A Mid-Term Critical Change or Crisis

A Mid-Term Critical Change or Crisis

Closing the chapter on a Marcos‑era governance is neither a ceremonial act nor a rhetorical flourish; it is a contested political project that demands institutional reckoning, juridical clarity, and a reorientation of state practice across Metro Manila. The imperative is immediate: credible accountability for extrajudicial killings (EJKs), a systematic response to the reemergence of salvage phenomena in the National Capital Region, and a simultaneous program of economic and infrastructural renewal that can undercut the social conditions that make extra‑legal violence politically legible. Recent admissions by the Department of Justice about investigative shortcomings, together with persistent civil‑society monitoring of drug‑war killings, create a narrow but consequential opening for reform. How that opening is seized—or squandered—will determine whether the polity experiences a mid‑term critical change or slides into a deeper crisis of legitimacy.

---

Context

The phrase closing the chapter of a Marcos operates on two registers. On one level it is metaphorical: an attempt to consign a particular constellation of governance practices—personalized authority, punitive spectacle, and impunity—to historical memory. On another level it is programmatic: a set of institutional reforms and policy choices that must be enacted to prevent the recurrence of those practices. Central to both registers is the problem of extrajudicial killings. EJKs are not merely discrete criminal acts; they are symptomatic of a governance logic that privileges immediate, visible enforcement over due process, and that instrumentalizes fear as a form of political control.

This governance logic is sustained by structural weaknesses: politicized policing, under‑resourced investigative capacity, opaque procurement and contracting practices, and a civic culture that at times tolerates summary justice when formal institutions fail to deliver. The reappearance of salvage killings in and around Metro Manila is not an isolated law‑and‑order problem; it is a signal that the institutional architecture meant to guarantee accountability and redress is fraying. The task of closing the chapter therefore requires both retributive clarity—lawful, procedural redress for past harms—and systemic redesign—institutional changes that make such harms less likely in the future.

---

Patterns of Violence and the Emergence of Salvage Phenomena

Historically, salvage denotes extrajudicial summary executions carried out by vigilantes, criminal syndicates, or rogue elements within security forces. These acts proliferate where formal justice is perceived as slow, corrupt, or complicit. Contemporary patterns around the National Capital Region reveal a troubling ecology: pockets of localized violence, often concentrated in peri‑urban barangays and informal settlements, where community actors, criminal networks, and sometimes state actors intersect. The drivers are multiple and mutually reinforcing.

First, impunity: when investigations stall, prosecutions fail, or evidence is mishandled, a social calculus emerges in which extra‑legal solutions appear expedient. Second, politicized security narratives: rhetoric that valorizes decisive, punitive action against crime normalizes the use of force and lowers the threshold for summary measures. Third, socioeconomic precarity: communities that lack reliable access to services, employment, and legal recourse are more likely to tolerate or even tacitly endorse vigilantism as a form of immediate problem‑solving. These dynamics reproduce the structural conditions that enabled the earlier drug‑war EJKs and make the present moment precarious.

Addressing these patterns requires more than policing reforms; it requires a recalibration of the social contract. The state must reassert its monopoly on legitimate coercion through transparent, accountable institutions while simultaneously restoring the civic and economic conditions that make formal justice meaningful to ordinary citizens.

---

Institutional Transition Taking the Reins of the Residency

A credible transition away from a Marcos‑style governance demands three interlocking institutional moves: transparent accountability, depoliticized policing, and community‑centered prevention. Each is necessary but not sufficient on its own; together they form a minimal program for reconstituting state legitimacy.

Transparent accountability. The reopening and proper resourcing of investigations into past EJKs is a moral and political imperative. This means independent oversight mechanisms with forensic capacity, legal insulation from partisan interference, and public reporting that is both regular and comprehensible. Accountability must be procedural: prosecutions and administrative sanctions must follow due process, and reparative measures for victims’ families must be instituted. Retribution in this sense is not vengeance; it is the restoration of rule‑bound remedies that reestablish the normative boundaries of state power.

Depoliticized policing. Professionalizing local police commands in the National Capital Region requires meritocratic promotion systems, civilian review boards with investigatory teeth, and operational protocols that prioritize evidence and due process over spectacle. Demilitarization of routine policing should be pursued in phases to avoid enforcement vacuums, but the end state must be a police force whose legitimacy rests on competence and legality rather than political loyalty.

Community‑centered prevention. Law enforcement alone cannot eliminate the social demand for vigilante justice. Investments in social services, harm‑reduction programs, and local dispute‑resolution mechanisms are essential. Community policing models that embed officers in civic networks, paired with robust witness protection and legal aid, can reduce the incentives for summary executions and build trust in formal institutions.

Operationalizing these moves will require legislative action, budgetary commitments, and a political coalition that includes civil society, technocratic reformers, and elements of the business community that have a stake in stability and rule‑bound governance.

---

Economic Renewal Infrastructure Stability and Youth Civic Engagement

Institutional reform must be accompanied by an economic and infrastructural strategy that addresses the material roots of instability. Accountability and transparency are not substitutes for economic policy; they are prerequisites for it. Public investment must be insulated from rent‑seeking through open contracting, performance‑based procurement, and independent project evaluation. Infrastructure priorities should be climate‑resilient transport, comprehensive flood control, and power grid modernization—projects that deliver visible public goods while creating employment and reducing the everyday precarity that fuels social unrest.

Business sector growth should be pursued through targeted support for small and medium enterprises: streamlined permits, digital registries, and accessible credit lines. Anti‑monopoly enforcement is essential to prevent capture by entrenched conglomerates that can distort public investment for private gain. The private sector has a role to play not only as investor but as a stakeholder in governance reforms that reduce regulatory uncertainty and corruption risk.

Equally important is the role of the younger generation. Digital fluency among youth can be harnessed for participatory budgeting, civic monitoring platforms, and investigative civic journalism. Formal civic education, coupled with legal protections for whistleblowers and journalists, can shift public discourse from personality‑driven politics to policy literacy. Intergenerational civic fellowships and youth oversight boards for local projects can institutionalize the political energy of younger cohorts into constructive channels.

---

Risks Trade‑offs and Implementation Pathways

Reform is inherently contested. Risks include co‑optation by vested interests within security and procurement systems, institutional inertia, and short‑term political backlash that frames accountability as partisan retribution. Trade‑offs are real: rapid procurement reform may slow project rollouts; demilitarization of policing may create temporary enforcement gaps. These trade‑offs are manageable if reforms are phased, piloted, and accompanied by capacity‑building measures.

Practical steps include legislating independent investigatory mandates, funding forensic laboratories and digital case‑management systems, strengthening witness protection, and institutionalizing public reporting of use‑of‑force incidents. Open‑contracting mandates and real‑time budget dashboards should be implemented at both city and barangay levels to reduce information asymmetries. Multi‑stakeholder infrastructure oversight boards—composed of civil society, technical experts, and private sector representatives—can provide continuous scrutiny of major projects.

Implementation requires a coalition that can withstand short‑term political pressures: independent prosecutors, insulated oversight bodies, civic coalitions, and reform‑minded elements within the bureaucracy. International partners can provide technical assistance and conditional financing, but domestic ownership is essential for legitimacy and sustainability.

---

Guiding Questions for Policy Design

- Which agencies will be legally insulated to lead investigations into past EJKs and procurement irregularities, and what statutory protections will ensure their independence?  

- How will budget transparency be operationalized at barangay and city levels so that ordinary citizens can monitor spending and project performance in real time?  

- What incentives will align private investment with public‑interest infrastructure, and how will anti‑monopoly enforcement be strengthened to prevent capture?  

- How will youth civic engagement be institutionalized beyond episodic campaigns, ensuring that digital platforms translate into durable oversight capacity?  

- What phased sequencing will balance demilitarization of policing with short‑term public safety needs, and what metrics will be used to evaluate progress?

These questions are not rhetorical; they are the scaffolding for a policy agenda that can transform a fragile opening into durable change.

---

Conclusion

Closing the chapter on a Marcos‑era governance is less an act of erasure than a project of transformation. It demands credible accountability, not as spectacle but as procedural remedy; structural reform, not as cosmetic rebranding but as institutional redesign; and social investment, not as charity but as a strategic bulwark against the conditions that make extra‑legal violence politically legible. The political moment—marked by admissions of investigative failure and by renewed civic vigilance—offers a fragile but real opening. Whether that opening becomes a mid‑term critical change or a deeper crisis depends on the capacity of reformers to bind procedural integrity to economic renewal, to couple depoliticized policing with community empowerment, and to translate youthful civic energy into institutionalized oversight.

If these elements cohere, the next decade can witness the normalization of judicial remedies, the resilience of forensic and prosecutorial institutions, and a political realignment that privileges evidence‑based crime prevention over punitive spectacle. If they do not, the polity risks entrenching parallel justice systems, perpetuating cycles of violence, and inviting renewed international scrutiny. The choice is not abstract; it is a practical, political, and moral one that will shape the contours of governance, security, and civic life in Metro Manila for years to come.

Amiel Roldan's curatorial writing practice exemplifies this path: transforming grief into infrastructure, evidence into agency, and memory into resistance. As the Philippines enters a new economic decade, such work is not peripheral—it is foundational. 

Amiel Gerald Roldan   

I'm trying to complement my writings with helpful inputs from AI through writing. Bear with me as I am treating this blog as repositories and drafts.    

please comment and tag if you like my compilations visit www.amielroldan.blogspot.com or www.amielroldan.wordpress.com 

and comments at

amiel_roldan@outlook.com

amielgeraldroldan@gmail.com 

Amiel Gerald A. Roldan: a multidisciplinary Filipino artist, poet, researcher, and cultural worker whose practice spans painting, printmaking, photography, installation, and writing. He is deeply rooted in cultural memory, postcolonial critique, and in bridging creative practice with scholarly infrastructure—building counter-archives, annotating speculative poetry like Southeast Asian manuscripts, and fostering regional solidarity through ethical art collaboration.

Recent show at ILOMOCA

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/16qUTDdEMD 

https://www.linkedin.com/safety/go?messageThreadUrn=urn%3Ali%3AmessageThreadUrn%3A&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pressenza.com%2F2025%2F05%2Fcultural-workers-not-creative-ilomoca-may-16-2025%2F&trk=flagship-messaging-android