[OPINION] How Duterte’s ‘nanlaban’ directive in drug war corrupted police work

Encounter killings, colloquially referred to as nanlaban (resisting arrest), became a controversial hallmark of former president Rodrigo Duterte’s anti-drug campaign. Under Duterte’s directive, police officers were encouraged to provoke suspects into resisting arrest, justifying lethal force under the guise of self-defense.

This tactic exploited certain characteristics inherent in police work to facilitate extrajudicial killings, positioning violence as a noble cause — a form of “noble cause corruption,” where officers justify abuses of power in pursuit of public safety. Understanding the structural and cultural aspects of policing that make such corruption possible is essential to addressing this issue.

Research on the nature of policing reveals several characteristics that distinguish it from other professions and contribute to its potential for deviance:

• First, police officers are granted considerable discretionary power. They are uniquely able to choose when to enforce the law, which individuals to arrest, and whether or not to use force.
• Second, police are the only professionals in a democratic society legally permitted to employ deadly force to carry out their duties.
• Third, there is typically a lack of immediate supervision in field situations. Officers operate autonomously, often in isolated settings, which reduces oversight and increases the opportunity for unchecked decision-making.
• Fourth, police work requires making rapid, high-stakes decisions, as officers often confront situations demanding split-second judgment.
• Fifth, the profession is inherently dangerous; officers are trained to respond to threats quickly, often perceiving suspects as immediate threats to their safety.
• Lastly, police culture is characterized by a deep-seated suspicion of civilians. This suspicion, particularly in contexts with high crime or drug use, leads officers to interpret innocuous behaviors as potentially criminal, reinforcing their justification for preemptive action.

In the Philippine context, where societal trust in the police is relatively low and political influences are strong, these characteristics can easily foster a culture of violence and corruption. The police are empowered to act autonomously, often in low-visibility areas, making it challenging for the public or internal authorities to monitor their actions.

Duterte’s mandate to “neutralize” drug offenders leveraged these traits, aligning with a political agenda that saw violence as an expedient solution to crime. With the promise of rewards and protection, many officers were incentivized to execute suspects, often creating scenarios to justify the use of lethal force. Such actions were justified under the guise of a “greater good,” though they violated both ethical standards and legal protections.

The consequences of this directive were extensive. Thousands of alleged drug offenders were killed, many of whom were likely unarmed and non-threatening. The procedural latitude police exploited for such killings often involved fabricating narratives, planting evidence, or manipulating accounts of confrontations. By allowing police to act beyond legal bounds in pursuing these objectives, Duterte institutionalized noble cause corruption, embedding extrajudicial measures within law enforcement.

The responsibility for these violations extends from Duterte’s administration to the officers who carried out these acts. To restore integrity within the Philippine National Police, it is critical to pursue accountability for all those involved in these abuses. This includes comprehensive investigations, appropriate sanctions for officers implicated in extrajudicial actions, and purging the ranks of individuals who abused their discretionary power. Without addressing these issues, the PNP cannot rebuild public trust or progress toward ethical law enforcement.

Moreover, reform within the PNP must emphasize a clear, codified use-of-force policy. A graduated force continuum — from verbal directives to lethal force — should be established to guide officers in determining appropriate responses in varying contexts. Immediate, thorough investigations should follow any instance of deadly force, with body-worn cameras employed to enhance transparency and document adherence to protocols. Continuous training on use-of-force guidelines and ethical behavior should reinforce acceptable practices, helping officers differentiate between justified actions and abusive ones.

A system that enshrines ethical decision-making, accountability, and respect for human rights is essential to prevent future abuses. Only by addressing the structural and cultural factors that allowed noble cause corruption to take root can the PNP ensure that policing aligns with democratic and humane principles. Never again should a Philippine president or police force exploit the vulnerabilities of the profession to pursue anti-crime initiatives through illegal, unethical, and violent means. – Rappler.com

Raymund E. Narag, PhD, is an associate professor in criminology and criminal justice at the School of Justice and Public Safety, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.