president and his administration have continued to maintain their brutal

approach to drug cartels during his six-year term. He has been quoted as saying that the opioid problem
in

the Philippines was worse than he had expected. Targeted killings by police and paramilitary units of
heroin

traffickers and consumers not only intensify the epidemic but also threaten the freedom to be free from
an

extrajudicial execution.

The war on drugs stood to be failed in the first place. It is impossible to eradicate this kind of

phenomenon within 6 months. Yet until now, this war is still going on. The glance of blood surpasses the

peak of human rights in every operation they do. They didn't think life is significant even the innocent
suffer

from it. Some endeavors came from the list of users that were not proven and verified before they
conduct

such a procedure. Thousands of life was a casualty, they always say this word " They shoot first so we
need

to protect ourselves." Also, they didn't give any chances for stoners to live. For me, giving odds to others

might turn into a good outcome.

In the last six months, about 7,500 people have died as a result of the drug war's effects, according

to PNP estimates. Since June 2016, Rodrigo Duterte, the Philippines' president, has waged a drug war
that

has resulted in the extrajudicial executions of thousands of alleged drug dealers and users around the
world.

The Philippine president views drug trafficking and addiction as "significant obstacles to the Philippines'

economic and social growth," according to John Gershman, an expert on Philippine politics. The drug
war is

a cornerstone of Duterte's domestic policy, and it builds on policies he implemented as mayor of Davao
earlier
in his political career. After expressing concern about Duterte's drug war, the US withheld poverty aid to
the

Philippines in December 2016. Rodrigo Duterte, the mayor of Davao, has vowed a massive crackdown on

drug traffickers and addicts. He encouraged the public to "go ahead and destroy" opioid dealers when
he

was elected president in June. His behavior has developed an environment in which people believe it is

acceptable to murder drug consumers and dealers. By early December, nearly 6,000 people had been
killed,

with about 2,100 killed in police operations and the rest killed in "deaths under investigation," which is
slang

for mob killings. According to estimates, between 500,000 and 700,000 people have surrendered to the

authorities. Approximately 40,000 people have been arrested.

The drug war in the Philippines has broad public support from citizens of all social groups. In the

most recent nationwide survey on presidential performance and confidence ratings, conducted by Pulse
Asia

Research from September 25 to October 1, Duterte earned an approval rating of about 86 percent.
Despite

their concerns about these deaths, some people support him as president because of his views on other

issues. For example, he has a progressive policy agenda that focuses on economic inequality. Duterte
also

backs a range of anti-poverty programs and initiatives. The most recent World Bank quarterly report
lauds

Duterte's economic plans. Since he wants to concentrate on issues of social and economic inequality,
the

drug war should not be seen as a war on the poor. The Philippine judicial system is slow and corrupt,
allowing

Duterte to act quickly and ineffectively in dealing with the drug crisis, resulting in widespread human
rights

violations. In addition to that, “Drug dealers and drug users are a stigmatized minority, and stigmatized

communities also have difficulty gaining political support for the defense of their rights,” according to
one

observer, in the face of a fragmented, elite-controlled political system and a sluggish, inefficient, and
corrupt
justice system. There is no evidence that the people killed are drug dealers or consumers and there are
no

trials. [This situation] illustrates the weakness of human rights institutions and debate in the face of a

prominent and competent populist leader. There is no proof that the victims were drug traffickers or
users,

and no trials have been held. In the face of a prominent and capable populist leader, demonstrates the

vulnerability of human rights institutions and discussion.