Defending Duterte’s Moral Obligation on War on Drugs through the lens of Deontological Ethics

1. Universality of moral duty.

This always applies to everyone because the human individual is fully capable of deliberating, following rules, and making decisions,
he is bound by moral law. So, it tells us what actions are good or bad according to a clear set of rules.

Kant's ideology can help explain Duterte's administration, in which the president is so eager on eradicating drugs in the country
because he sees it as a threat to humanity, and as a leader, it is his imperative to act on it.

As a duty-based ethics, it tells us that it is Duterte’s moral duty to protect the country from all potential threats, and he will continue
to do so regardless of the consequences because he believes that this is for the best.

2. Duty is the supreme norm of morality or “the obligation to act from reverence to law”

The president's desire to eliminate drug proliferation is fueled by his desire to reduce one of the many factors that contribute to
crime and corruption. Duterte has known that drug abuse is frequently accompanied by a negative social impact on education,
family, violence and crime. Drug-related crimes have been thriving in the country, claiming many lives, and Duterte believes that
drug users pose catastrophic threats to society.

3. The morality of every human act is determined by a good will.

Kant insists on deriving any moral worth from our actions, and humans must do them with the right motive. Duterte's harsh and
ruthless administration, could be attributed to this ideology because the morality of his actions is based on some aspect of the
activity itself, rather than the quality of the action's outcome. The rightness or wrongness of an act, according to Deontological
Ethics is determined with what the human intends to accomplish as an autonomous being.

SUMMARY:

Through the lens of Deontological Ethics, we all know what is right and bad, good and evil, on some level. The problem is not moral
doubt; it’s the suppression of what we already know to be true, good, and real. To answer the ethical dilemma to whether or not
continue Duterte’s war on Drugs, our group believes that IT SHOULD NOT for the following reasons:

(1) It violates the Universal law of “thou shall not kill” (Universality)

(2) It

If the act

(3) Doing something out of your free will

Police chooses

No checks and balance

Although deontological ethics posits that the person in authority should do their duty because it’s their moral obligation to do so.

Duterte's categorical imperative is based on prudence rather than morality, which is in line with Kant's notion that a human being
may determine good from evil by using his intellect. Duterte understands the detrimental effects of drugs, therefore he acted legally.
Which he believes to result in peace and have long-term socioeconomic progress.

Kant’s theory supports that Duterte’s will is good, not because the consequences are good, nor because it is capable of attaining the
end which is seeks, but “it is good in itself, or because it wills the good” And to Duterte, this is what matters the most, a genuine
and meaningful change.