President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. blocked the passage of a bill that seeks to reorganize the Philippine National Police (PNP).

His four-page letter to Congress, made public on Thursday, July 11, listed numerous justifications for his veto of the measure.

1. Provisions that go against the government’s rightsizing agenda

The President argued that the bill’s aim to institutionalize numerous posts, such as directorial staff, area police commands (APC), special offices, and support units, did not consider other offices that already have similar functions.

“Instead of coordinated working relationships, the result may be bureaucratic efficiencies. We cannot allow the reorganization to be bloated and overstaffed with the creation of redundant, overlapping, and ambiguous offices,” he wrote.

Specifically, he acknowledged criticisms of the APCs, which were activated in 2009 to take the lead on inter-regional and trans-regional police operations.

“Considering that various police offices (regional, provincial, cities, or municipalities) are already covering various aspects of police operations and with the adoption of the directorate system, the APCs may be superfluous. Besides, let us not wait for the time when there will be misencounters among our police forces due to their overlapping functions,” he added.

Marcos also questioned the proposed creation of a PNP liaison office to the Office of the President – which he said, “may pose security and confidentiality risks” – and the proposed creation of another liaison office to the Department of the Interior and Local Government, when the PNP is already under the DILG’s supervision.

2. Potential pay disparity between PNP officers and AFP counterparts

The bill seeks to guarantee a government employee status for Philippine National Police Academy (PNPA) cadets, rewarding them with a salary grade similar to police cadets, but the President expressed concern that doing so would cause a pay distortion when compared to their military counterparts.

“Indeed, the grant of Salary Grade 21 to PNPA cadets will distort the base pay schedule of the military and uniformed personnel (MUP) by creating disparity among the several government cadetship programs. At any rate, the grant is visibly higher than the base pay the cadets will receive after graduation and appointment as police lieutenants,” he said.

3. Questions of independence

The PNP has what it calls Internal Affairs Service, an independent body that probes cops accused of violating procedures and regulations. In enhancing its role, the bill suggests that IAS, on its own initiative, conduct investigations into incidents where a police officer is allegedly involved, such as murder.

The President, however, said questions of independence may be raised since the Integrity Monitoring and Enforcement Group, which is tasked to gather information against erring cops, will be under the National Operational Support Units of the PNP national office.

“The need to ensure independence and impartiality in the appointment of members of the legal service unit or the IAS is quite an important issue. While the bill specifies that the Inspector General heading the IAS must be a civilian, the deputy inspector general and the regional internal affairs officer are both star-ranked officials,” Marcos explained.

The President also said that the bill was unable to lay out “the administrative relationships among the Civil Service Commission, DILG, and PNP, including the procedures for disciplinary measures.”

4. Ambiguous language

Section 19 of the measure reads: “The provisions of this Act shall have retroactive effect on the rights and benefits granted by virtue of appointment, promotion, or retirement prior to its effectivity.”

Marcos said the language is vague.

“For instance, what are the rights and benefits contemplated and how can the rights and benefits be retroactively applied to individuals who had already been separated from service?” he asked.

Back to Congress

One paragraph in Marcos’ letter encapsulates his decision to block the bill’s passage.

“The bill has not added any significant measure that would bolster and enhance the capability of the PNP leadership to implement the highest standards of integrity and accountability in the police force. There can be no true reform if these issues are not prioritized,” he said.

The measure was transmitted to the Office of the President on June 6, and was scheduled to lapse into law on July 7, until Marcos vetoed it on July 5.

The Constitution says the House and the Senate may reconsider the bill, and if it passes with two-thirds of the vote in separate chambers, the measure becomes law. – Rappler.com