ON
← Volver al feed
Group warns: Duterte drug war rules can still be used by police
PH🏛️ Políticahace 12 h

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 informaciones

Philippine Daily Inquirer logoPhilippine Daily InquirerIndependienteCentroVeracidad 85Objetividad 70hace 12 h
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.

Lectura del sesgo (Centro): 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

Por qué estas puntuaciones (Veracidad 85 · Objetividad 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 InquirerIndependienteCentroVeracidad 85Objetividad 65hace 16 h
Las víctimas de la guerra contra las drogas buscan protección judicial en medio de la política de "doble cañón" de la PNP

Las familias de las víctimas de la guerra contra las drogas y sus representantes legales han pedido a la Corte Suprema que declare inconstitucional la política de "doble barril" de la Policía Nacional de Filipinas. Esta política, emitida en 2016 bajo el entonces jefe de la PNP, Ronald Dela Rosa, fue fundamental para la campaña nacional contra las drogas durante el mandato del ex presidente Rodrigo Duterte. La política ha sido vinculada a miles de ejecuciones extrajudiciales, y su continua aplicación plantea preocupaciones sobre las violaciones continuas de los derechos humanos. La acción legal busca desafiar la legalidad de la política y brindar protección a las comunidades afectadas.

Lectura del sesgo (Centro): El artículo presenta el desafío legal contra la política del PNP y destaca las preocupaciones planteadas por las familias de las víctimas y los abogados de derechos humanos.

Por qué estas puntuaciones (Veracidad 85 · Objetividad 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.

Mantengamos las noticias honestas.

ObjectiveNews se financia con los lectores y no tiene anuncios: te mostramos el sesgo en lugar de ocultarlo. Apoya el periodismo independiente por 5 €/mes.

Hazte suscriptor

Historias relacionadas