EDITORIAL - Nightlife checks
September 19, 2003 | 12:00am
The so-called lifestyle checks have just barely taken off when we are again hearing of yet another check this time on the nightlife of cops, soldiers and other public officials. Offhand its not such a bad idea. The presence of police and military personnel in nightspots can be unseemly, especially if the main attractions in the nightspots are scantily clad young women serving expensive liquor. The question is whether a presidential order banning cops and soldiers from such nightspots can be enforced.
For one, when out of uniform, its hard to tell cops and soldiers from civilians. And when cops and soldiers are out of uniform, unarmed and enjoying the company of friends and relatives, how far can the government go in controlling their activities? Using their guns to bully civilians and creating trouble in beer joints are definitely a no-no. But singing in karaoke bars? The go-vernment will have to draw up clear-cut guidelines if it is serious about these nightlife checks.
For another, a number of these fun houses enjoy the protection of police and military officers. Why do you think police raids on these nightspots rarely yield positive results? And then there are cops and soldiers who are merely accompanying politicians and other public officials to the nightspots. Will the ban on cops and soldiers in nightspots cover politicians private armies? In places controlled by political warlords, how can such a ban be enforced? And its not just warlords. At least one Cabinet member is widely believed to be a regular patron of fun houses in Metro Manila. Will he be covered by the nightlife checks?
Malacañang may be able to end the presence of uniformed police and military personnel in these fun houses. But first it should get cops and soldiers out of the sleazy entertainment business. Members of the uniformed services who are found to be protecting fronts for prostitution must be punished and banished from their organizations. This is easier said than done. But unless this happens, there will always be nightspots frequented by cops and soldiers, and the nightlife checks will be useless.
For one, when out of uniform, its hard to tell cops and soldiers from civilians. And when cops and soldiers are out of uniform, unarmed and enjoying the company of friends and relatives, how far can the government go in controlling their activities? Using their guns to bully civilians and creating trouble in beer joints are definitely a no-no. But singing in karaoke bars? The go-vernment will have to draw up clear-cut guidelines if it is serious about these nightlife checks.
For another, a number of these fun houses enjoy the protection of police and military officers. Why do you think police raids on these nightspots rarely yield positive results? And then there are cops and soldiers who are merely accompanying politicians and other public officials to the nightspots. Will the ban on cops and soldiers in nightspots cover politicians private armies? In places controlled by political warlords, how can such a ban be enforced? And its not just warlords. At least one Cabinet member is widely believed to be a regular patron of fun houses in Metro Manila. Will he be covered by the nightlife checks?
Malacañang may be able to end the presence of uniformed police and military personnel in these fun houses. But first it should get cops and soldiers out of the sleazy entertainment business. Members of the uniformed services who are found to be protecting fronts for prostitution must be punished and banished from their organizations. This is easier said than done. But unless this happens, there will always be nightspots frequented by cops and soldiers, and the nightlife checks will be useless.
BrandSpace Articles
<
>
- Latest
- Trending
Trending
Latest