Chapter 1

Problem and its Background

Introduction

A prohibited drug is a substance which has a physiological effect when ingested or

otherwise introduced in the body. Here in the Philippines, the drug problem has primarily been

viewed as an issue of law enforcement and criminality .it was until June 30, 2016 when

President Rodrigo Duterte assumed office and started the war on drugs campaign. During the

campaign, Mr. Duterte pushed a war against illegal drugs which he argued was the most

dangerous threat to the country (The Guardian,2016). For how many years illegal drugs was still

there an indestructible one. It is really a big issue here in our country in which we criminology

students have also concerns in this kind of dilemma. Our thoughts are speculating on why does

crime rate of illegal drugs are escalating? The notion on why there are still drug users amid the

risk of taking them. In fact, it can affect lives and lifestyle in general.

Anti-illegal Drugs Operation covers the intelligence or case build-up and/or negation

operation for the arrest of violators and suppression. Seizure or confiscation of dangerous plant

sources of dangerous drugs, and controlled precursors and essential chemicals of the

Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) (Series,2014). It’s a war without a enemy.

Anything waged against a shapeless intangible noun can truly won (Mccaffrey,1994). It is really

strenuous to exterminate those people especially the mastermind of the illegal drugs.

However, the war on drugs was not seen by everyone as a proper solution to the

problem concerning drugs. Some would say, they are in favor with it and others are totally

against it. The campaign itself has brought divided perceptions among every Filipinos. Others

are pro when it comes to its goal of eliminating drugs but are totally upset of how its

implemented.
 Based on our evaluation in the criminology students about the concerning the anti-illegal

drugs. They have already knowledge on how to avoid and why illegal drugs should be avoided.

It is important for criminology students to be mindful of their habits to avoid substance

dependence or addiction. In which some of CCJE students attend as symposium such as drug

symposium. In that way, they will get awareness for the effect that illegal drugs might cause to

the whole system of their body.

As a pandemic started on year of 2020 with the Duterte administration, the users of

illegal drugs has been reduced and minimized. The Andres Soriano Colleges of Bislig (ASCB)

are already aware in this kind of matter in which they ensure that no one of the students are

involve in this kind of crime. Since, the school are against in this illegal activity. That’s why,

there are securities in the school to strictly check every students to make sure the safety of

students and institution.

Statement of the Problem

The study aims to investigate the perception of criminology students concerning

the anti-illegal drugs operation. Specifically, this research is expected to answers the following

questions.

1. What is the demographic profile of the correspondents in terms of:

a. Age

b. Gender

2. What is the level of perception of the respondents to the anti-illegal drugs operation?

3. What is the level of concern of the respondents to the anti-illegal drugs operation?

4. Is there a significant difference between the perception and concern of the

respondents on the anti-illegal drugs operation?

Conceptual/ Theoretical Framework

Perception of Criminology Students Anti-illegal drugs operation.

concerning the Anti-illegal drugs
operation.

The concept of this study is to know how knowledgeable Criminology Students are in ASCB

when it comes to Anti-illegal drug operation.

Scope and Limitation

This study focused on the perception of ASCB CCJE Students towards the Anti-illegal

drugs operations. The means that will be used in conducting this research are the questions

prepared by the researchers. Criminology students from Andres Soriano Colleges of Bislig were

chosen as subjects.

The students outside the Andres Soriano Colleges of Bislig and the students in the

Andres Soriano Colleges of Bislig who are from different department will not be included as

subjects in the research.

Significance of the Study

This research is made with aims towards the awareness and knowledge of the students of

College of Criminal Justice System.

Benefiting the study are the various sectors as following:

The Criminology Students T

They are the recipients of the research that will be conducted by the researchers.

The result will be coming from their insights and knowledge to the study of Anti-illegal

drugs.

The Researchers

This study may provide us with an important and valuable insights from the

College of Criminal Justice System of ASCB towards the Anti-illegal drugs operation.
School

The findings of this study would provide them baseline information, so that they

could make an actual in the terms giving an awareness and idea to the students of

Andres Soriano Colleges of Bislig towards the issue of Anti-illegal drugs.

Future Researchers

May also gain valuable insights from the result of the investigation in which it will

be a source of information to the future researchers.

Definition of Terms

Drug - a medicine or other substance which has a physiological effect when ingested or

otherwise introduced into the body. (https://www.google.com.ph/?gws_rd=ssl#q=drug+meaning)

Illegal drugs - are drugs which have limitations on their ownership or use by a government, and

are illegal in certain situations (meaning a person is not allowed to have them.

(https://www.google.com.ph/?gws_rd=ssl#q=illegal+drug+meaning)

Perception - awareness of the elements of environments through physical sensation.

(https://en.m.wikipedia.org)

Operation - performance of a practical work or of something involving the practical application

of principles or processes. (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/operation)

Case Build-Up - refers to the entire process of investigation and case preparation, including the

collection and preservation of evidence, documentation, and identification of suspects to ensure

the successful prosecution of the case. (https://www.doj.gov.ph/news_article.html?

newsid=178#:~:text=Case%20Build%2DUp%20%2D%20refers%20to,successful

%20prosecution%20of%20the%20case.)

Anti-illegal drug operation - covers the intelligence or case build-up and/or negation operation

for the arrest of violator/s and suppression, seizure or confiscation of dangerous drugs, plant

sources of dangerous drugs, and controlled precursors and essential chemicals of the

Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) and/or other law enforcement agencies in support

of the PDEA, whether joint operation or not. Generally, it applies to search warrant operation,

buy-bust operation, eradication, interdiction, interception, or controlled delivery operation.

(https://www.ddb.gov.ph/images/Board_Regulation/2016/BD.REG1.16.pdf)
The Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency or Prohibited Drug Entrapment Agency (PDEA)

(Filipino: Kawanihan ng Pilipinas Laban sa Droga) - is the lead anti-drug law enforcement

agency, responsible for preventing, investigating and combating any dangerous drugs,

controlled precursors and essential chemicals within the Philippines.

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine_Drug_Enforcement_Agency)
 Chapter 2

Review Related Literature

Addiction is a chronic disease characterized by drug seeking and use that is compulsive,

or difficult to control, despite harmful consequences. During the initial decision to take drugs, the

brain changes can be persistent, which is why drug addiction is considered a “relapsing”

disease. People in recovery from drug use disorders are at increased risk for returning to drug

use even after years of not taking the drugs. It is common for a person to relapse, but relapse

does not mean that treatment does not work. As with other chronic health conditions, treatment

should be ongoing and should be adjusted based on how the patient responds. Treatment plans

need to be reviewed often and modified to fit the patient’s changing needs. Generally, this study

aimed to determine the perceived effects of the President’s anti-illegal drug campaign in the

municipality of Tuao. This study used the descriptive – correlational research design.

Respondents of the study were the barangay officials of the different barangays of Tuao. From

the total number of barangays in the municipality, only 8 barangays were randomly picked as

the respondents of the study. Total enumeration was used in selecting the barangay officials.

The main instrument used to gather information and data was a self-administered

questionnaire. Interview was also conducted to verify and clarify some information taken from

the respondents. The data were analyzed using frequency counts and percentages. To

determine the difference on the perception of the respondents when grouped according to their

profile, the Analysis of Variance was used. From the findings of this study, it is concluded that

most of the respondents favor the program of the government to stop the proliferation of illegal

drugs and support the move of the government to stop this problem. From the above findings of

the study, it is strongly recommended that in spite of the support of the people on the

government, the government should consider the rights of the suspected users and pushers in
its campaign by giving due process for every arrested suspect. Further, rehabilitation programs

of the government should become accessible to all parts of the country.

(Joey R. Pascua, 2017)

When Philippine President Rodrigo R. Duterte assumed office in 2016, his government

launched an unprecedented campaign against illegal drugs. The drug problem in the Philippines

has primarily been viewed as an issue of law enforcement and criminality, and the government

has focused on implementing a policy of criminalization and punishment. The escalation of

human rights violations has caught the attention of groups in the Philippines as well as the

international community. The Global Health Program of the Association of Pacific Rim

Universities (APRU), a non-profit network of 50 universities in the Pacific Rim, held its 2017

annual conference in Manila. A special half-day worksh`op was held on illicit drug abuse in the

Philippines which convened 167 participants from 10 economies and 21 disciplines. The goal of

the workshop was to collaboratively develop a policy statement describing the best way to

address the drug problem in the Philippines, taking into consideration a public health and

human rights approach to the issue. The policy statement is presented here.

When Philippine President Rodrigo R. Duterte assumed office on June 30, 2016, his

government launched an unprecedented campaign against illegal drugs. He promised to solve

the illegal drug problem in the country, which, according to him, was wreaking havoc on the

lives of many Filipino families and destroying the future of the Filipino youth. He declared a “war

on drugs” targeting users, peddlers, producers and suppliers, and called for the Philippine

criminal justice system to put an end to the drug menace.

According to the Dangerous Drugs Board (DDB) (the government agency mandated to

formulate policies on illegal drugs in the Philippines), there are 1.8 million current drug users in

the Philippines, and 4.8 million Filipinos report having used illegal drugs at least once in their
lives. More than three-quarters of drug users are adults (91%), males (87%), and have reached

high school (80%). More than two-thirds (67%) are employed. The most commonly used drug in

the Philippines is a variant of methamphetamine called shabu or “poor man’s cocaine.”

According to a 2012 United Nations report, the Philippines had the highest rate of

methamphetamine abuse among countries in East Asia; about 2.2% of Filipinos between the

ages 16–64 years were methamphetamines users.

The drug problem in the Philippines has primarily been viewed as an issue of law

enforcement and criminality, and the government has focused on implementing a policy of

criminalization and punishment. This is evidenced by the fact that since the start of the “war on

drugs,” the Duterte government has utilized punitive measures and has mobilized the Philippine

National Police (PNP) and local government units nationwide. With orders from the President,

law enforcement agents have engaged in extensive door-to-door operations. One such

operation in Manila in August 2017 aimed to “shock and awe” drug dealers and resulted in the

killing of 32 people by police in one night.

On the basis of mere suspicion of drug use and/or drug dealing, and criminal record,

police forces have arrested, detained, and even killed men, women and children in the course of

these operations. Male urban poor residents in Metro Manila and other key cities of the country

have been especially targeted. During the first six months of the Duterte Presidency (July 2016–

January 2017), the PNP conducted 43,593 operations that covered 5.6 million houses, resulting

in the arrest of 53,025 “drug personalities,” and a reported 1,189,462 persons “surrendering” to

authorities, including 79,349 drug dealers and 1,110,113 drug users. Government figures show

that during the first six months of Duterte’s presidency, more than 7,000 individuals accused of

drug dealing or drug use were killed in the Philippines, both from legitimate police and vigilante-

style operations. Almost 2,555, or a little over a third of people suspected to be involved in

drugs, have been killed in gun battles with police in anti-drug operations. Community activists
estimate that the death toll has now reached 13,000. The killings by police are widely believed

to be staged in order to qualify for the cash rewards offered to policeman for killing suspected

drug dealers. Apart from the killings, the recorded number of “surrenderees” resulting in mass

incarceration has overwhelmed the Philippine penal system, which does not have sufficient

facilities to cope with the population upsurge. Consequently, detainees have to stay in

overcrowded, unhygienic conditions unfit for humans.

The escalation of human rights violations, particularly the increase in killings, both state-

perpetrated and vigilante-style, has caught the attention of various groups and sectors in society

including the international community. Both police officers and community members have

reported fear of being targeted if they fail to support the state-sanctioned killings. After

widespread protests by human rights groups, Duterte called for police to shoot human rights

activists who are “obstructing justice.” Human Rights organizations, such as Human Rights

Watch and Amnesty International, have said that Duterte’s instigation of unlawful police violence

and the incitement of vigilante killings may amount to crimes against humanity, violating

international law. The European Union found that human rights have deteriorated significantly

since Duterte assumed power, saying “The Philippine government needs to ensure that the fight

against drug crimes is conducted within the law, including the right to due process and

safeguarding of the basic human rights of citizens of the Philippines, including the right to life,

and that it respects the proportionality principle.” Despite the fact that, in October 2017, Duterte

ordered the police to end all operations in the war on drugs, doubts remain as to whether the

state-sanctioned killings will stop. Duterte assigned the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency

(PDEA) to be the sole anti-drug enforcement agency.

Duterte’s war on drugs is morally and legally unjustifiable and has created large-scale

human rights violations; and is also counterproductive in addressing the drug problem.

International human rights groups and even the United Nations have acknowledged that the
country’s drug problem cannot be resolved using a punitive approach, and the imposition of

criminal sanctions and that drug users should not be viewed and treated as criminals. Those

critical of the government’s policy towards the illegal drug problem have emphasized that the

drug issue should be viewed as a public health problem using a rights-based approach (RBA).

This was affirmed by UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon on the 2015 International Day Against

Drug Abuse and Illegal Trafficking when he stated, “…We should increase the focus on public

health, prevention, treatment and care, as well as on economic, social and cultural strategies.”

The United Nations Human Rights Council released a joint statement in September 2017, which

states that the human rights situation in the Philippines continued to cause serious concern. The

Council urged the government of the Philippines to “take all necessary measures to bring these

killings to an end and cooperate with the international community to pursue appropriate

investigations into these incidents, in keeping with the universal principles of democratic

accountability and the rule of law.” In October 2017, the Philippines Dangerous Drug Board

(DDB) released a new proposal for an anti-drug approach that protects the life of the people.

The declaration includes an implicit recognition of the public health aspect of illegal drug use,

“which recognizes that the drug problem as both social and psychological.

The Association of Pacific Rim Universities (APRU) is a non-profit network of 50 leading

research universities in the Pacific Rim region, representing 16 economies, 120,000 faculty

members and approximately two million students. Launched in 2007, the APRU Global Health

Program (GHP) includes approximately 1,000 faculty, students, and researchers who are

actively engaged in global health work. The main objective of the GHP is to advance global

health research, education and training in the Pacific Rim, as APRU member institutions

respond to global and regional health challenges. Each year, about 300 APRU GHP members

gather at the annual global health conference, which is hosted by a rotating member university.
In 2017, the University of the Philippines in Manila hosted the conference and included a special

half-day workshop on illicit drug abuse in the Philippines.

Held on the first day of the annual APRU GHP conference, the workshop convened 167

university professors, students, university administrators, government officials, and employees

of non-governmental organizations (NGO), from 21 disciplines, including anthropology, Asian

studies, communication, dentistry, development, education, environmental health, ethics,

international relations, law, library and information science, medicine, nutrition, nursing,

occupational health, pharmaceutical science, physical therapy, political science, psychology,

public health, and women’s studies. The participants came from 10 economies: Australia,

China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Mexico, Nepal, the Philippines, Thailand, and the US.

The special workshop was intended to provide a venue for health professionals and workers,

academics, researchers, students, health rights advocates, and policy makers to: give an

overview on the character and state of the drug problem in the Philippines, including the social

and public health implications of the problem and the approaches being used by the

government in the Philippines; learn from the experiences of other countries in the handling of

the drug and substance abuse problem; and identify appropriate methods and strategies, and

the role of the health sector in addressing the problem in the country. The overall goal of the

workshop was to collaboratively develop a policy statement describing the best way to address

this problem in a matnner that could be disseminated to all the participants and key

policymakers both in the Philippines, as well as globally.

The workshop included presentations from three speakers and was moderated by Dr.

Carissa Paz Dioquino-Maligaso, head of the National Poison Management and Control Center

in the Philippines. The first speaker was Dr. Benjamin P. Reyes, Undersecretary of the

Philippine Dangerous Drugs Board, who spoke about “the State of the Philippine Drug and

Substance Abuse Problem in the Philippines.” The second speaker was Dr. Joselito Pascual, a
medical specialist from the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, at the University

of the Philippines General Hospital in Manila. His talk was titled “Psychotropic Drugs and Mental

Health.” The final speaker was Patrick Loius B. Angeles, a Policy and Research Officer of the

NoBox Transitions Foundation, whose talk was titled “Approaches to Addressing the Drug and

Substance Abuse Problem: Learning from the Experiences of Other Countries.”

“Manila Statement on the Drug Problem in the Philippines” Gathering in this workshop

with a common issue and concern – the drug problem in the Philippines and its consequences

and how it can be addressed and solved in the best way possible; Recognizing that the drug

problem in the Philippines is a complex and multi-faceted problem that includes not only

criminal justice issues but also public health issues and with various approaches that can be

used in order to solve such; We call for drug control policies and strategies that incorporate

evidence-based, socially acceptable, cost-effective, and rights-based approaches that are

designed to minimize, if not to eliminate, the adverse health, psychological, social, economic

and criminal justice consequences of drug abuse towards the goal of attaining a society that is

free from crime and drug and substance abuse; Recognizing, further, that drug dependency and

co-dependency, as consequences of drug abuse, are mental and behavioral health problems,

and that in some areas in the Philippines injecting drug use comorbidities such as the spread of

HIV and AIDS are also apparent, and that current prevention and treatment interventions are

not quite adequate to prevent mental disorders, HIV/AIDS and other co-morbid diseases among

people who use drugs; Affirming that the primacy of the sanctity/value of human life and the

value of human dignity, social protection of the victims of drug abuse and illegal drugs trade

must be our primary concern; And that all health, psycho-social, socio-economic and rights-

related interventions leading to the reduction or elimination of the adverse health, economic and

social consequences of drug abuse and other related co-morbidities such as HIV/AIDS should

be considered in all plans and actions toward the control, prevention and treatment of drug and
substance abuse; As a community of health professionals, experts, academics, researchers,

students and health advocates, we call on the Philippine government to address the root causes

of the illegal drug problem in the Philippines utilizing the aforementioned affirmations. We assert

that the drug problem in the country is but a symptom of deeper structural ills rooted in social

inequality and injustice, lack of economic and social opportunities, and powerlessness among

the Filipino people. Genuine solutions to the drug problem will only be realized with the

fulfillment and enjoyment of human rights, allowing them to live in dignity deserving of human

beings. As members of educational, scientific and health institutions of the country, being rich

and valuable sources of human, material and technological resources, we affirm our

commitment to contribute to solving this social ill that the Philippine government has considered

to be a major obstacle in the attainment of national development.

The statement of insights and affirmations on the drug problem in the Philippines is a

declaration that is readily applicable to other countries in Asia where approaches to the problem

of drug abuse are largely harsh, violent and punitive.

As a community of scholars, health professionals, academics, and researchers, we

reiterate our conviction that the drug problem in the Philippines is multi-dimensional in character

and deeply rooted in the structural causes of poverty, inequality and powerlessness of the

Filipino people. Contrary to the government’s position of treating the issues as a problem of

criminality and lawlessness, the drug problem must be addressed using a holistic and rights-

based approach, requiring the mobilization and involvement of all stakeholders. This is the

message and the challenge which we, as members of the Association of Pacific Rim

Universities, want to relay to the leaders, policymakers, healthcare professionals, and human

rights advocates in the region; we must all work together to protect and promote health and well

being of all populations in our region.

 As soon as President Rodrigo Duterte assumed office in 2016, the Philippine

government launched a nationwide antidrug campaign based on enforcement-led anti-illegal

drugs policies primarily implemented by the national police. This was followed by a spate of

killings resulting from both acknowledged police operations and by unidentified assailants. This

study assembles a victim-level dataset of drug-related killings covered by the media during the

Philippine government's antidrug campaign, and presents a spatial and temporal analysis of the

killings.

The datasets covers information on 5021 people killed from May 10, 2016 to September

29, 2017. Data collected systematically through online search procedures and existing listings

of media organizations detailing information about incidences of drug-related police operations

and drug-related killings in 'vigilante-style' manner reveal patterns for who were being killed,

where, and how.

Over half of the killings were due to acknowledged police operations, and the rest were

targeted in so-called 'vigilante-style' killings. The first three months after Mr. Duterte was sworn

in were the deadliest months. Those who were killed were mostly low-level drug suspects. The

analysis of temporal pattern reveals the scale of killings in the country, with rapid escalation

starting in July 2016 and lasting throughout the rest of that year. Observable declines occurred

during periods when the 'drug war' was suspended and operations were moved to a non-police

enforcement unit and rose again when police were brought back into operations. The spatial

analysis indicates a large concentration of deaths in the National Capital Region (40%)

compared to the rest of the country with wide variations across cities and regions.

Overall, the Philippine 'drug war' exhibits similarities with violent wars on drugs waged in

other countries such as Thailand, with heavily police-led interventions leading to fatalities in the

thousands over a span of under two years. Findings of this study point to important policy
adjustments that need to be made, including the role that local governments play in drug policy

implementation, the disproportionate negative impacts of enforcement-led policies against drugs

on urban and poor areas, the targeting of low-level suspected drug dealers and users, and the

importance of proper data monitoring and transparency by the government to inform policy

adjustments in the face of high costs to human life. We also discuss the importance of

independent monitoring systems when the government reports conflicting information.

Antidrug campaign; Dataset; Drug war; Killings; Philippines.

(Elsevier B.V., 2019)

The Duterte administration’s “war against illegal drugs” thus far is one among many

controversial issues that has received a great deal of media attention both, locally and

internationally and has earned extra attention in foreign policy circles and among local and

international human rights organisations.

The elimination of the drug problem in the country is one of Duterte’s campaign promises

from the 2016 national elections. He promised to eliminate the problem of illegal drugs in the

country in around six months. However, along the course of his administration, Duterte had

come to realise and has acknowledged the fact that the country has a long way to go in

addressing this deep-seated societal menace because of its enormity and sheer magnitude

more so amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

He expressed such sentiment in his “Fifth State of the Nation Address (SONA)” on 27

July, 2020 where he said, “The dealers and purveyors of illegal drugs, hiding in the shadow of

COVID- 19, have stepped up their activities. The amount of shabu valued at millions of pesos

seized during police operations speak volumes of the enormity and weight of the problem that

we bear”.
Nonetheless, even amid the pandemic, Duterte pledged to continue the fight against illegal

drugs in the country until his term ends with more intensified efforts to secure and protect the

country most especially the youth from the scourge of illegal drugs.

In 1972, the drug problem was just at its incipient stage, with only 20,000 drug users.

After a decade, in 1982, the number of “methamphetamine hydrochloride” or locally known as

“shabu” users in the country had increased significantly. There was a radical shift in the illegal

drug landscape in the 1990s.

It was during this time that the illegal drug problem in the country worsened both, in

terms of the scope of illegal operations and its breadth. By the late 1990s, the Philippines had

become a net producer and exporter of “shabu” or “poor man’s cocaine.”

Subsequently, in 2003, the Philippines was said to have around 1.8 million drug users,

which is equivalent to 2.2 percent of the population based on the 2003 International Narcotics

Control Strategy Report. By 2012, the United Nations (UN) said the Philippines had the highest

rate of “methamphetamine” or “shabu” abuse among countries in East Asia, and about 2.2

percent of Filipinos between the ages of 16 and 64 years were methamphetamines users.

The “2015 Nationwide Survey on the Nature and Extent of Drug Abuse in the Philippines”

commissioned by the Philippine Dangerous Drugs Board (DDB), and carried out by the

“Resources, Environment and Economic Centre for Studies, Inc. (REECS), which was released

in 2016, had estimated that the drug market in the country was valued at around PHP 55.8

billion (US$1.1 billion) per one-year consumption or 16,138 kilogrammes in weight. To note, the

DDB is the government agency mandated to formulate policies on illegal drugs in the

Philippines.
Likewise, the study reported that the country had around 1.8 million “current users” of illegal

drugs and 4.8 million “lifetime users” (those who have used drugs at least once in their lifetime).

The study also purported that, in Metro Manila alone, 99 percent of barangays had at least one

drug user-resident, and the prevalence of families having a drug-using member was 2.6

percent, which is quite alarming.

(Anna Malindog-Uy, 2020)

Is the Philippine War on Drugs a ‘War on the Poor’? Focusing on beneficiaries of the

Philippine Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT) or Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program as the

most legible cohort of poor, we examine the effects of the anti-narcotics campaign on

impoverished families in Metro Manila from April 2016 to December 2017.

From field validation and interviews with families affected by drug-related killings (DRKs),

we find that at least 333 victims out of 1,827 identifiable DRK cases in Metro Manila during the

study period were CCT beneficiaries. These are extremely conservative figures since field

validation did not saturate all cities in Metro Manila and does not include deaths after December

2017 or poor families who are not CCT beneficiaries.

The findings illustrate that DRKs negatively affect CCT beneficiaries and their families.

Most victims were breadwinners, leading to a decrease in household income. The reduced

available income and the social stigma of having a drug-related death in the family often cause

children beneficiaries of the CCT program to drop out of school. Widowed parents often find

new partners, leaving the children with paternal grandmothers. DRKs are often bookended by

other hazards such as flooding, fires, and home demolitions. The direct effects of these DRKs,

compounded with disasters and other socio-economic shocks, traumatizes CCT families,

erodes social cohesion, and pushes them further into poverty. We conclude with
recommendations for the design of support packages to mitigate untoward effects on families,

particularly single parent households.

(Maria Karla Abigail Pangilinan , Maria Carmen Fernandez, Nastassja Quijano, Wilfredo Dizon,

Jr., 2021)’

In the Philippines there is a lot of crime, corruption and poverty. Drugs are an important

cause of this, at least according to the Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte. That is why Duterte

wants the drug problem to be tackled. This is why he introduced the ‘Oplan Tokhang’, or as we

know it, ‘the war on drugs’, as soon as he became a president in May 2016. His goal is to create

security for the good citizens by protecting them against crime, poverty and corruption. The

country has been experiencing less crime since Duterte’s presidency, yet there is much criticism

on Duterte’s approach and also on the approach of the Philippine National Police. This is

because the war on drugs is accompanied by the violation of many human rights. Since fighting

crime is accompanied by a lot of state violence, it is questionable how people perceive this. Do

they consider this violence legitimate, and does this affect the regime’s legitimacy?

Therefore it is interesting to research the effects of the war on drugs on the perceived safety of

Filipino inhabitants and on how this influences the regime’s legitimacy. The objective of this

research is therefore to better understand how Duterte’s domestic policy to create ‘a safe

environment for good citizens’ influences the perceived sense of safety for Filipino inhabitants

and also on how this has an impact on the regime’s legitimacy. The main research question that

follows from this is therefore: ‘What impact does Duterte’s ‘war on drugs’ have on the perceived

safety of Filipino inhabitants and how does this impact the regime’s legitimacy?’

To answer this research question I went to the Philippines to conduct semi-structured in-depth

interviews with the local population from different barangays (neighborhoods) in San Jose de

Buenavista. I also collected an important part of information from small talk and the media,
especially from digital newspapers. After I interpreted my results, I discussed the results with

three informants in order to increase the validity of the research.

T he barangays in which I conducted my research were quite different in nature. For the results

it is important to emphasize the difference between Comon and the other barangays. Comon is

one of the poorest barangays of San Jose de Buenavista, and it appears that in Comon most of

my respondents suffered from crime before the war on drugs. In the other barangays, San

Fernando, Bagong Bayan, Hamtic and Bugasong, less crime is experienced. For the main

conclusion it seems that the differences in the level of poverty and earlier experiences of

violence have important consequences for security perceptions. These differences appear

somehow paradoxical, because in the barangays that were safer in the past, the people feel

less secure now. Conversely, the people in the barangays who experienced more crime feel

more secure now.

So how does this impact the regime’s legitimacy? Most of the people in Comon agree

with the violence. they are the ones who noticed most of the crime before the war on drugs. It

seems that they therefore believe that violence may be used for this drug - and crime problem.

They feel safer now, because of the violence by the state, and state violence becomes

legitimate as soon as people feel that they are protected by it. Most of my respondents outside

Comon feel less safe. Most of them indicate that the violence is not proportional for this drug -

and crime problem, they believe that there are other solutions such as free rehabilitation, send

the suspects to prison, education or the providing of jobs. There are, however, some limitations

to this research, therefore some recommendations for further research have been made. One of

the limitations is that this research only took place in one town. Another limitation is that this

research did not deal with the degree of police intervention. Moreover, this research only

indicates that respondents do not approve innocent victims. However, this research has not

dealt with the extent to which there are innocent victims, or the extent to which respondents
have experienced this. In addition, this research does not include interviews with (ex)-drug

addicts and this research does not address the lacked information provision.

(Iris Kattouw, Groningen, September 2018)

 Chapter 3

Research Methodology

Research Local

The study will be conducted in Andres Soriano Colleges of Bislig, one of the private

schools in Bislig City. The respondents will be College of Criminal Justice Education students

and will be given the participants a questionnaire as means of collecting the data.

Research Design

This study is made by the means of qualitative methods of researcher. A qualitative

research approach for this was chosen to know the different perspective of Criminology

Students regarding to anti- illegal operation.The research method used below are random

sampling as the data collection.

According to Kothari in (Cahyani, 2016) research design is the conceptual structure

within which research is conducted, it constitutes the blueprint for the collection, measurement

and analysis of data.

Respondent

The respondents of this study are the Criminology students of Andres Soriano colleges of

Bislig who had a knowledge and awareness about the anti-illegal drugs operation. They were

chosen to be the subject of this study because it’s their forte. The participants of this research

study are all criminology students in Andres Soriano College in Bislig.

Research Instrument

The researchers will use one research instrument in the study. The researchers will use a

questionnaire which is used when the researchers will conduct the survey. The researchers will
use a questionnaire as means of collecting the data where the participants are going to answer.

To get the appropriate data needed, the researcher will have questionnaires. Part 1 will ask for

the profile, age and gender of the respondents.

Data Collection

Upon the approval of the research instrument that will be used by the researchers, the

researchers will formally write a letter to the Dean of College of Criminal Justice Education at

Andres Soriano Colleges of Bislig to ask for permission to conduct the study. The instrument

that will be used will be in a form of a questionnaire and will be given personally to the

responders. Once the letter of request has been granted, the collection of data will follow.

Data Analysis

The researchers will use the instrument to gather data from the selected responders. In

order to get the numbers of the same answers from the responders, the researchers will

categorize the raw data using the coding process.