Commission On Human Rights' Leniency With Crime May Have Just Inadvertently Created A Generation Of Vigilantes
I would like to discuss about the problem of the Commission on Human Rights with their stupidity. A criminal got killed in self-defense and the person who killed in self-defense gets convicted? Worse, that organization has contributed to a culture of impunity in the Philippines like when it protests against the rightful use of death penalty which by removing it from the Constitution may have also gotten rid of the right to defensive killing.
I still remembered how many Filipinos really got angry with Singapore's government for executing Flor Contemplacion insisting she was innocent even after three years of proper investigation. Then there was the case of the three Filipino drug mules in China. When that happened, the Filipino government got rid of its rightful duty to execute criminals who deserve to be put to death, then we have all the "human rights" dribble never mind that sometimes, you have to kill somebody to protect the community. If you have to shoot a rapist to save the victim, by any means do it. If you have to shoot a crook who is holding hostages, do it. It's not a right, it's a duty when it comes to defending one's self and society from criminals. But again, appeal to the "all-powerful, all-knowing" (and you know I'm being sarcastic) CHR right?
It's best to observe this one that when a crime is not punished accordingly the result is that it will encourage crime among the citizens. If you just gave the crime of lying in court a light punishment instead of giving them a rightful sentence then innocent people will get sentenced wrongly. The one who frames a person for murder should be executed because that was a life and death scenario as the person who is framed up could have been unjustly put to death. If criminal activities like stealing, cheating and murder are not the only ones encouraged then should I tell you about vigilantism. Vigilantism is defined as taking the law into your hands. In the case of the Philippines' lack of law enforcement and not to mention abolition of death penalty for severe criminal offenses like murder and drug-trafficking, it's not easy to see one's own loved one die before one's eyes either my murder or by complications of drug addiction. I wonder do those Failipino activists ever consider what if their own loved ones were the victims?
The problem of the Philippines is that Filipinos who really need justice and need of help are not given justice and help. My own speculation (correct me if I'm wrong) is that the Philippine justice system's indifference towards the plight of victims while defending the criminal rights instead. While criminals should have the right to a fair trial but they should not have the right to impunity. As I mentioned earlier, who in the right mind wouldn't get angry if a person who kills out of self-defense is convicted for murder while many murderers do not get convicted according to their offense? Then again, what do you expect from a people who is ruled by people who cannot even follow simple guidelines? If the law enforcement cannot even properly deal with civil offenses that deserve to be fined to a certain extent, how can they even properly deal with criminal offenses when they arrive? Stuff like that might give the temptation of, "That's it, I am taking the law into my hands now because there's no justice in this F*CKING SOCIETY!"
To know why Singapore is progressive from a basic level, it's not only its reasonable economic policies where all investors are in the same playing field, they also because it's a place where people are disciplined. Please, it's not even Draconian to give reasonable fines for littering. I know Singapore has some of its flaws and no country is ever perfect but it got out of its poverty state by instilling a real state of discipline. If people can follow simple guidelines, there can be progress and if more Filipinos learn to follow simple guidelines, that would be a huge step to the progress of the Philippines to get some progress. If proper law enforcement can be done against simple offenses like jaywalking and littering, people would be afraid to break the law. If there's proper law enforcement then there will be less criminal offenses. If there will be less criminal offenses then tourism and foreign investment will be encouraged. Sidenote, do remember that having reasonable economic restrictions like allowing 50% to 100% ownership of foreign firms while putting them in the same level with local businesses is also another key factor to success.
Before the country should even address the problem of why vigilantism is on the rise, the authorities should even examine provisions of the 1987 Constitution that need to be changed or how are they even addressing discipline in society. Did they even think that the person who killed in self-defense does not deserve to be charged for murder? Did they even think that when they refuse to give a criminal their just desserts, they are encouraging people to break rules? If they really refuse to give proper law enforcement then the Philippines deserves to be a country plagued with vigilantism because the government refuses to do its responsibility to enforce peace and order. If they continue what they are doing, vigilantism will really become a bigger problem sooner or later because of loose law enforcement and policies that support impunity.