Police crisis?

What was said early of this decade unfortunately holds true with what’s happening at the end of this decade. Apparently, nothing had changed, testifying to the ‘rot’ in the PNP.

Police bosses declaring their current troubles a crisis are a tad melodramatic. Since when did our Philippine National Police (PNP) ran out of crises involving rogue cops?

Not being surprised also comes from the fact the “ninja cop” is an inevitable character in the police organization. Time and again rogue cops have been involved in other nefarious crimes as contemptible as the reselling of seized drugs. It doesn’t need an overactive imagination to suspect the rogue cop won’t dip his dirty hands into the illegal drug trade, or even if the rogue cop hasn’t done so already.

Still, to be fair, the police brass do need to be momentarily theatrical, partly dictated by the need to convince a skeptical public the present leadership is dead serious about cleansing its ranks of scalawags.

At the same time, too, the present troubles admittedly aren’t common — there has been no instance in the history of our police where a top PNP official resigns his post largely for allegedly committing acts of negligence or sins of omission seven years ago.

Nonetheless, these present circumstances do not make for an overwhelming “crisis.” If anything, should a true crisis happen it will lead to the abolition of the PNP or, at least, change the way how policing is done in this country. At most, the present “crisis” then is only a variation of the other crises, a matter of degree.

Furthermore, the present police troubles can be seen as a case of a dubious past catching up not only with the resigned General Oscar Albayalde but also with the police organization itself.

In fact, the anomalous 2013 anti-drug operation in Pampanga involving the 13 so-called “ninja cops” occurred during a time, at the early part of this decade, when the PNP was under a dark cloud when it had turned into a criminal organization.

The accusation of the “criminalization” of PNP came after frequent serious crimes involving police officers. It was so serious it led one appalled newspaper to say there was “an appalling breakdown in the very institution that was sworn to enforce discipline, order and the power of the law in public life.”

What was said early on this decade unfortunately holds true with what’s happening at the end of this decade. Apparently, nothing had changed, testifying to the “rot” in the PNP.

With rot still alarmingly present in the PNP, it also effectively revives a long-running debate whether the institutionalizing of a single national police force remains to be the only way to go. It is a core issue, among other issues, which is far more important than the issue of rogue cops.

Among experts on police affairs the debate is all about the wisdom of a system having only “one police force, national in scope,” as called for in our 1987 Constitution.

It should also be noted here that there often has been calls for the reverting of control of police forces to local governments instead of the national government solely calling the shots.

To begin to understand this debate the experts tell us it is wise for us to examine again the history of the PNP and how it evolved.

The PNP originated from the Philippine Constabulary (PC), established in 1901 as an insular police force under the American regime.

Alongside the military-dominated PC, the country also had local city and municipal forces which largely were not controlled by the national government. While the system had advantages, it was also prone to abuses.

Foremost among the abuses was the fact that with local police under the effective control of local politicians, various instances of police becoming violent instruments of a politician’s warlord ways was all too evident.

To address the abuses — besides other political considerations — during the martial law era, Mr. Marcos established on 8 August 1975 the Philippine Constabulary-Integrated National Police (PC-INP) as the country’s national police force. The PC-INP effectively abolished the local city and municipal police forces.

Law enforcement nationwide then became the sole responsibility of one police force headed by the constabulary chief, an appointee of the president and directly reporting to him.

It all sounded innocent enough. Only that it also led to accusations the PC-INP, in more ways than one, was essentially Mr. Marcos’ personal “private army” since it was directly under his control.

After 1986, the Constitution revamped the police forces with “An Act Establishing the Philippine National Police under a Reorganized Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG).” The PNP was operational by 29 January 1991.

The bulk of the members of the new PNP came from the PC and the INP, though it also absorbed selected personnel from the major service units of the Armed Forces of the Philippines.

These facts explain another core issue still bugging the PNP — the domination of the PNP’s current top leadership by graduates of the country’s military academy. An oddity since the police is overwhelmingly civilian in essence instead of military.

At the same time, the other core issue of the PNP remaining under the control of one man, the President, remains unresolved.

This much was pretty clear last week when acting PNP chief Archie Gamboa said “the recent controversy has shaken the institution at its core. Not only has it caused displeasure from our President but some doubts on our capability and resolve to serve and protect the people.”

When the current police chief puts more emphasis on Mr. Duterte’s “displeasure” than on what the public thinks about the police institution, he essentially acknowledges the problem of one man having sole control of the police.

Such are some of the difficult issues confronting the police organization today, with which the issue of internal cleansing of rogue cops has brought again to the fore. We need to think of these too.