LAST week, presidential spokesman Salvador Panelo branded a resolution filed with the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) regarding our government’s war on drugs as the “latest demonization attempt” against his client and boldly predicted that it will fail.
It did not. Last Thursday, the UNHRC passed the resolution, which was sponsored by Iceland, that, among others, requested the UN Commissioner for Human Rights to submit a comprehensive report on the human rights situation in the Philippines.
The reaction from Manila was swift and at times bordered on the ridiculous. Panelo led the charge by labeling the resolution as “grotesquely one-sided, outrageously narrow, and maliciously partisan” as well as reeking of “nauseating politics completely devoid of respect for the sovereignty of our country, even as it is bereft of the gruesome realities of the drug menace in the country.”
And I thought that Michael Rama was the champion in grandeloquence!
Though flowery, Panelo’s response was still subdued, compared to that of our top diplomat. Foreign Secretary Teodoro Locsin Jr. accused those who voted for the resolution of being “deepest in the pockets of the drug trade” and threatened them with “far-reaching consequences” for insulting us.
Senate President Tito Sotto echoed Locsin’s accusation, claiming that the resolution was supported by countries that are tolerant of dangerous drugs. A newly elected colleague, former national police chief Ronald dela Rosa, meanwhile dared the UN human rights body to “come here and cut my head off” if they can prove that the killings were state-sponsored.
So what are the countries that are in the deepest pockets of the drug trade and/or are tolerant of dangerous drugs? Eighteen of the 47 member- countries of the UNHRC voted for the resolution: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Iceland, Fiji, Italy, Mexico, Peru, Slovakia, Spain, Ukraine, Uruguay and the United Kingdom.
Now tell me, do we really believe that the governments of, for example, the UK, Italy and Australia are receiving payola from the drug cartels? And what possibly far-reaching consequences can we deal against these countries? Withdraw our OFWs that are based there? Other than that, I can not think of any way that we can hurt them.
The UN resolution is embarrassing to us in the same way that being summoned to the principal’s office is embarrassing to an elementary school grader. But there must be other ways that our officials can express their displeasure besides childish accusations and empty threats.
President Duterte at least showed a sense of humor. Iceland, he said, does not understand our problems because they only eat ice there. Non-sequitur but less abrasive.