Garma escapes! How serious is government’s fight against drugs?

PRESIDENT RODRIGO Duterte’s “war on drugs” was out to implement the “Davao model” nationwide. Testifying at the House Quad committee hearings, Ret. Police Colonel Royina Garma described the system of cash rewards that went as high as PHP1 million, depending on the drug suspect killed – the most damning revelation yet about Duterte’s hand in a campaign that left thousands of drug suspects dead. 

The Department of Justice (DOJ) announced on November 12 that Garma and her daughter were arrested by US immigration authorities in San Francisco, California. Garma arrived in the US on November 7 but was held by the US border control for a canceled visa “over a human rights issue.” The DOJ, the Bureau of Immigration (BI), and the Philippine National Police all said that there was no hold departure order (HDO) nor a lookout bulletin to prevent Garma from traveling abroad. 

Fleeing suspects

Garma remains in the US, as of this writing. The last news report on her whereabouts was published on November 22 by The Philippine Star. It said American authorities did not say Garma was seeking political asylum; and that her deportation to the Philippines would be for US law enforcement matter to decide. 

Media did not make the comparison, but Garma’s escape from the country recalled the case of another controversial figure, dismissed Bamban mayor Alice Guo who was able to leave the country despite several complaints filed against her for criminal activities related to Philippine offshore gaming operators (POGOs). 

Both Guo and Garma were able to leave the country as no charges had been filed against them, even as media coverage had revealed their involvement in serious crimes. Coverage did not note the apparent ease with which high-profile suspects can depart the country and escape accountability. 

The arrest or detention of the two depended on the quick action of foreign authorities—Indonesia in the case of Guo and the US in Garma’s. Their departures reflect the lack of zeal on the part of Philippine authorities to deter their escape or the lack of haste in preparing charges against them. 

The two cases should raise questions about the seriousness of government efforts to prosecute cases and to pursue persons of interest in high-profile cases. Preventing their departure should be a priority that calls for effective executive coordination, the absence of which has been highlighted by the two cases. 

The news about Garma and Guo hogged headlines. Reports suggested that there was much more to investigate to reveal the involvement of still unidentified individuals.

The hasty departures of Garma and Guo suggest a lack of urgency and disturbing leniency in government’s response. The effort to protect these identities must be countered by media’s close scrutiny and by public vigilance.