Sympathy for Remulla’s son

Thought-provoking indeed: “Marcos Jr. and the older Remulla must make a sacrifice. Specifically, Remulla, the father, must resign from his being Justice Secretary. And Marcos Jr. must encourage him to do so.”

By FILOMENO S. STA. ANA III  

The title is meant to provoke. I differ from those who think that the son of the Justice Secretary must be punished for possession of illegal drugs.

My stand: The son deserves humane treatment. In fact, in a kinder world, the son does not deserve harsh judgment and heavy punishment.

But to spare the son from the law’s harshness, the father must make a big sacrifice beyond what he has offered.

I do not deny that this piece is political. But I veer away from partisanship as I declare my sympathy for the devil. (My apologies to the Rolling Stones.)

But before I explain why I have “sympathy for the devil,” let us critically examine the troubles of the Remulla family. How this issue is handled will also have repercussions, for better or for worse, on President Ferdinand Marcos, Jr.’s government.

Illicit drug enforcers arrested Juanito Jose Remulla III, the son of Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla, through a “controlled delivery operation.” That is, instead of immediately confiscating the contraband at the port of entry, the operatives allowed the parcel containing 937 grams of high-grade cannabis delivered to the young Remulla. Under the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002, a person convicted of possessing 500 grams or more of marijuana faces the penalty of life imprisonment and a fine ranging from P500,000 to P10,000,000.

But the Philippines is way behind the curve with respect to drug rules and enforcement. We witness an increasing number of countries or societies accepting the use of marijuana and hallucinogens. Cannabis legalization is spreading all over the world. Among countries that have legalized the recreational use of cannabis are Canada, Mexico, Uruguay, South Africa, and neighboring Thailand.

In the US, a growing number of states have made recreational marijuana legal. At the federal level, US President Joe Biden has pardoned thousands convicted of mere possession of marijuana.

Other countries have limited the scope of legalization to medical use or have decriminalized drug use (not just cannabis consumption).

This shift from punitive action to a humane policy is a recognition of the failure of the violent war on drugs. Harm reduction is the emerging framework and strategy.

Indeed, it makes no sense that cannabis use is criminally punished, but the sale of alcohol and tobacco is legal. Yet, the scientific evidence shows that alcohol and tobacco are more harmful than cannabis. (Our society should then be understanding towards the younger Remulla and sterner towards politicians who peddle tobacco and alcohol.)

Prohibition, as economic history has demonstrated, is costly and damaging to society. A “war on drugs” is less effective in curbing consumption, for this merely drives users underground. Worse, it abets corruption and violence (including extra-judicial killings especially during the time of Rodrigo Duterte).

Strong regulation — by distinguishing between hard and soft drugs and using a variety of tools to discourage consumption and apply harm-reduction strategies — is more effective to address substance abuse.

As pointed out by a Time article (Aug. 1, 2018), “Want to win the war on drugs? Portugal might have the answer.” What Portugal did in 2001 was to decriminalize the use of all drugs if individual consumption does not exceed a certain amount for 10 days. According to Portugal’s Health Ministry, 15 years after decriminalizing drug use, heroin use went down by 75% and death from overdose dropped by 85% although this increased slightly in the wake of an economic crisis. Overall, Portugal’s drug mortality rate is one of the lowest in the whole of Europe.

The explanation above should lead us to rethink our drug policy. It should also lead us to sympathize with the younger Remulla and many others accused of or convicted for using drugs.

Moreover, the Remulla controversy is an opportunity for Marcos Jr., to overturn Duterte’s failed war on drugs. Was it Winston Churchill who said: “Never let a good crisis go to waste?”

Turn the Remulla crisis into an opportunity to reform. Marcos Jr. in fact has already taken a different approach, having rejected the violence and brutality that characterized Duterte’s drug policy. He can take a bigger, bolder step by overhauling the Dangerous Drugs Act. At the minimum, decriminalize drug use. (Note that decriminalization is very different from legalization.)

But to do this, Marcos Jr. and the older Remulla must make a sacrifice. Specifically, Remulla, the father, must resign from his being Justice Secretary. And Marcos Jr. must encourage him to do so.

Secretary Remulla’s pronouncement that he will not intervene in his son’s case, nor will he influence the process is nonetheless insufficient. Similarly, Marcos Jr.’s statement that the calls for Remulla’s resignation “have no basis” is off the mark.

Those demanding Remulla’s resignation have raised the questions of delicadeza* and potential conflict of interest. Delicadeza and avoidance of conflict of interest are strong reasons why Secretary Remulla should resign.

I do not doubt Remulla’s statement to “let justice take its own course.” But this is objectively difficult to happen so long as he heads the Department of Justice. Remulla may not intervene, but his employees or subordinates will still regard him as their boss and will continue dealing with him even after the resolution of his son’s case. It is but natural for them to butter up and please their chief.

Here’s the dilemma. The law is the law, and the law is hard. The law must apply to the younger Remulla.

Aspiring for a new direction regarding drug policy, we want the harm reduction approach to prevail. That means giving the lightest sentence to Remulla if he is found guilty.

Prima facie, the case against the younger Remulla is strong. But having a light sentence is the way to go. Doing this sends a clear message that the whole of government will, from now on, lean towards harm reduction.

But giving Remulla, the son, a light sentence in a situation when the father remains Justice Secretary will arouse public suspicion and anger. That will lead to a political backlash.

The public will accuse the administration of having a double standard of justice. The poor are severely punished, even killed, in the course of the war on drugs. The son of a powerful politician gets a light sentence. But as I have argued, everyone charged with drug use or possession deserves humane treatment.

Upholding harm reduction means sparing anyone, including the younger Remulla, from heavy punishment. For Marcos Jr. and Secretary Remulla to show credibility in doing the right thing, they must make the ultimate sacrifice: Remulla, the father, must resign. It is for their own good.

Having himself acknowledged that he used drugs, Marcos Jr. has sympathy for drug users and understands the need for reform. At the proper time, Marcos Jr., using his political capital, can announce that henceforth, government will terminate Duterte’s war on drugs, amend the Dangerous Drugs Act, and adopt harm reduction.

This essay is written in memory of Edgardo Araneta Kalaw, Jr. He was a Filipino pioneer in championing harm reduction.

* Maintaining dignity by avoiding embarrassing situations and comporting oneself properly. A sense of propriety.

 

Dollar diarrhea

As usual it’s OFW remittances that will keep us afloat somehow. And as usual America doesn’t care about the impact of their mopping-up operations on the rest of the world.

By CIELITO HABITO

With the peso-dollar exchange rate now seemingly courting P60 to the dollar, our economy appears to be suffering from a case of LDM, or loose dollar movement. Dollars are indeed flowing out of the country for various reasons, foremost being how the US economy is sucking in its own currency with its rising interest rates.

The US Federal Reserve Bank has been deliberately raising its rates to mop up too many dollars in circulation, which has caused inflation rates Americans have not seen in decades. High-interest rates make US financial investments more attractive, unless other countries match the US interest rate hikes point by point. But central banks have various reasons not to match the US Fed’s moves, especially because higher interest rates also stifle investments, production, jobs, and incomes.

Such is the predicament our own Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) faces. It saw no need to match US interest rate hikes point by point earlier on, as our own inflation has not been as high and was more due to supply disruptions (especially in meat and fish), not too much money going around. But then Russia invaded Ukraine, which affected supplies and pushed up prices of our vital imports like fossil fuels, fertilizers, and wheat, fueling further domestic inflation. It also led to greater outflow of dollars to pay for the now more expensive imports, adding to the dollar diarrhea, further raising the exchange rate. But a rising exchange rate actually favors a lot of people: workers in export, tourism, and import-competing industries (whose competing imports get more expensive), families of overseas Filipino workers receiving remittances, and workers who get jobs in new or expanding foreign firms that now find investing in the country cheaper. A peso that has lost value is, after all, also a more competitive peso. Thus, the BSP does not fret over a depreciating peso as much as it does with rising inflation.

But things changed by the time the exchange rate had risen by more than the inflation rate because that now meant that the exchange rate rise would worsen inflation itself. And given that managing inflation is BSP’s primary mandate, it must now stem inflation—and depreciation—with tighter money supply, which means raising interest rates, even if it means further dampening the already dampened growth of the economy. That means stifling jobs, if not killing them outright. Many argue that growth is not everything, and that controlling inflation is more important, but it’s hard to tell that to those who are unable to find jobs or losing their jobs outright.

There are two important things to note about the current peso depreciation. One, it is almost entirely caused by the rising dollar, and completely external to us. It can be seen in how the peso’s movement has closely tracked that of the euro and Japanese yen, two of the most important reference currencies for the dollar. This means that all other currencies closely linked to it have also been drastically losing value, including the mighty British pound which is now almost at parity with the dollar, as Britain braces for great economic troubles ahead.

Two, while it is said that the peso has been the “worst performing” currency in Asean and possibly Asia since the start of the year, we could also describe it as having become the most competitive currency, for reasons already explained. In fact, while major economies are now bracing for recession through next year, the Philippine economy remains positioned for robust growth, albeit slower than earlier projected. And much of that growth will come from how the effect of remittances, which have traditionally driven our consumption growth, will be boosted by the peso depreciation—not to mention its push on tourism, exports, and foreign direct investments. Still, we must expect things to get worse before they get better.

So, what can we do to weather the difficulties ahead? At the individual level, the same simple advice I heard back at the height of the Asian financial crisis in 1998 holds today: produce more, consume less, and share more. That could well be the way to minimize the pain for all of us.