ON
← Back to feed
Group warns: Duterte drug war rules can still be used by police
PH🏛️ Politics17 hr. ago

Group warns: Duterte drug war rules can still be used by police

An article from the Philippine Daily Inquirer reports that policies from the Duterte administration’s drug war remain in effect and could still be used by police under the current administration unless revoked by the Supreme Court. The Center for International Law (CenterLaw), representing petitioners including Sister Ma. Juanita R. Daño, argues that PNP Circular No. 16-2016 (Project 'Double Barrel'), its 2017 amendment, and DILG Memorandum Circular 2017-112 have not been suspended or revoked. These policies included house-to-house visits, community-based rehabilitation, and citizen reporting mechanisms. The petition, originally filed nearly a decade ago, seeks to challenge the legality of these measures, which petitioners claim continue to allow police to operate under questionable rules and justify actions leading to fatalities. They also urge the court to issue a writ of amparo due to ongoing threats against victims' families linked to Duterte’s potential ICC trial.

2 reports

Philippine Daily Inquirer logoPhilippine Daily InquirerIndependentCenterFactual 85Objective 7017 hr. ago
Group warns: Duterte drug war rules can still be used by police

An article from the Philippine Daily Inquirer reports that policies from the Duterte administration’s drug war remain in effect and could still be used by police under the current administration unless revoked by the Supreme Court. The Center for International Law (CenterLaw), representing petitioners including Sister Ma. Juanita R. Daño, argues that PNP Circular No. 16-2016 (Project 'Double Barrel'), its 2017 amendment, and DILG Memorandum Circular 2017-112 have not been suspended or revoked. These policies included house-to-house visits, community-based rehabilitation, and citizen reporting mechanisms. The petition, originally filed nearly a decade ago, seeks to challenge the legality of these measures, which petitioners claim continue to allow police to operate under questionable rules and justify actions leading to fatalities. They also urge the court to issue a writ of amparo due to ongoing threats against victims' families linked to Duterte’s potential ICC trial.

Bias read (Center): The article presents the legal arguments of petitioners challenging the continued use of Duterte-era drug war policies without taking a clear ideological stance. It emphasizes the legal status of the policies and the ongoing judicial process rather than promoting a specific political agenda. While a

Why these scores (Factual 85 · Objective 70): Factuality is high as the article accurately reports the status of Duterte-era drug war policies and references legal documents. Objectivity is lower due to the emotionally charged language around the 'weaponization' of policies and potential bias toward human rights concerns.

Philippine Daily Inquirer logoPhilippine Daily InquirerIndependentCenterFactual 85Objective 6522 hr. ago
Drug war victims seek court protection amid PNP ‘double-barrel’ policy

Drug war victims' families and their legal representatives have called on the Supreme Court to declare the Philippine National Police's 'Double Barrel' policy unconstitutional. This policy, issued in 2016 under then-PNP chief Ronald Dela Rosa, was central to the nationwide anti-drug campaign during former President Rodrigo Duterte's tenure. The policy has been linked to thousands of extrajudicial killings, and its continued enforcement raises concerns about ongoing human rights violations. Legal action seeks to challenge the policy's legality and provide protection to affected communities. Meanwhile, Duterte faces international prosecution at the International Criminal Court for his role in the drug war.

Bias read (Center): The article presents the legal challenge against the PNP's policy and highlights concerns raised by victims' families and human rights lawyers. It does not exhibit overtly biased language or one-sided sourcing but rather reports on the legal proceedings and perspectives from multiple stakeholders,力求

Why these scores (Factual 85 · Objective 65): Factuality is strong with accurate details about the 'Double Barrel' policy and ongoing legal challenges. Objectivity is slightly lower due to focus on victim narratives and calls for judicial intervention, which may reflect advocacy positions rather than neutrality.

Keep the news honest.

ObjectiveNews is reader-funded and ad-free — we show you the bias instead of hiding it. Support independent journalism for €5/month.

Become a Supporter

Related stories