There are three traffic lights

THE CROWDS applauded. Never before had they heard “Stop!” spoken so forcefully. “I tell you, just STOP.” At last, a fearless, resolute man of action, a savior from crime and corruption. Never mind that we, the pasaway proletariat, the silent middle, the ilustrados of “Luna,” have been part of the problem. “I will kill you.” Fascinated by the man with such intemperate language, the crowds roared. Something seemed very right—but why did something also seem very wrong?

And so it came to pass that even before Election Day, May 9, reports of killings trickled in, drawing boldness from an advanced executive command. Into the presidency the red and green lights blinked fast and furious. (Read the Inquirer reports, columns and commentaries.)

STOP: drugs (in three to six months); mining (“You obey or we will survive … without you.” “I will stuff you in that hole…” 8/2); “endo” (“End ‘endo’ or close shop,” 8/2, or “I kill you,” 8/5); queues in government offices; oligarchs (“Destroy the oligarchs … imbedded in government now,” 8/5).

GO: for federalism; amending the Constitution (through a Con-ass); ceasefire with the New People’s Army; RH Law; 911 and 8888 nationwide; freedom of information (with a swift executive order); death penalty (by hanging); Ferdinand Marcos’ burial in the Libingan ng mga Bayani; pardon of GMA; railways and trains; revival of ROTC; reduction of taxes (more in the Inquirer’s Duterte inaugural special, 6/30).

Exhilarating? Urgent points taken up. Exhausting? Too many too fast. Frightening? A President cited as having a “hit list” (8/5/).

But there is a third traffic light: the yellow light, which means “warning,” ready to stop. Even a president impatient with analysis needs pause. Even orders descending imperiously and marked “fast track” need pacing. Edilberto de Jesus writes: Even appointments need “protracted planning processes” (8/6).

Straightening out the short-lived honeymoon between President Duterte and Joma Sison will take much longer than their declaration of love last July 25 with the unilateral ceasefire up to the breakup on July 30. We’re familiar with their bristling exchange of words. Reconciliation will need a review of past negotiations, proposals, counterproposals. The experts would know.

As for federalism, we and perhaps members of Congress, too, know next to nothing about it. What kind—dual, fiscal, etc.? Like the United States, Russia, etc.? With or without a president? Variations abound. Former chief justice Reynato Puno and Representatives Edcel Lagman and Teddy Baguilat counsel caution and deliberation. Even ex-senator Nene Pimentel, a pro-fed, realizes that “people must first of all understand the ins and outs of the proposal” (8/4). When, how and how much do we get to know the unique federalism “PH Style” (8/5)?

And now, already named is an ill-prepared Congress to change the form of government, with the House planning to divide the 290 representatives into 12 states, each led by deputy leaders (8/6)—like “playing house” in a federalist domicile?

The warning yellow light must shine longest on the drug war. Gratitude to the President for revealing its magnitude cannot erase the gravity of the 100-2-3-4-5-600 killed, taped and labeled “drug pusher ako.” That’s how they’ve been treated—as numbers, until Raffy Lerma’s photo of Michael Siaron exploded in the media; until Ceres P. Doyo, Rina J. David and Eric S. Caruncho gave the “invisible man” a name and a face. “Kill drugs, not people.” “Baka [ka] ma-Duterte.” “Totoong tao sila.”

The “protracted process” on the killings must get to the heart of the matter: the very morality of the killings, the travesty on human life. Pledging allegiance to human dignity in his State of the Nation Address on July 25, Mr. Duterte also said: “Human rights cannot be used as a shield or an excuse to destroy the country.” How’s that? Human dignity and human rights are two sides of the same coin.

Reactions were muted at first. Businessmen and columnists were humming praise, or were they whistling in the dark? A friend whispered, “We support him, pero hindi naman ganyan (but it shouldn’t be like that).” The Church was the first who went public: “Thou shalt not kill.” VP Leni bravely departed from Mr. Duterte’s view, “lamenting the lack of outcry” (8/5). Sen. Ping Lacson said “shoot on sight” is murder (Read: 8/4).

The outcry is swelling. Column after column questions the killings (Read op-eds 8/2, 8/3, 8/9). Abroad, the United Nations and human rights organizations are aware of what’s happening, and so are the international media. Sen. Leila de Lima, under heavy fire by executive subalterns, warned: “We cannot go on being indifferent to the daily executions… The day has already come when we can no longer tell who is morally wrong… the 9-year-old street child sniffing rugby, or the policeman who shoots the child … for sniffing rugby. This is our descent as a nation into the darkness that these men have created for us” (8/5).

It is now Archbishop Socrates Villegas’ turn to say STOP. “Enough of killings; let our humanity speak.”

Asuncion David Maramba (marda_ph@yahoo. com) is a retired professor, book editor and occasional journalist.