Since Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte took office in June, as a result of his extreme approach on the war on durgs, nearly 6,000 people have been killed across the country. Of that number, around 2,000 drug suspects were killed during police operations and around 3,800 deaths are under investigation, as they were killed by unknown gunmen and are believed to be vigilante killings.
In a recent speech, Duterte admitted that he personally killed criminals when he was the mayor of Davao City, something he’s previously denied. In the speech he boasted, “I was really looking for a confrontation so I could kill.” and “If I can do it, why can’t you?”
In response to these recent remarks, oppisition in the Congress has said that mass murders fall into the category of high crimes, which are grounds enough to impeach under the Constitution. However, of the 293 members of the lower house, there are fewer than 50 who are opposed to Duterte. A two-thirds vote is needed to impeach. Thus, it is unlikely that Duterte will not be impeached because there is simply not enough opposition in Congress to garner enough votes to remove him from office. Even the slightest possibility of impeaching a president is a serious issue; however, the more pressing issue should be why impeachment has come into question. The idea that a sitting President has admitted to killing people while he held puclic office is unpredented, let alone questionable. Even if Duterte did not violate any laws, it becomes a matter of professionalism, as killing is not necessarily thought of as Presedential behavior. Rodrigo Duterte was mayor of a city when he killed these people and now he is President. Therefore the response to these remarks has been overwhelmingly negative and critical.