On the matter of the Bureau of Customs’ controversy, news reveals that the intelligence report on the 604-kg shipment of methamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu) came from the Anti-Smuggling Bureau of the General Administration of China Customs.
Yes, China.
It may be recalled that sometime in October 2016, China made a declaration that it supports the Duterte administration’s antidrug campaign, pledging $15 million to the initiative. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Geng Shuang said back then that the Philippines and China were in “close communication” over this. China also pledged support in other areas of cooperation including $6 billion in financial aid and loans referred to by the Philippine government as “official development assistance.”
Some political analysts are of the view that the aforesaid forms of support are “malicious” and “anomalous” in view of China’s relentless claim and exercise of ownership over the South China Sea (SCS). Experts said the financial aids were too good to be true and will likely be used as tricks to woo the Philippines into letting go of its SCS sovereign rights in favor of China.
Meanwhile, some believe that the soft loans and “favors” extended by China to the Philippines could just be another version of the China-Africa relations where the latter has been allegedly financed by the former in exchange for the exploitation of its natural resources.
With the seemingly active support of the Chinese government to some of our country’s programs and initiatives such as Mr. Duterte’s
antidrug campaign, my nosy self tells me that there could be more than what meets the eye.
I am even more concerned on the ramifications this could have over Philippine-China dynamics, particularly in view of their contradicting claims over the West Philippine Sea and efforts to gain “peaceful relations” as coexisting states.
Could China make good its pledge and commitment to support the Philippines’ initiatives on abating, if not eradicating, the drug trade? Will it be willing to go beyond giving financial aids and “gifts” and devise more effective and workable mechanisms to help Philippine law enforcers catch drug pushers and/or users or narcotics smugglers and manufacturers? More so, will it be willing to give full cooperation even when it means turning over its own people?
I am of the opinion that if China is truthful to its previous declarations and pledges of support, it must be more than willing to revisit the existing Philippine-China Extradition Treaty, strengthen it, and formulate practicable and efficient ways to put the same into full operation for the apprehension of law violators—particularly illegal drug smugglers. With this, the Philippine government may test the waters to determine China’s seriousness in concretizing its previous pledges of support.
Perhaps, the Philippine government could ask China to accord it a more encompassing “concurrent jurisdiction” to prosecute Chinese nationals accused to have violated the Philippine Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (Republic Act No. 9165). But then, will China be willing to waive its right to refuse extradition in cases when it could likewise exercise jurisdiction over the person sought for the offense?
Ultimately, will China be more willing to give a more far-reaching support and commitment that is way beyond the “fancy gifts” it has already given us?
Waiting for China to get the ball rolling to prove its sincerity and candidness on its dealings could take quite some time. But instead of just waiting, I think the Philippines could use some tapping and nudging.
BELINDA DAYAG, lindz.dayag@gmail.com