With approximately 97% of the ballots tabulated on May 9, 2022, the son of former Filipino

dictator Ferdinand Marcos and a supporter of outgoing President Duterte received more than
twice as many votes as his nearest competitor, Leni Robredo. It is legitimate to worry how
Duterte's war on drugs would go after this election. The country's war on drugs, which has
resulted in between 12,000 and 30,000 murders, will be the subject of legal challenges from
the International Criminal Court (ICC), which the incoming president will have the authority to
block.

In essence, Duterte's drug war began in 2016 with the goal of "neutralizing illicit drug
personalities countrywide," and he encouraged people to kill criminals and drug users. Due
to the country's extensive coastline and the fact that many government officials and law
enforcement personnel themselves were implicated in the drug trade, Duterte, also known
by the moniker "the Punisher," acknowledged at the time that border control against illegal
narcotics was a challenge. Suspected drug traffickers, addicts, and those mistaken for them
are among the deceased, along with youngsters who were killed by bullets meant for
someone else. According to a study issued by the World Organisation Against Torture
(OMCT) in 2020, the police were involved in more than half of the child homicides that were
reported between July 2016 and December 2019. The detrimental impact that de facto
shoot-to-kill tactics have on law enforcement, the rule of law, and accountability in this regard
is a human rights consequence. After completing a preliminary examination in June 2021,
ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda requested permission from the Court's judges to look into
recent cases of torture, crimes against humanity, and other harsh treatment carried out in the
Philippines as part of the drug war. Despite the Court's approval in September 2021, the
inquiry was briefly halted by the Hague in November at the Philippines' request. This
prompted objections from Filipino attorneys and human rights organizations.

What would the election of Ferdinand Marcos Jr. imply for the drug war? Will the incoming
administration alter the pattern? In his initial interviews with Philstar, he declared his aim to
modify parts of the former president Duterte's techniques. He wanted to downplay the
severity of the crackdown, which was obviously harsh and alienated an increasing number of
people. As a result, the Department of the Interior and Local Government established the
"Buhay Ingatan, Droga'y Ayawan" (Secure Life, Shun Drugs) or "Bida" program. This
initiative involves local government entities, national government agencies, and other
spheres of society, and it aims to increase community-based rehabilitation while also
reducing the demand for illegal drugs.

The current government will concentrate on going after drug lords rather than the little
players. In addition, he pledged to increase the number of rehabilitation institutions at the
provincial level while focusing on enhancing treatment facilities rather than treating addicts
like criminals. He contends that since drug addiction is primarily a health and social issue, it
is the government's duty to inform young people about the harmful effects of illicit narcotics.
Despite taking what appeared to be a softer stance, he made it apparent that he would not
be eager to enable the ICC to intervene, particularly after the nation withdrew from ratifying
the Rome Statute in 2019. On the other hand, the civil society is concerned that the
president elect would prolong the war's abuse and brutality by advancing the death sentence
measure for drug traffickers, which was adopted in early 2019 but put on hold by Congress.

Looking further into the effects of this program, since its inception, the war on drugs has
criminalized millions of people, imprisoned them, and given them permanent criminal
records, interrupting or completely removing their access to the tools and resources they
need to lead healthy lives. Drug war reasoning treats drug use as a criminal issue, which
harms rather than promotes the health of drug users, their families, and their communities.
Drug war logic is made tangible not only within criminal legal codes but also through required
drug monitoring and reporting systems in treatment and healthcare settings, mandatory drug
testing for employment and in order to receive social services, the proliferation of
zero-tolerance work environments and school zones, compulsory treatment in order to
access resources or minimize loss of benefits, mental health checks for work and housing,
and numerous other measures which will be implemented. Since more people are compelled
to participate in these types of monitoring and punishment, doctors, nurses, teachers,
neighbors, social workers, employers, landlords, and others are now included among the
frontline enforcers of the drug war in addition to the police.

Employment is a significant factor in determining health because of its relationship to money

and health insurance. But there are several obstacles to finding and keeping a job, including
drug tests, background checks for crimes, and the exclusion of those with criminal records
from specific professions. The National Research Council observed in a study from 1994
that over the course of nearly 20 years, urine testing has evolved from being used to identify
a small number of people with serious criminal or health issues to more widespread
programs that have an impact on millions of residents. The National Survey on Drug Use
and Health reported that 15% of respondents were subjected to random employee drug
testing between 2017 and 2020, and about 21% of respondents underwent testing as part of
the employment process. Because it offers money, access to health insurance and medical
treatment, and social connection, employment is a health problem that healthcare
professionals should be concerned about. Low income and insecure work are associated
with ill health, and some evidence suggests that those who use drugs and have precarious
employment are more susceptible to violence and HIV infection. Being jobless is linked to
higher incidence of drug use and SUDs, poverty, and other detrimental health impacts.

Aside from this, the correlation between education and health is well known, yet drug war
thinking in educational settings can penalize drug users instead of providing them with the
necessary assistance. Adolescent substance use is linked to risky sexual behavior, violent
encounters, negative childhood memories, mental health risks, and suicide risks, which calls
for more comprehensive mental health and support services in schools. Despite this,
disciplinary measures to suspected or proven drug use are frequently used in the
educational setting. These responses can range from monitoring and policing to drug testing
and expulsion. Drug war rationale focuses on penalizing them in schools while frequently
limiting access to financial assistance and educational resources for those pursuing higher
education, rather than assisting young people in finishing their education and receiving the
care they may need. We need to change these policies if we wish to enhance the health of
young people. A thorough review of the literature led the American Academy of Pediatrics,
for instance, to conclude that random drug testing of children and adolescents did more
harm than good. The removal of police from schools, the abolition of zero-tolerance rules,
and the provision of counseling and assistance to teenage drug users rather than expulsion
might all contribute to higher completion rates and, eventually, improved health outcomes.

Drug policies have an impact on society, the economy, and health, thus attempts to end the
drug war cannot be limited to criminal justice reform alone. Most systems of daily life in the
Philippines are affected by the drug war and its punitive logic, which puts individuals under
constant observation, suspicion, and punishment while eroding important facets of society
including access to welfare, work, housing, and education. In all, these have led to worse
health consequences for persons, families, and communities, especially for drug users. As
the general public and decision-makers call for a health-based approach to drug use, it is
critical to recognize how systems designed to care for and support users frequently fall short
of their goals; rather than offering assistance to users or those who are suspected of using
users, these systems frequently punish users.

Healthcare workers need to be aware of how the drug war began, how it has evolved, and
how they may both support and undermine its ideologies and methods in their daily work.
Drug users can be treated with respect, decency, and trust by healthcare professionals, and
choices about their care and treatment can be made in collaboration with patients. As they
recognize that drug-related problems frequently result from a lack of resources, such as
precarious housing and food, economic instability, and inadequate healthcare, medical
practitioners can also try to contextualize drug use within a wider social and economic
framework. People who encounter drug-related problems require not just receive treatment;
there should be a variety of other health services, resources, and support available as well.

In retrospect, the nation should embrace drastically new counternarcotics policies: dragnets
targeting low-level pushers and users, shoot-to-kill orders to police, and demands for
extrajudicial murders must all end immediately. If such orders are given, encounter murders
must be looked into and any additional extrajudicial killings must be prosecuted. In the near
term, the pervasive guilt may preclude the implementation of any strategy that would aim to
look into and bring charges against police, government, and community council members
who were complicit in the state-sanctioned killing. Reduced criminal violence and violent
militancy must be among the top priorities of law enforcement and other aspects of drug
policy strategies. President Duterte claims that the Philippines is home to drug trafficking
networks. The Philippines should gather accurate intelligence on these networks and focus
on their middle operational layers rather than low-level dealers, as well as their corruption
networks in the government and law enforcement. The latter, nevertheless, must not be used
as an excuse to silence independent and competing politicians. Furthermore, The
Philippines should implement sensible harm-reduction strategies to combat addiction, such
as methadone maintenance, safe-needle exchange, and easy access to quality care. These
are undoubtedly challenging and illusive for methamphetamines, the preferred drug in the
Philippines. Meth addiction has a high morbidity rate and is exceedingly challenging to cure.
President Duterte could make the Philippines the hub of cooperative East Asian research on
how to create efficient public health responses to methamphetamine addiction rather than
turning his nation into a lawless Wild East.

In this new agenda against drugs, we may anticipate the imprecise, unplanned approach
that his predecessor has been using for the past six years to continue. There may yet be
persistent democratic decline. However, fresh initiatives to reshape Duterte's agenda in favor
of more progressive options may also be successful. The current president's allies, the
frustration of the Filipino people, and their desire to assert their human rights and create a
more democratic nation will all play a role in the result.

References:

Cohen, A., Vakharia, S., Netherland, J., Frederique, K. (2022). How the war on drugs
impacts social determinants of health beyond the criminal legal system. Retrieved
from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9302017/#.
Cupin, B. (2022). Marcos: Drug war continues but ‘slightly different’. Retrieved from
https://www.rappler.com/nation/marcos-drug-war-continues-but-slightly-different/.

Galvez, D. (2022). Bongbong Marcos to take ‘slightly different’ approach in fight against
drugs. Retrieved from
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1669727/bongbong-marcos-to-take-slightly-different-appr
oach-in-fight-against-drugs.

Human Rights Watch. (n.d.). Philippines’ ‘War on Drugs’. Retrieved from

https://www.hrw.org/tag/philippines-war-drugs.

Manila Standard. (2022). The war on drugs, Marcos-style. Retrieved from

https://www.manilastandard.net/opinion/editorial/314279367/the-war-on-drugs-marco
s-style.html.

Romero, A. (2022). 'War on drugs' under Marcos to focus on prevention, rehabilitation.

Retrieved from
https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2022/09/13/2209468/war-drugs-under-marcos-foc
us-prevention-rehabilitation.

Schlein, L. (2022). UN: For Victims of Philippines 'War on Drugs,' Justice Remains Elusive.
Retrieved from
https://www.voanews.com/a/un-for-victims-of-philippines-war-on-drugs-justice-remain
s-elusive/6780138.html.

Sunstar Cebu. (2022). Editorial: Bongbong’s war on drugs. Retrieved from

https://www.sunstar.com.ph/article/1947224/cebu/opinion/editorial-bongbongs-war-on
-drugs.