“Law and order” is a recurring theme in US politics particularly among the Republican presidential candidates. In recent past, its leading exponents were former Presidents Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon, both Californians. “Law and order” is a powerful message, which resonates effectively well with the electorates. It will always be a relevant issue in any political conversation whenever there is a perception of breakdown of law and order in the country.
For instance, in the 1968 presidential election, all serious candidates particularly Richard Nixon, who was then making his second run for the highest office after losing to John F. Kennedy, made law and order his centerpiece agenda. He condemned violence and crimes in the streets and called for a reassertion of authority. Nixon said that “liberty is not a ticket for violence, license and chaos. There can be no progress without order, no freedom without order, no justice without order.” Yet Nixon was forced out of office after committing a serious crime against the American people. Even Robert Kennedy, who was then leading the primary contests in the Democratic Party prior to his assassination, could not ignore the overriding public concern and campaigned as a crime-busting former Attorney General and strongly plugged for “law and order.”
During his term, President Ronald Reagan who also adopted “law and order” as his advocacy, had appointed conservative judges who were tough on crimes. More prison houses were constructed as the number of inmates more than tripled from 500,000 to over 1.5 million prisoners from 1980 to 1994. Convicted felons served longer prison terms, with less parole.
Generally, proponents of “law and order” are from the right wing of the political spectrum. Liberals and left-wing elements are not keen advocates of “law and order” since it normally clashes with civil liberties. A candidate normally projects himself as tough on crime or regards himself as “anti-crime”. He has no hesitation embracing the cause and proudly proclaims himself: “I am your law and order candidate” to the people. That’s exactly what President Donald J. Trump said when he first ran for president in 2016. Now, after a long summer of discontent and massive street protests across the US, marked by riots, lootings and killings, President Trump in his acceptance speech last week, introduced himself to the electorates: “I am your president of law and order.” And lambasted his opponent, former VP Joe Biden for being soft on crime. Trump claims that Biden will dismantle the police, desecrate historical monuments and give free rein to anarchists. “You cannot be safe in Biden’s America,” he intoned. And added that his opponent will fail to protect law-abiding citizens and tear down America if he is voted into office. Will “law and order” be again his successful recipe for his re-election?
We listened to the just concluded Republican National Convention where practically all speakers spoke glowingly about the achievements of the Trump administration on its first term in office and pointed to the other side for the failures of the government especially on the issue of “law and order” that they blame, among others, to the opposition. Trump and his allies alleged that the social turmoil raging across America is politically inspired. The Democrats countered that when there is failure of leadership and abuse of power by the authorities that wield it, protest actions become legitimate and justified. During the Republican National Convention, the Democrats played a campaign advertisement that portrays Trump virtually a wolf disguising himself as a lamb. He is running on “law and order” agenda but Trump in all the years that he has been at the White House was surrounded by felons—campaign manager Paul Manafort and deputy campaign manager Rick Gates, National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, personal lawyer Michael Cohen, personal adviser Roger Stone, and several other characters who had brushes with the law and subsequently convicted.
***
President Duterte is an original “law and order” president. He was a known “toughie” against crime while he was the Davao City mayor. He imposed curfew in the city and personally patrolled the streets at night to enforce it. He made violators of the anti-smoking ordinance eat cigarette butts. He was unforgiving to criminals, particularly those involved in illegal drugs. Lawless elements turned up dead and the Commission on Human Rights extensively investigated him about them. He was fiercer than “Dirty Harry.” When he became our President, he introduced Tokhang, which is now the most dreaded term in police work. He appointed retired military and police officers in his cabinet and other sensitive posts. He declared Martial Law in Mindanao to arrest the deterioration of law and order. Recently he had the Anti-Terrorism Act amended to give it more teeth. Now, he asked Congress to reimpose the death penalty. We have all the laws but what we need is more “order”. We need a strong criminal justice system and stricter law enforcement. It presupposes mandatory sentencing, harsher penalties and longer imprisonment. Now, President Duterte has asked Congress to reimpose the death penalty. He may use the strong arm of the law, within legal bounds, but he should not intensify militarization and police power of the state. The rule of law should be paramount. If he succeeds, “law and order” will define the Duterte presidency.