PRESIDENT Rodrigo Duterte on Wednesday described his first year in office as a rollercoaster ride and declined to say how well he thought he did.
“I do not make any assessment. I [will] only make [an] assessment after my term,” said Duterte, who rose to power on a strong plurality vote.
“If I get to live, then I’ll tell you. If I don’t exist anymore by that time, you make your own assessment. Just be fair,” he added.
Campaigning on a platform of change, Duterte’s strong, often incendiary rhetoric has unnerved not only the staunchest of critics but the international arena as well as he made waves over his staunch defense of the drug war, his foreign policy shift, and his promise to address rebellion and conflicts in Mindanao, inequality and his push for federalism.
“You cannot judge the first year because the concluding programs or projects aren’t there yet. What we can only say is that he’s on the right track, both in terms of promises he said and its actual impact to our society,” analyst Ramon Casiple, executive director of the Institute for Political and Electoral Reform, said.
“If his slogan is the measurement, there really is huge change—his one whole year is like three years already. There really is contrasting facts compared to the previous administration, there really has been accomplishments,” he added.
While there are still five years to go to his term and changes are inevitable, the fulfillment of many of his bold and controversial pledges has yet to be fully realized.
“It’s unfair to judge him that he can do everything in the first year. This is simply a barometer of the direction where the administration is heading,” Ronald Mendoza, dean of the Ateneo School of Government, said.
Citing “reformists pushing against vested interests” like Cabinet Secretary Leoncio Evasco who wrestled over the country’s rice importation policy, Mendoza said that the administration “stands a chance” to fix the country’s long-standing problems.
What remains to be seen from the Duterte administration, Mendoza said, are “strong institutions” that would ensure that the change he promised would outlast his term.
“Our concern is, what will happen when the President is gone? What will happen when his administration is over? What have they built that will outlast the administration? In terms of the continuity of reforms, what is the administration’s game plan?” he said in Filipino.
Foreign policy
If there is one area that the administration has already succeeded in bringing change, it is foreign policy.
“Definitely, there really is change that was introduced when it comes to our foreign policy. First of all, pursuing an independent foreign policy,” Dr. Aileen Baviera, a professor at the University of the Philippines-Asian Center, said.
Before leaving for Jakarta last year, Duterte introduced his “independent foreign policy” shift in the face of what he described as attempts by foreign governments to meddle in local affairs.
The President then defiantly announced during his visit to Beijing his “separation” from the United States, and the strengthening of ties with China and Russia.
Amid threats over possible sanctions as a result of his bloody drug war, Duterte announced that he would no longer accept development aid from the US and the European Union.
Duterte’s attempt to retool his relationships with other countries may have strained relations with traditional allies like the United States, however.
“There were some missteps in the beginning,” Baviera said in Filipino. “Rather than developing relations with new partners, we antagonized those who have helped us in the past.”
Baviera said, however, that the administration needs to clearly spell out its position on the South China Sea dispute, even as ties between Manila and Beijing have warmed.
“It’s positive that the crisis in our relations with China has already been tempered. The pressure on the security people who are always concerned with China has lessened,” she said.
“But for those who rely on our legal rights—fishermen, our right to oil and mineral resources and exploit our exclusive economic zone—one year is not enough to clearly state the position on this,” she added.
War on drugs
While support remains high for the President’s hardline campaign promises—the eradication of criminality and the illegal drug menace—the administration should remain open to criticisms and fix many of its loopholes, analysts said.
“If you look at international evidence on an anti-drugs campaign, many will say that the punitive approach isn’t working. Many countries, like Thailand, Portugal, Colombia–they already changed their strategy,” Mendoza said.
Saying that he won’t let the country go to the dogs, Duterte waged his controversial drug war, in which 3,151 people have died from July 1, 2016 to June 13, 2016 alone, government statistics showed.
Official data from the Philippine National Police have also pegged the total number of homicide cases at 9,432 from July 2016 to March 2017.
Of this number, 1,847 deaths were said to be drug-related, while 1,894 were not. The remaining 5,691 cases, or about 60 percent of the total figure, were still under investigation.
Duterte’s anti-narcotics drive has also resulted in a 26.45 percent drop in the estimated total drug market, and a 28.57 percent reduction in index crime, according to PNP data.
But the killing of South Korean businessman Jee Ick-joo by alleged rogue cops inside the headquarters of the Philippine National Police last October added to the long list of controversies hounding the PNP, considered one of the most corrupt institutions in the Philippines and has shaken the credibility of the institution most vital to Duterte’s war on drugs.
Human Rights Watch said Duterte’s war on drugs has resulted in a “drug-related overcrowding of jails, and the harassment and prosecution of drug war critics.” This, the New York-based group said, has caused a steep decline in respect for basic rights.
Mendoza said that the government needs to emphasize other options in combatting the drug menace, other than the punitive approach.
“There are many parts of the system that aren’t given much emphasis. For example, the health approach in combatting drugs and treatment [of drug pushers]. The government needs much support,” he said.
Economy
Casiple said that while the administration has done well on the economy, current reforms need to be sustained.
He said that programs seen to spur the country’s growth, including the Build, Build, Build, the new Philippine Development Plan, and the comprehensive tax reform package (CTRP) have yet to see results.
“The President’s pronouncements that he won’t be changing the basis of economic policies, that he doesn’t want to rock the boat, are good,” Casiple said.
Philippine Exporters Confederation chairman Sergio Ortiz-Luis said that businesses remain confident to the administration as long as it supports their needs and maintains a healthy environment to conduct business.
“Regardless of how he behaves… as far as we are concerned we’re getting what we want in terms of direct foreign investments and in terms of tourism,” he said.
Mixed messages
One problematic area is the President’s changing policy statements, which give the impression of incoherence, analysts said.
“The ideal of course is that you will not send a signal of incoherence. That when you say something in the morning, you’ll not change that by afternoon,” Mendoza said.
Casiple said that the President’s often changing rhetoric should be taken with a grain of salt unless he has done something tangible.
As an example, Casiple cited the President’s statement that he would expel the US Special Forces from Mindanao—which never materialized.
“For him, it’s an advantage to be difficult to read, but a President has to take it seriously,” Casiple said.
Marawi and martial law
While the government is not entirely to blame for the Marawi siege, Mendoza cautioned against Duterte’s pronouncements that he might extend martial law in Mindanao.
“It sends a wrong signal and gives a different perception to tourists, investors, the rest of the world that the institutions cannot put down terrorists—meaning, our institutions are weak if there is need to extend it,” he said, adding that there are actions that the government and the military can take without the need to declare military rule.
“If they are trying to extend martial law or expand the scope, maybe we are sending the wrong message to the international community,” he said.
Casiple also said the lack of a strong and credible political opposition would have implications on democracy.
“There was no agreement formally between the administration and the opposition. There’s no modus vivendi. Until now, the battle still continues by other means,” he said, citing the air of political divisiveness in the country.
But the government will not have too much to worry about because the opposition is too weak to pose a political problem, he added.
