Going after ‘tambays’

June 23, 2018 Opinion Sideglance

Short of declaring martial law nationwide President Rodrigo Duterte has come up with a new measure to curb criminality and the spread of illegal drugs in the country.

His directive to the Philippine National Police to go after so called loiterers or ‘tambays’ in public places has been met with criticism from some sectors of society but is nevertheless being implemented full blast by the authorities.

While the president had made it clear in his pronouncement that the police should only encouraged these ‘tambays’ to go home and not arrest them the seemingly increasing number of people arrested  and apprehended for loitering in public places warrants a closer look at the anti-tambay directive of the president.

At the outset it is important to know that loitering per se is not illegal nor prohibited by law.

But nowadays loitering in public places such as corner sidewalks or alleys has become a trend for a lot of young people more particularly those belonging to gangs and outlawed fraternities who are always trying to defend their territories or so called ‘turf’. In slum areas where ‘gangsterism’ is prevalent gangs of young kids, mostly minors, preen and display their gang affiliations and converge and loiter in alleyways and sidewalks intimidating or threatening passersby and those that catch their fancy and attention.

These so called ‘gangsters’ not only present a danger to the public but sometimes also serve as conduits through which drugs and weapons  and the commission of crimes are done.

It is therefore possible that the president, seeing the danger to the public posed by these types of ruffians loitering in public places, has decided to make their world smaller by coming up with his anti-tambay directive and thus secure the lives and property of the people.

This is just conjecture on my part and those protesting the implementation of the anti-tambay drive may well see the measure as a curtailment of civil rights.

However, much as we deeply value our rights pertaining to travel and liberty it becomes equally important to appreciate that these so called rights should only apply to law abiding citizens and not to those whose intention in loitering along public places is to cause depredation against his fellowmen. These kinds of people should not be entitled to the right to exercise their so called freedoms since allowing them such liberties would work to oppress the rest of us.

On the other hand it might also be too early to tell whether the anti-tambay drive of the president is a reasonable exercise of power and authority by the chief executive, nonetheless the recent announcement by the PNP that they will be formulating guidelines for the implementation of the anti-tambay drive – that there are remedies in law readily available to those who feel that their rights have been violated because of it – only goes to show that the present leadership seems reasonable enough in striving to maintain peace and order in the country.