The Philippine National Police (PNP) on Wednesday came under fire for regulating a tattoo ban among its officers and aspiring cops, which lawmakers deemed "discriminatory" and "unconstitutional."

Manila Rep. Joel Chua pressed the PNP to swiftly discard the so-called tattoo policy before the law enforcers themselves get into legal trouble.

"It is disappointing that our PNP has this negative mindset about people with tattoos. Tattoos have nothing to do with the job performance of any police or public servant," Chua said.

"Tattoos are an art form of expression. The Constitution protects freedom of expression. By all indications, the PNP policy on tattoos is unconstitutional."

Chua, a lawyer, vehemently disagreed with the PNP's policy forbidding its personnel from sporting revealing tattoos, asserting that neither the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees (RA 6713) nor the Philippine National Police Act (RA 6975) require such a prohibition.

Even the Supreme Court does not outlaw jurists from having tattoos, added Chua.

Another lawyer, Bukidnon Rep. Jonathan Flores, also denounced the PNP's stereotyping approach against tattooed police officers and its wannabes, which he deemed is already "old fashioned."

"That view is not based on the new reality of the 21st century. There is also no basis in law. It seems that the Philippine National Police itself needs a new orientation," said Flores, a member of the House committee on Human Rights.

Flores lamented that the PNP should not make tattoos a proxy or indirect indicator of "good moral conduct" or "of sound mind and body."

"Neither is the overt reason stated by the PNP spokesperson, couched in terms of supposed negative public image reasons, among the qualifications and disqualifications enumerated in Section 30 of Republic Act 6975. The reason stated is therefore illegal and without basis in the law establishing the Philippine National Police," the lawmaker stressed.

Both Chua and Flores underscored that the statutory legal dictum "What is not included is excluded," applies to all laws, including RAs 6713 and 6795.

Flores further pointed out that tattoos have nothing to do with the competence and skills needed to become law enforcers, and the ban on them is "irrelevant as a disqualification."

"It can also be considered unconstitutional to discriminate in a way against people with tattoos because tattoos are symbols of expression of faith, love, and association," he added.

Recently, PNP spokesperson Col. Jean Fajardo announced the agency would prohibit its officers from having visible tattoos while on duty, especially those with visible inks on their bodies, especially on areas like the face, head, neck, and arms.

The same policy would be applied to those who aspire to join the PNP through lateral entry, such as line and technical units, PNPA cadets, and new patrol officers.

Fajardo said the rules are stipulated in Memorandum Circular 2024-023, mandating that PNP personnel declare their tattoos and vow not to add more, especially those easily seen in public, such as on the face, neck, ears, and arms.

Once the circular takes effect, PNP personnel will be forbidden from adding additional visible tattoos, according to Fajardo.

The circular will be effective 15 days after publication in the Official Gazette.

It was approved on 19 March.