My only sin

"My only sin is the extrajudicial killings." This was what President Duterte said in a speech at the Palace. He claims that he did not steal a single peso, and he never had anyone jailed. EJK is his only sin. What do you think? Is it an admission that he was behind the extrajudicial killings? Is it an admission that he ordered state forces to kill thousands, mostly the ones found wrapped in packing tape with signs around their necks, all over the country? For his critics, this is exactly what it means. For the first time, Duterte admitted he was behind EJKs, a fact many already believed. This statement is now being forwarded as part of the complaint filed against him before the International Criminal Court.

But Duterte's usual defenders and apologists quickly went into damage control. The presidential spokesman immediately explained that the president was not serious when he said it, and that his statements should not be taken literally. The Palace also denies it was an admission, being devoid of legal documentation and protocol. He was just being playful. According to the legal counsel of the Palace, Duterte’s statement was a "matter of language," and that a misinterpretation is once again being made. His statements must be related to all of his previous statements to get a picture of what he really wants to say. He further explains the president is Bisaya and not from Metro Manila, so he may be expressing things differently from what most are used to. He is merely saying that the issue of EJKs is the only issue being used against him, nothing else.

Is this the norm of this administration? How do people know when the president is serious or not? How are his statement going to be understood by the people, or should they just wait for the explanation of the Palace or the legal counsel? He is the president of the country, therefore all his statements will be taken seriously, as they should be. According to the Senate minority leader: “It is wrong for the president’s spokesperson to say that we should not believe the president because he was just joking… It seems they are the only presidential spokespersons in the world who keep on saying that we should not take the President seriously,” he adds. I agree.

Take for instance, the statement that the reason there are so many rape cases in Davao is because of the many beautiful women. As usual, the Palace said the president said that in jest. Another joke. But for the women actually raped, I doubt if they saw any iota of humor in what happened to them, especially not in the president’s remark. As if it was their fault for being raped. So how can we discern what is a joke and what isn’t? Is the president only serious when talking about Senator Trillanes? Is he only serious when lashing out at his critics like the CHR, EU, UNHCR, and the like? No explanations needed there.