‘Change has come, but not in a good way’

MANILA, Philippines - Change has come to the Philippines, but not necessarily in a good way, according to the top British diplomat in the country.

British Ambassador Asif Ahmad said that while alleged extrajudicial killings arising from the administration’s war on drugs have not hindered British investments in the country, they have left investors wondering “where all of these are going.”

“What I’m saying is the distraction that we see now, the noises, is almost ‘un-Filipino.’ It’s something we are not used to,” Ahmad told reporters Monday night in his Forbes Park residence.

“When I first arrived here, nobody was talking about the things we’re talking about today. We talked about PPP (public private partnerships) and if it’s going to happen. We talked about Charter change, and how close are we to the Bangsamoro peace process. Things were really moving forward,” he pointed out.

“It’s unfortunate that in our assessment of the Philippines, these were not areas of concern before. This is something that is relatively new. I hope that in many respects the government would have turned its corner now, having realized that plan A was not as successful as it might be,” he said referring to killings of suspected drug offenders. “That we might go back to treating the health issue and the drug issue (and) to treat law and order something as evidence based, something that you have intelligence, you intercept people,” he said.

Aside from peace and order concerns, Ahmad also expressed alarm over the planned revival of the death penalty in the Philippines which he said would be a “severe blow” to the country as far as British investments are concerned.

“I think that will be a severe blow because it basically says the Philippines can walk away from international treaties. If you can walk away from international treaty, it is much easier to walk away from commercial treaty,” he said.

The Philippines is a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and to the Second Optional Protocol of the ICCPR on the abolition of the death penalty.

“It’s not that we don’t deal with countries that have death penalty but we see it as a tragic reversal for a country which we haven’t come across in recent times. Sad to think of an example for a country that signed up to, then wants to go back,” Ahmad pointed out.

The Philippine government abolished the death penalty under the 1987 Constitution. President Fidel Ramos re-imposed it in 1993 as a “crime control” measure. President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo abolished it again in 2006.

Ahmad expressed belief the death penalty did not work in many countries, as it was anchored on vengeance.

“Part of the President’s frustration is that the wheels of justice here turn slowly. Basically you need to find a better wheel and more lubricant. You don’t throw the whole thing away. You have to improve the system,” he said.

He also cited the case of national hero Jose Rizal who was a victim of injustice and sentenced to death.

“The fact that Rizal was buried as a martyr, was a victim of a death penalty. The very sense of nationhood in the Philippines is from that injustice,” he added.

The New York-based Human Rights Watch earlier expressed opposition to the death penalty, a move that angered President Duterte.

Despite concerns, Ahmad said he is sensing that people in the administration are beginning to understand that there are better ways to deal with issues.

“As somebody who really believes in the long term stability of the Philippines and that people here are educated and cultured and we really want to be part of the global system, I think I’m pretty hopeful that within a very short period within this current administration, the Philippines will lose that new-found reputation for notoriety and just go back to what it was, which is pretty much a place (where) human rights matter to you more,” he said.