A Critical Analysis of the War on Drugs Campaign by President Rodrigo Roa Duterte: Gains, Gaps, and the Road Ahead

In 2016, President Rodrigo Roa Duterte launched the controversial “War on Drugs” as a centerpiece of his administration. Backed by tough rhetoric and a promise to eliminate the country’s drug problem, the campaign drew both praise and condemnation. This blog post provides a balanced and critical analysis of the program—its background, execution strategies, effects on society, and lessons for future governance.

The War on Drugs was formally initiated through Project Double Barrel, spearheaded by the Philippine National Police (PNP) in July 2016. It aimed to eradicate illegal drug use and trade, primarily through a two-pronged approach:

• Oplan Tokhang – derived from Visayan words “toktok” (knock) and “hangyo” (plead), involved police officers visiting homes of suspected drug users and pushers, urging them to surrender and undergo rehabilitation.

• Oplan HVT (High-Value Target) – focused on identifying, neutralizing, or apprehending high-profile drug personalities and syndicates.

Prior to Duterte’s presidency, the Philippines faced a growing problem with methamphetamine hydrochloride, locally known as “shabu.” Previous administrations acknowledged the issue but implemented softer community-based rehabilitation programs. Duterte, drawing from his Davao City governance style, championed a more hardline and immediate approach.

Strategies

1. Nationwide Tokhang Operations
   Police conducted house-to-house visits, initially emphasizing voluntary surrender. However, operations soon turned aggressive, with reports of nighttime raids and violent confrontations.

2. Involvement of Barangay Watchlists
   Local officials compiled names of suspected users and pushers, which were then validated and used as targets for police operations.

3. Use of PNP and PDEA Collaboration
   The PNP led the initial wave but, after growing criticism, the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) later took a more prominent role.

4. Encouragement of Citizen Reporting
   Community members were encouraged to report drug-related activities, increasing surveillance and accountability—but also fostering fear and suspicion.

5. Establishment of Community-Based Rehabilitation
   Amid criticism, the administration promoted Barangay-based rehabilitation centers and reintegration programs for voluntary surrenderees.

---

Pros of the War on Drugs

• Heightened National Awareness
  Drug addiction and trafficking were placed front and center of public discourse.

• Massive Drug Surrender Statistics
  As of late 2021, over 1.3 million drug personalities reportedly surrendered nationwide, per government statistics.

• Crackdown on Drug Syndicates
  Numerous high-value targets were neutralized, and several drug labs were dismantled.

• Barangay Engagement
  The program decentralized anti-drug efforts, making barangays frontline players in implementation and monitoring.

---

Cons and Criticisms

• Alleged Human Rights Violations
  Over 6,000 deaths in anti-drug operations (as per PNP reports), with independent bodies claiming higher numbers. Many of these involved alleged extrajudicial killings.

• Fear and Breakdown of Community Trust
  Communities grew wary of law enforcement. Accusations of abuse of power, mistaken identities, and planting of evidence surfaced.

• Poor Targeting and Inconsistent Data
  The process of identifying drug suspects was often unclear, with limited validation mechanisms. This led to possible wrongful deaths and arrests.

• Overburdened Criminal Justice System
  Courts and detention facilities were overwhelmed, resulting in delayed hearings and congestion in jails.

• Minimal Focus on Rehabilitation
  Critics argued the campaign was punitive and lacked substantial investment in long-term rehabilitation and reintegration.

Impact to Society

1. Social Polarization
   The campaign deeply divided public opinion—some hailed Duterte as a crime-fighting hero, while others saw the campaign as authoritarian and inhumane.

2. International Backlash
   Organizations like the UN, Human Rights Watch, and the International Criminal Court (ICC) launched inquiries and condemned the alleged rights violations.

3. Influence on Law Enforcement Culture
   The campaign emboldened police forces, but also raised issues of impunity, lack of oversight, and abuse of power.

4. Rise of Civil Society Movements
   NGOs, church groups, and human rights defenders became more vocal and active, demanding transparency and justice.

The War on Drugs under PRRD was a defining chapter in modern Philippine governance. It aggressively confronted a real national problem but did so through a method fraught with ethical dilemmas and legal controversies.

Key takeaways:

• Drug issues require a holistic approach—addressing not just supply, but demand, poverty, education, and mental health.

• Rule of law must prevail—combating crime must not come at the cost of human dignity and due process.

• Community engagement is vital—barangays should be empowered, not militarized.

• Post-campaign healing is necessary—truth, justice, and support for victims’ families must be prioritized.

As the Philippines moves forward, future anti-drug programs must learn from the past—balancing firmness with fairness, and enforcement with empathy.

Author's Note:
This analysis does not seek to discredit the intention to create a drug-free Philippines but to call for a more humane, evidence-based, and sustainable approach in addressing such a complex issue.

#WarOnDrugs #DuterteAdministration #HumanRights #PhilippineGovernance #BarangayEmpowerment #CommunityBasedSolutions