Professional Documents
Culture Documents
AND
THREATS OF
NARCOTERRORISM
IN THE PHILIPPINES
Global Lessons Learned and Policy Options
for the Duterte Government and Beyond
Copyright@2018
by Rommel C. Banlaoi
Except for brief quotations for scholarly purposes, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, and
recordings and/or otherwise without the prior written permission of the author. You may reach the author
at rbanlaoi@pipvtr.com or rbanlaoi.pipvtr@gmail.com.
Published by
Rommel C. Banlaoi, Marawi City Siege and Threats of Narcoterrorism in the Philippines: Global Lessons
Learned and Policy Options for the Duterte Government and Beyond (Quezon City: Philippine Institute
for Peace, Violence and Terrorism Research, 2018).
ISBN 978-971-93769-2-2
CONTENTS
i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
ii
PREFACE
iii
ABSTRACT
1
INTRODUCTION
Terrorism, Drugs, and the Siege of Marawi City
3
What is Narcoterrorism?
5
Narcoterrorism: Global Situation
13
Countering Narcoterrorism: Global Lessons Learned
23
Marawi City Siege and its Aftermath:
The Current State of Narcoterrorism in the Philippines
41
Countering Narcoterrorism: Policy Options and Alternatives
for the Duterte Government and Beyond
49
CONCLUSION
51
NOTES
57
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
59
ABOUT THE PIPVTR
Acknowledgement
Finishing this work was a difficult struggle as it came from a deep sorrow following the
unexpected demise of a dear friend and an excellent mentor, Rodolfo “Boogie” Mendoza.
Before his death, “Ka Boogie”, as I fondly called him, turned over to me files of documents
and personally handwritten notes describing his long investigative work on threats of
insurgency and terrorism in the Philippines. I promised to organize these documents and
notes to come out with a scholarly paper authored by him.
Based from his notes and documents, Ka Boogie wanted me to write first a short paper
on the New People’s Army (NPA) to coincide with the 50th founding anniversary of the
NPA. Ka Boogie wanted me to underscore some changes and continuities of the NPA as a
rebel army of Filipino communists and to highlight the growing alliance between the NPA
and the Moro secessionist groups in the Southern Philippines, especially in the context of the
rise of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). I told him that I was finishing a publication
on narcoterrorism and I promised that the short paper he requested would be next to my
writing agenda.
Boogie passed away without seeing the short paper he would have wanted me to write.
But his instruction prompted me hurriedly finish this work on narcoterrorism so I can move
on the paper on the NPA and its inextricable link with the Moro rebellion.
I therefore thank Ka Boogie for his encouragement, support and inspiration. Without
Ka Boogie, I would not have developed a solid niche in counter-terrorism research in the
Philippines. I sincerely owe him a very deep debt of gratitude. I give to him my highest
respect not only for being a sincere best friend, a true mentor, and a reliable buddy but also
for being a genuine patriot – a trait worthy of emulation to us all.
Ka Boogie’s views were oftentimes misunderstood, if not maligned, because he was
ahead of his time. His out-of-the-box thinking spurred controversies because he was using
an unfamiliar lens that only him could use.
Like a fox, Ka Boogie could smell danger from afar. Like a fortuneteller, Ka Boogie
could foresee ominous events like the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the Twin
Tower of New York City. He also anticipated the Marawi City siege when he warned months
before that followers were planning big and bold attacks to impress ISIS in an interview with
ABS-CBN News Channel (ANC). These prompted others to describe him as too alarmist.
But he developed this one-of-a-kind attitude through many years of hard experiences as
a spy par excellence of the Philippine government. Thus, Glenda Gloria would call him a
“consummate spy”, a “bullheaded strategist and psywar expert” – an ”intelligence officer
through and through.”
For PIPVTR, Ka Boogie was our legendary James Bond, the spy who really loved this
country until the last breathe of his life. He deliberately sacrificed his personal quality time
with his family so he could offer more precious time for our country.
Ka Boogie’s high sense of patriotism does not die with him. His patriotism lives on the
younger colleagues, friends and followers who continue to believe in him and his legacies. We
thank you Ka Boogie for setting a good example for us. We will raise the torch of patriotism
that you instilled in us.
This work evolves from the policy paper I wrote in 2016 for PCSupt. Albert Ignacius
Ferro whom Ka Boogie also mentored. PCSupt. Ferro was serving then as Director of the
now defunct Anti-Illegal Drugs Group (AIDG) of the Philippine National Police (PNP). I
decided to update this policy paper when PCSupt. Ferro received his appointment as Director
of the Drugs Enforcement Group (DEG) of the PNP. I am very grateful to PCSupt. Ferro for
his continuing support and friendship.
I have many colleagues and friends in the academe, government and intelligence
community who also supported me in this work. I thank them all for the continuing
assistance. But I would like to render special mention to Abu Hamdie and Billy who, until
now, assist me in my counter-terrorism research activities.
Most importantly, I thank my wife, Grace, for his strong patience, and profound
understanding. Marrying an academic working on counter-terrorism research like me takes
more courage and perseverance. I admire her so dearly for the enduring and unconditional
love.
I also acknowledge our three children: Zed, Zac and Zoe for the right behavior I needed
when I was writing this work. My children always remind me to enjoy life with them.
My children taught me how to combine work and leisure and achieve the quality work-life
balance.
Of course, if there is any factual inaccuracy, lapse in judgment, and substantive error
arising from this work, the accountability is all mine.
Though his work aims to help government develop sound policies in countering
narcoterrorism, all views articulated in this work are my personal academic perspectives.
Though this work uses some government sources as references, conclusions coming from
this study do not represent any official position of the Philippine government.
Preface
This work marks the first year of the Marawi City siege that began on 23 May 2017. This
incident was the longest urban battle ever confronted by the Armed Forces of the Philippines
(AFP). It took the AFP 154 days before it liberated Marawi City from armed groups that
claimed to be followers of ISIS in the Philippines.
The Marawi City siege was a game-changer in the history of Philippine counter-
insurgency operations as the main battle area was an urban terrain and not a guerilla zone
in the forested areas. For almost five decades, the Philippine government has fought armed
insurgencies in the countryside. The Marawi City siege taught the Philippine military to also
learn how to fight in the city.
The Marawi City siege was also a mind-blowing incident as it strongly demonstrated
the complex nexus of crime, insurgency and terrorism in the Philippines. For half a century
after the Second World War, the Philippine government has fought crime, insurgency and
terrorism separately from each other with a delineation of the function of the police and the
military. In the aftermath of the siege, the Philippine government has truly realized the value
of security convergence and the importance of comprehensive approach whether in the form
of “whole-of-government”, “whole-of-society”, or “whole-of-nation” approaches.
One of the major crimes exhibited during the Marawi City siege was the financing of
terrorism from illegal drug operations. Scholars and experts describe this phenomenon as
narcoterrorism where terrorism and illegal drug trafficking effectively converge.
This study examines narcoterrorism in the Philippines using the case of the Marawi
City siege. This is the first in a series of publications that the Philippine Institute for Peace,
Violence and Terrorism Research (PIPVTR) intends to publish on the Marawi City siege.
Forthcoming publications on the topic will include the role of foreign terrorist fighters and
transnational organized crimes in the Marawi City siege. PIPVTR hopes to publish these
forthcoming studies in October 2018 to mark the liberation of Marawi City from ISIS.
It is an ardent desire of PIPVTR to see this present study adding value to our knowledge
of the Marawi City siege. Through this study, PIPVTR also endeavors to contribute to policy
development in order to counter the evolving threat of narcoterrorism confronting the
Philippines and its neighbors.
Abstract
Threats of narcoterrorism have received very serious attention in the Philippine when
the Philippine government under the administration of President Rodrigo Roa Duterte
vigorously raised the menace in the aftermath of the 2 September 2016 Davao City bombing
and the 23 May 2017 Marawi City siege. Though narcoterrorism has been a global problem
since the 1980s, it takes almost four decades for the Philippine government to realize the
gravity of this threat only in the aftermath of the siege of Marawi City by armed groups
claiming to be part of the Islamic State (IS), more known initially as the Islamic State of Iraq
and Syria (ISIS). As a result, the Duterte Administration securitized narcoterrorism in his
National Security Policy 2017-2022 and National Security Strategy 2018 declaring drugs and
terrorism as national security threats.
As a concept, narcoterrorism remains to be very nebulous. As a threat, it arguably
presents panoply of complex security challenges for law enforcement not only for the
Philippines but also for the international community.
Other countries have been combating narcoterrorism for years with mixed results
and unintended consequences. Based on great lessons learned from exemplary practices of
other countries and cognizant of the Philippines’ own unique situations and experiences, the
Duterte government needs to develop a more humane and socially responsible innovative
anti-narcoterrorism approach that applies not only a strong law enforcement but also a
decisive treatment through rehabilitation and care.
INTRODUCTION
When then Davao City Mayor Rodrigo Roa Duterte took office on 30 June 2016 as
the 16th President of the Republic of the Philippines, he declared the “war on drugs” as his
rallying cause.1 President Duterte even reiterated that the war on drugs would continue to be
the centerpiece of his policy until the “dying days of my presidency, or my life.”2
While waging the war on drugs, President Duterte inevitably confronts the continuing
battle against terrorist threats in the Philippines.3 The Davao City bombing on 2 September
2016 and the 23 May 2017 Marawi City siege have aptly unveiled the panoply of security
threats facing the Philippines involving drugs and terrorism.
Philippine National Police (PNP) Chief, Director General Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa,
has attributed the perpetrator of the Davao City bombing from narcoterrorism where
drug money finances terrorism. Even part of the financing of the Marawi City siege by the
Mindanao affiliates of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS)4 has also been linked with
narco-politicians operating in Lanao del Sur.
The Marawi City Siege is a seminal case in the Philippines where the complex nexus of
illegal drug trade and terrorism exists. It is an epoch-making event in the Philippines that
empirically demonstrates how drug money can also finance acts of terrorism.
Because of the nexus of drugs and terrorism in the Marawi City Siege, President Duterte
has securitized his war on drugs and his war on terrorism. In the National Security Policy
2017-2022, President Duterte declares drugs and terrorism as national security threats.5 In
its national security goals and strategic objectives, the Duterte Administration intends to
launch “holistic program” to combat illegal drugs, criminality, corruption, terrorism and
transnational crimes in order to strengthen public safety, law and order, and the administration
of justice in the Philippines.
But what is narcoterrorism?
How serious is the threat of narcoterrorism in the Philippines?
This study describes the conceptual ramifications of narcoterrorism in order to inform
policy makers and the greater public on its various meanings and understandings. It presents
narcoterrorism not only as a domestic problem but also as a regional and global threat.
To get lessons learned from international exemplary practices, this study also illustrates
how other countries have confronted narcoterrorism. This study particularly underscores
2 MARAWI CITY SIEGE AND THE THREATS OF NARCOTERRORISM IN THE PHILIPPINES
many scholars and experts use narcoterrorism to describe the complex nexus of drugs and
terrorism, although this nexus arguably still lacks conceptual clarity and policy coherence.
Because narcoterrorism involves the twin problem of drug trafficking and terrorism, it
has acquired a “dual character” that remains to be conceptually problematic because of its
ambiguity. Narcoterrorism attempts to merge two problems under a single roof: the war on
drugs and the war on terrorism.
But the “the merger of the two phenomena” is complicating rather than facilitating,
clarification of the two concepts that narcoterrorism attempts to embody.9 There is still a
lack of satisfactory explanation on whether narcoterrorism places more emphasis on the
drug aspect of terrorism or gives more stress on the terrorist dimension of drug trafficking.
Some studies use the term narcoterrorism to describe the collaboration of terrorist groups
and drug syndicates.10 Others use narcoterrorism to explain the financing of terrorism from
drug money.11
Apparently, narcoterrorism is a highly contested concept. But the Drug Enforcement
Administration (DEA) of the United States defines narcoterrorism as “a subset of terrorism,
in which terrorist groups, or associated individuals, participate directly or indirectly in the
cultivation, manufacture, transportation, or distribution of controlled substances and the
monies derived from these activities.12 Simply put, narcoterrorism pertains to “terrorist/
insurgent organizations that use drug trafficking proceeds to advance their political agenda.” 13 From
this view, narcoterrorism endorses the war on drugs in the context of the war on terrorism.
Thus, combating narcoterrorism is placed under counterterrorism. Institutions
responsible for counterterrorism are given the responsibility to combat narcoterrorism.
There is another view, however, using narcoterrorism to privilege more the narcotics
aspect of terrorism.14 This view pursues counterterrorism in the context of the war on drugs.
Thus, institutions responsible for counternarcotics are given the responsibility to combat
narcoterrorism.15
But others avoid this dichotomy by advocating for an interagency collaboration to
combat narcoterrorism in a holistic manner.16 To counter narcoterrorism, some countries
apply a whole-of-government approach by mobilizing the resources of the whole
government bureaucracy involved in countering terrorism and illegal use of drugs. Other
countries advocate a whole-of-nation approach to include civil societies, non-government
organizations, academic communities and policy think tanks in addressing the threat of
narcoterrorism.
Narcoterrorism: Global Situation
their ambitions.”23 But existing evidences are not conclusive to claim terrorist groups as drug
traffickers. Available evidences only tell, “Income linked to the drug sector is only one of
several revenue streams for terrorist groups. If one revenue stream dries up, another can be
tapped, such as extortion, kidnapping for ransom, bank robberies, sale of natural resources
or sale of cultural artifacts.”24
From other study, the Terrorism Knowledge Base identified 395 terrorist organizations
with involvements in various crimes from 1998 to 2005. The Terrorism Knowledge Base
discovered that 35 organizations, representing 9 percent, were engaged in drug trafficking.25
This study also found that international terrorist organizations “are more likely to engage in
drug trafficking when they have the logistical capability and the necessary network.”26
In the investigative study published in 2002 by the US Department of Defense (DOD)
8 MARAWI CITY SIEGE AND THE THREATS OF NARCOTERRORISM IN THE PHILIPPINES
The intersection between major drug trafficking routes and terrorist activities has not
been thoroughly studied. But the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has
already recognized the gravity of this problem as part of non-traditional security challenges,
particularly in the context of transnational organized crime.29 As early as 1976, in fact,
the Declaration of ASEAN Concord urged for intensified regional cooperation in order to
prevent and eradicate drug trafficking and narcotics abuse in Southeast Asia.
At least five distinct ways have been identified to show the links between drug trafficking
and terrorism:
1. Supplying cash for terrorist operations;
2. Creating chaos in countries where drugs are produced, through which they
pass, or in which they are sold at retail and consumed — chaos sometimes
deliberately cultivated by drug traffickers — which may provide an environment
10 MARAWI CITY SIEGE AND THE THREATS OF NARCOTERRORISM IN THE PHILIPPINES
intersection of drug trafficking and terrorist activities. Nonetheless, both reports have
recognized the global problem of drugs and terrorism requiring international cooperation
and national capacity building involving not only state players but also civil society
organizations.
The international community, particularly the United Nations (UN), has proposed
various measures to promote international cooperation in combating narcoterrorism. Many
affected countries have also implemented their own domestic counter-measures. These
counter-measures have produced mixed results and unintended consequences that the
Philippine government needs to take into account in policy development and implementation.
As early as 1961, the UN already took action on global drug trafficking problem when
it passed the UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. The 1961 Convention endorsed
a law enforcement based approach to confront drug problem plaguing the international
community. The 1961 Convention criminalizes drug offenses and calls for a strong punitive
action against drug offenders.
In 1988, the UN passed another measure called the Convention Against Illicit Traffic in
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances in order the address criminal violence associated
with illegal drug use. The 1988 Convention recognizes “the links between illicit traffic and
other related organized criminal activities, which undermine the legitimate economies and
threaten the stability, security and sovereignty of States.”39 In 1993, the World Conference on
Human Rights reaffirms the connection between drugs and criminal violence, particularly
violence resulting from acts of terrorism, when it declares:
The acts, methods and practices of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations
as well as linkage in some countries to drug trafficking are activities aimed
at the destruction of human rights, fundamental freedoms and democracy,
threatening territorial integrity, security of States and destabilizing
legitimately constituted Governments. The international community should
take the necessary steps to enhance cooperation to prevent and combat
terrorism.40
14 MARAWI CITY SIEGE AND THE THREATS OF NARCOTERRORISM IN THE PHILIPPINES
At the country level, many countries have waged the war on drugs since the US began
its vigorous campaign in the 1970s. In the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 (9/11)
terrorist attacks, some countries sustained the war on drugs in the context of the war on
terrorism. Addressing the duo of drugs and terrorism informs the present campaign against
narcoterrorism.
The US provides many lessons learned from its wars on drugs and terrorism. When it
first initiated the war on drugs in 1971, the US under the administration of then President
Richard Nixon declared drug abuse as “public enemy number one” after discovering the
heroin addiction of around 15 percent of US servicemen in Vietnam. Nixon increased
federal resources towards the “eradication, interdiction, and incarceration” of drug abusers.
In 1973, the US established the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to replace
the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs. Because of the growing menace of drug
abuse in the US in the 1980s, the US Armed Forces and the Central Intelligence Agency
(CIA) got strongly involved in drug interdiction measures. Since then, the US adopted
more punitive approaches to deter drug use and distribution not only in its homeland but
also in other countries.43
During the administration of President George H.W. Bush, the US declared his new
version on the war on drugs by reducing funding for drug prevention and treatment and
increasing instead the federal budget for anti-drug law enforcement by almost 50 percent.44
As a result, many American drug users suffered imprisonment rather than medical
treatment as the US government viewed drug menace as a law enforcement problem rather
than a public health issue.
By 1994, around one million Americans suffered detention each year due to drug
offenses. When the US waged the war on terrorism in 2001, the figure increased to 1.5
million Americans being imprisoned each year in the 2008 estimates. The US war on drugs
suffered the unintended consequence of racial discrimination as most of those incarcerated
belonged to African-American communities. The US war on terror, on the hand, affected
many Arab-American communities.
The US war on drugs extended overseas. The US deployed the CIA abroad to operate
in drug-infested countries affecting the Americans. The US mobilized the military in
the global campaign against drugs in the context of Military Operations Other Than War
(MOOTW). The US implemented the Operation Just Cause in Panama in 1989, the Plan
Columbia in 1998, the Merida Initiative Mexico in 2008, and the Operation Honduras in
2012.
16 MARAWI CITY SIEGE AND THE THREATS OF NARCOTERRORISM IN THE PHILIPPINES
US Drug Control Spending Vis a Vis US Drug Addiction Rate 1970 - 2010
In Europe, the UK has the highest level of illegal drug use.47 From mere 5,000 users in
1975, it grew to 281,000 in 2007. Thus, the UK also vigorously waged a war on drugs.
The US greatly influenced the development of anti-illegal drugs policy in the UK. The
US pressured the UK to pass the Drug (Regulation of Misuse) Act of 1964 and the Misuse
of Drugs Act of 1971. Like the US, the UK pursued strong punitive actions against drug
addicts. The UK also spent huge money to support its war on drugs. In 2009 alone, it was
estimated that the UK government was spending £16 billion a year in the war on drugs. The
UK followed the US model in criminalizing the illegal use of drugs.
But the UK avoided the pitfall of the US when London started investing more on
treatment programs for offenders by treating them as patients rather than criminals. In
1991, the UK passed a legislation that separated punitive and medical responses to drug
misuse. Though this legislation, the UK implemented treatment programs that tremendously
reduced the numbers of drug offenders to 48 percent based on a 2008 research report.48 As
elaborated by the Global Commission on Drug Policy:
18 MARAWI CITY SIEGE AND THE THREATS OF NARCOTERRORISM IN THE PHILIPPINES
In Southeast Asia, the fiercest battle against drug, thus far, was
in Thailand. During the administration of Prime Minister Thaksin
Shinawatra, Thailand waged a bloody war against drugs that began
in February 2003. At that time, 5 percent (or 3 million) of its 63
million citizens were accused of drug addiction, particularly with
the use methamphetamines, or ‘crazy pills’ as Thai users would call
it. Thaksin pursued an aggressive law enforcement campaign against
drug dealers, users, and traffickers.
Though Thaksin’s war on drugs highlighted the need to
promote public education and awareness against drugs and to treat
drug addicts as patients rather than criminals, the actual practice
22 MARAWI CITY SIEGE AND THE THREATS OF NARCOTERRORISM IN THE PHILIPPINES
Alert, a human rights organization, already warned that involvements of some armed groups in
illicit drugs in Mindanao could aversely affect the Bangsamoro peace process.65 The International
Alert asserts:
The illicit drug economy should be regarded as a strategic concern in the peace
process between the government of the Philippines and the Moro Islamic
Liberation Front (MILF). Left unchecked, the combination of drug-related
corruption and violence is likely to have an adverse effect on the governance
institutions of the future Bangsamoro. Stakeholders in the peace process therefore
need to turn their attention to the drug economy and use the implementation of
the peace agreement as an opportunity to address the drug problem. Priorities
for action include using drug enforcement as a confidence-building measure,
insulating the new Bangsamoro police from corruption, providing alternative
economic opportunities for poor communities, challenging the sense of
impunity among drug criminals, preventing money laundering, and cutting the
links between criminals and politicians.66
crimes.81 The Siege occurred not only because of the collective actions of most of the ISIS
followers in the Philippines but also because of the collective support of various criminal
syndicates engaged in drug trafficking, human smuggling, money laundering, and trafficking
of small arms and light weapons in the tri-border maritime areas of the Philippines, Malaysia
and Indonesia, particularly in the Sulu and Celebes/Sulawesi seas. Transnational organized
crimes provided the resilient support network of ISIS followers in the Philippines to mount
the Marawi City siege.
ISIS followers in the Philippines belong to another network in the country called ISIS
Philippines (ISISP) declared by the US State Department as a foreign terrorist organization on
27 February 2018.82 ISISP belongs to a unified organization called Daula Islamiya Wilayatul
Mashriq (DIWM), the so-called Islamic State Province in East Asia.
Based on the Tactical Interrogation Report of TJ Macabalang (one of the arrested
suspects in the Davao City bombing in September 2016), the organizational structure of
the group is shown in figure below. The overall Leader/Khalifa of DIWM or Daula Islamiya
(DI) for short was Isnilon Hapilon with the following sub groups in the different provinces
in Mindanao;
Farhana Maute and Cayamura Maute (parents of Maute brothers) served the finance
and logistics officers. Mohammad Khayam Maute served as Intelligence and Operation
Officer.
Followers also called the DIWM as Islamic State Philippines (ISP) in their various
messages in the Telegram. The DIWM or ISP had the following sub-leaders based on the
confession of TJ Macabalang:
Because of the strong involvement of the entire Maute family in the establishment of
DIWM, the Philippine government inaccurately described the mastermind of Marawi City
siege as the Maute Group. In various reports, the Philippine government even described the
armed group responsible for the Marawi City siege as ISIS-Maute Group.
But the official name of the Maute Group was Daula Islamiya Fi Ranao (DIFR) or the
Islamic State of Lanao declared in September 2014 when the Maute Family pledged allegiance
to ISIS. Because of the participation of the entire Maute Family in the creation of the DIFR,
it signaled the rise of family terrorism in the Philippines.83
MARAWI CITY SIEGE AND THE THREATS OF NARCOTERRORISM IN THE PHILIPPINES 33
Source: Rommel C Banlaoi, “Maute Group and the Rise of Family Terrorism”, Rappler, 15 June 2017.
34 MARAWI CITY SIEGE AND THE THREATS OF NARCOTERRORISM IN THE PHILIPPINES
Source: International Center for Political Violence and Terrorism Research, November 2017
In the 10th issue of Rumiya, the official magazine of ISIS, the cover story was Jihad in
East Asia, referring to the Marawi City siege. This issue featured an interview with Isnilon
Hapilon described as the Amir of the Soldiers of the Khilafa in East Asia.84 In the interview,
the Rumiya magazine hailed Hapilon as Shaykh Abu Abdillah Al-Mujahir who described
President Duterte as head of “taghut” (anyone who is worshiped instead of Allah) of the
Philippines. In the same interview, Hapilon declared the Armed Forces of the Philippines
as “Crusader Filipino Army.” Hapilon also conveyed his “message to the world” that a Islamic
state “has been established” in East Asia with the siege of Marawi City under his leadership.85
But the military killed Hapilon on 16 October 2017 in a special operation in Marawi City.
Prior to his death, the magazine published several photos of Hapilon and his men
while the Marawi City siege was still going on. These photos indicated that Hapilon and his
men were directly in touch with ISIS Central, which provided operational instructions and
tactical orders to Hapilon. ISIS Central, on one hand, received photos and video footages of
Marawi City siege used by ISIS in its several propaganda materials during the entire duration
of the siege. Through these photos and video footages, ISIS was able to produce several
MARAWI CITY SIEGE AND THE THREATS OF NARCOTERRORISM IN THE PHILIPPINES 35
Meanwhile, ISIS Central regarded the Resorts World Manila attack and the Marawi City
siege as part of its worldwide plan to carry out several jihadist attacks during the month of
Ramadan in 2017. From its several claimed attacks from 26 May to 25 June 2017, ISIS listed
two major attacks in the Philippines: the Marawi City siege and the Resort World Manila attack.
Source: Drug Enforcement Group, Philippine National Police, and March 2018
A year after the Marawi City siege, there is no doubt that combating drugs and terrorism
has been the flagship program of the Duterte government. Despite strong criticisms against
Duterte’s war on drugs due to allegations of human rights violations and extra-judicial
killings, the Third Quarter 2017 Pulse Asia Survey showed that 88% of Filipinos supported
Duterte’s war on drugs. The September 2017 Pew Research Center survey, on the other
hand, said that 78% of Filipinos supported Duterte’s handling of illegal drugs issue while
62% of Filipinos said that the Philippine government was making progress in its anti-drugs
campaign.96
However, the Duterte government’s accomplishments on the war on drugs have not
been effectively synchronized with its war on terrorism. In countering narcoterrorism, there
is still the lack of operational clarity on whether it is pursued under the war on drugs or
under the war on terrorism.
In the war on drugs, the PDEA is the lead government agency in charge of implementing
the Philippine government’s campaign against illegal drugs as directed by President Duterte
on 10 October 2017. The President also issued Memorandum Order Number 17 on 5
December 2017 directing the PNP, the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), and the
Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), the Bureau of Customs (BOC), and the Philippine
Postal Corporation (PCC) “to resume in providing active support to the PDEA in the conduct
of anti-illegal drug operations.” This Order supplements the Executive Order Number 15
issued on 6 March 2017 creating the Inter-Agency Committee on Anti-Illegal Drugs (ICAD)
and National Anti-Illegal Drug Task Force (NAID-TF) “to harness the entire bureaucracy to
assist in the implementation of anti-illegal drugs campaign.” Despite this arrangement, the
Duterte government has not yet clarified on how to counter narcoterrorism in the context of
its war on drugs.
Apparently, the war on drugs only pays attention to the narcotics aspects of
narcoterrorism. It is presumed that the terrorism aspect of narcoterrorism is waged under
the government’s war on terrorism led by the Anti-Terrorism Council (ATC) as the highest
policy-making body in the area of counter-terrorism.
42 MARAWI CITY SIEGE AND THE THREATS OF NARCOTERRORISM IN THE PHILIPPINES
Source: Presidential Communications Operations Office, The Duterte Administration Year-End Report:
2017 Key Accomplishments (Manila: Malacanang Palace, December 2017).
There is, however, a need to understand that drug trafficking organizations and terrorist
groups operate differently despite their increasing collaboration. This presents tremendous
challenge for counter measures.
Legally, organizations accused of drug trafficking and groups accused of acts of terrorism
are tried differently under existing Philippine laws. The Philippines does not have a law
to convict groups or individuals for specifically the specific act of narcoterrorism. These
groups or individuals are either charged of violating illegal drugs laws or anti-terrorism laws.
Even for acts of terrorism, law enforcement authorities avoid using anti-terrorism laws
for suspects. Philippine law enforcement authorities prefer to use the revised penal code
to convict persons for acts of terrorism because they find the Human Security Act (HSA) of
2007, the Philippines’ anti-terrorism law, as difficult to implement due to many human rights
provisions. Thus, there is a move to amend or scrap the HSA to replace it with a tougher anti-
terrorism law. There is also a proposal to enact another anti-terrorism law that is more useful
for law enforcement in order to balance the human rights provisions of the HSA.
MARAWI CITY SIEGE AND THE THREATS OF NARCOTERRORISM IN THE PHILIPPINES 43
been proposed for regulating different aspects of the market – such as production,
vendors, outlets, marketing and promotion, and availability – for a range of products
in different environments.102
Based on important experiences of some countries, those that privilege the hard
approach (war on drugs, crackdown against drug addicts, drug-free society) have led to the
unnecessary criminalization, marginalization and stigmatization of people using drugs but
not harming others. This kind of approach, unfortunately, has enormously failed worldwide
based on scientific studies made by global experts.
According to the Global Commission on Drug Policy, “The global war on drugs has
failed, with devastating consequences for individuals and societies around the world.”103 It
argues, “Vast expenditures on criminalization and repressive measures directed at producers,
traffickers and consumers of illegal drugs have clearly failed to effectively curtail supply or
consumption.”104
While some drug addicts are indeed engaged in crimes and terrorism, not all users are
criminals and terrorists. In most countries, using illegal drugs is a crime. But not all users
are criminals.
Illegal drug users engaged in violent crimes and terrorism should be given punitive law
enforcement actions (hard approach). But illegal users who are not harming others must
be treated as patients needing careful medical attention (soft approach). These users must
receive appropriate health and treatment services and not punitive and law enforcement
actions.
Treating illegal drug users as patients rather than criminals is considered a more humane
and effective approach to address the problem of illegal drug use. China, the Netherlands,
Portugal, Switzerland, and UK provide exemplary practices on how to address illegal drug
problem through public health interventions by creating more treatment facilities and
rehabilitation centers for illegal drug users. But illegal drug users involved in crimes and
terrorism must receive the full force of the law.
Findings from solid scientific studies of experts indicate that countries that have pursued
harsh actions against drug addicts, dealers, and traffickers and have implemented massive
arrest and detention of drug offenders have continued to suffer higher levels of illegal drug
use and its concomitant social problems than countries that have adopted a more tolerant,
humane and softer actions.105
While the hard approach is undoubtedly essential to fight violence and terrorism
associated with illegal drug use, the Duterte government should diligently isolate users
who are not harming others. These users need a soft approach that requires treatment,
rehabilitation and care.
46 MARAWI CITY SIEGE AND THE THREATS OF NARCOTERRORISM IN THE PHILIPPINES
Illegal drug use is a global menace. Its nexus with terrorism further exacerbates the
problem it causes to citizens of the world. Narcoterrorism has become a security problem
that if not quickly abated can undermine world peace and stability. Thus, many countries
have adopted various measures to counter the virulent threat of narcoterrorism.
The Philippines is not spared from narcoterrorism. President Duterte has recognized
the gravity of this problem. From a war on drugs, the Duterte government has launched a
war against drugs and terrorism. The Marawi City siege provided the current government a
strong justification to pursue this two-pronged war.
A war against narcoterrorism undeniably warrants a hard approach that needs strong
law enforcement actions.
But not all users are engaged in crime and terrorism. This type of users needs a soft
approach that privileges humane treatment, rehabilitation and care.
Based on the aforementioned global lessons learned and solid scientific findings of
experts, the Duterte government and his successor must adopt a more humane strategy
against terrorism and illegal drugs that applies both hard and soft approaches. In the fight
against illegal drugs, The Alternative World Drug Report offers policy options and alternatives
that the Duterte government should seriously consider. In the fight against terrorism, the
Duterte government and his successor can also pay serious attention to preventing violent
extremism through the process of deradicalization, counter-radicalization, disengagement,
and terrorist rehabilitation. The Philippine government can legislate the adoption of this
approach to ensure national budgetary allocation.
Countering narcoterrorism is not a job for the slothful. The government needs a deeper
understanding of this threat in order to muster a strong political will to counter it.
Sadly, policy makers are slow to appreciate and too incremental to act on the threat
posed by the rapid transformation of groups and individuals operating in the complex
nexus of crimes and terrorism where narcoterrorism finds itself. Unless the government
learns how to innovate faster and smarter in its policy and actions, threat groups involved in
narcoterrorism will evolve into more perilous forms that will be harder to defeat.
Notes
*Original version of this study was originally 8. Libby Goodell, “Narcoterrorism: The
submitted to the then Director of the now defunct Anti- Growing Threat in Latin America”, Winter
Illegal Drugs Group (AIDG) of the Philippine National 2014 <https://repository.wlu.edu/bitstream/
Police in September 2016. It has been updated to cover the handle/11021/27299/RG38_Goodell_LACS_2014.
most current developments. An abridged version of this pdf?sequence=1>.
study has appeared in Rommel C. Banlaoi, “Threats of 9. Emma Björnehed, “Narco-Terrorism: The Merger
Narcoterrorism in the Philippines,” Rappler, 23 September of the War on Drugs and the War on Terror”, Global
2017. Crime, Volume 6, Number 3&4 (August-November
2004), pp. 306-308.
INTRODUCTION 10. Christine Myers, Insurgency, Terrorism and
TERRORISM, DRUGS, AND THE Drug Trade (Herzliya: International Institute for
SIEGE OF MARAWI CITY
Counter-Terrorism, 31 October 2013). Also see
Sara A. Carter, “Terrorists Teaming with Drug
1. President Rodrigo R. Duterte, Inaugural Speech on
Cartels,” The Washington Times (8 August 2007).
30 June 2016.
11. Rex A. Hudson, Laverle Berry, Glenn E. Curtis, Rex
2. President Rodrigo R. Duterte, Speech delivered at
A. Hudson and Nina A. Kollars, A Global Overview
the ASEAN Convention Center, Fontana, Clark,
of Narcotics-Funded Terrorist and Other Extremist
Pampanga, 7 December 2017.
Groups (A Report Prepared by the Federal Research
3. For an initial analysis, see Rommel C. Banlaoi,
Division, Library of Congress under an Interagency
“Duterte’s Challenges: Terror, Crime and the Abu
Agreement with the Department of Defense, May
Sayyaf,” Rappler, 13 May 2016.
2002).
4. Also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the
12. Cited in Benoit Gomis, “Demystifying
Levant (ISIL). The Arabs call it Daesh, an Arabic
Narcoterrorism”, Policy Brief, Number 9 (Global
acronym for “al-Dawla al-Islamiya fil Iraq wa al-
Drug Policy Observatory, May 2015).
Sham”, known to its members as the Islamic State
13. Brian Dodd, “The Nexus Between Drugs and
(IS) or the Islamic Caliphate.
Terrorism” (A PowerPoint presentation, 2010), <
5. Office of the President, 2017-2022 National Security
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2010homeland/Dodd.
Policy for Change and Well-Being of the Filipino
pdf>.
People (Manila: Malacanang Palace, 2017).
14. Vanda Felbab-Brown, “A Better Strategy Against
Narcoterrorism” (MIT Center for International
WHAT IS NARCOTERRORISM? Studies, January 2006).
15. Jonas Hartelus, “Narcoterrorism” (Policy Paper for
6. Emma Bjornehed, “Narcoterrorism: The Merger of the East West Institute and the Swedish Carnegie
the War on Drugs and the War on Terror,” Global Institute, February 2008).
Crime, Volume 6, Numbers 3-4 (August-November 16. See for example the work of Joint Counter-
2004), p. 306. Narcoterrorism Task Force of the State of Arizona,
7. Rachel Ehrenfeld, Narcoterrorism. New York: Basic United States <https://dema.az.gov/joint-task-
Book, 1990. force-arizona/joint-counter-narcotics-task-force>.
52 MARAWI CITY SIEGE AND THE THREATS OF NARCOTERRORISM IN THE PHILIPPINES
Policy Analysis and Public Affairs, May 2016), p. of the US War on Drugs in Columbia, January 2013
xxiii. < http://witnessforpeace.org/downloads/drug_
43. Suhaib Kebhaj, Nima Shahidinia, Alexander Testa war_delegation_report_02.pdf>.
and Justin Williams, “Collateral Damage and the 57. Latin America Working Group, “The Human
War on Drugs: Estimating the Effects of Zero Rights Costs during Plan Columbia”, February 2016
Tolerance Policies on Drug Arrest Rates, 1975- <http://lawg.org/storage/documents/Human_
2002”, The Public Purpose, Volume 11 (2013), p. 1. Rights_Costs_during_Plan_Colombia.pdf >
44. Ibid, p. 4. 58. Cynthia McClintock, “The War on Drugs: The
45. Report of the Global Commission on Drug Policy Peruvian Case”, Journal of Inter-American Studies
(June 2011), p. 1. and World Affairs, Volume 30, Numbers 2/3,
46. David A. Haupt, Narcoterrorism: An Increasing Special Issue: Assessing the Americas’ War on
Threat of US National Security (Master’s Thesis: Drugs (Summer - Autumn, 1988), pp. 127-142.
Joint Forces Staff College, 6 December 2009). 59. Kelly Hearn, “Success in Colombia shifts drug war
47. Peter Reuter and Alex Stevens, An Analysis of UK to Peru”, The Washington Times (7 May 2012).
Drug Policy: A Monograph Prepared for the UK 60. Yasser Gomez, “Militarization and the War on
Drug Commission (London: UK Drug Policy Drugs in Peru”, 28 October 2008 < https://www.tni.
Commission, 2007), p. 8. org/es/node/4561>.
48. T. Millar, A. Jones, M. Donmall, and M. Roxburgh, 61. Neil Pyper, “How Peru’s drug trade is threatening its
M., Changes in offending following prescribing economic growth”, The Conversation, 29 July 2015
treatment for drug misuse National Treatment < http://theconversation.com/how-perus-drug-
Agency for Substance Misuse, 2008 <http://www. trade-is-threatening-its-economic-growth-45018>.
nta.nhs.uk/uploads/nta_changes_in_offending_ 62. “Thailand’s ‘war on drugs’ International Harm
rb35.pd>. Reduction Association and Human Rights Watch
49. Aaron Akenyemi, “UK and US Target al-Qaida briefing paper “, 12 March 2008 < https://www.hrw.
‘Narco-Terrorism’ Drug Routes in West Africa”, org/news/2008/03/12/thailands-war-drugs>.
International Business Times, 6 July 2014 < http:// 63. Gardner S. Third, “History Lesson: Bloody drug
www.ibtimes.co.uk/uk-us-target-al-qaida-narco- war failed in the long run,” July 2016 < https://
terrorism-drug-routes-west-africa-1455514>. kami.com.ph/25140-history-lesson-bloody-drug-
50. Niklas Swanstrom and Yin He, China’s war on war-failed-long-run.html>.
Narcotics: Two Perspectives (Washington DC: 64. Figures cited in “Thailand battles to contain rising
Central Asia-Caucacus Institute, 2006). drug use”, The Nation, 27 June 2015 < http://www.
51. Ibid. nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Thailand-battles-
52. Ibid. to-contain-RISING-DRUG-USE-30263250.html>.
53. Sheldon X, Zhang and Ko-lin Chin, “A People’s
War: China’s Struggle to Contain its Illicit Drug
Problem”, Foreign Policy at Brookings, 7 June MARAWI CITY SIEGE AND ITS AFTERMATH:
CURRENT STATE OF NARCOTERRORISM
2015 <https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/ IN THE PHILIPPINES
uploads/2016/07/A-Peoples-War-final.pdf>.
54. Xiaobo Su, “China’s Antidrug Policies in Southeast 65. “Illicit drugs and peace: Challenges for the
Asia’s Golden Triangle”, Asia Pacific Bullettin, bangsamoro peace process”, International Alert
Number 234 (23 September 2013). Policy Brief, April 2014.
55. “China Links Terrorism and Drugs in War on 66. Ibid.
Uyghur Groups”, Radio Free Asia, 29 July 2004 67. See Rommel C. Banlaoi, Al-Harakatul Al-
< http://www.rfa.org/english/news/142403- Islamiyyah: Essays on the Abu Sayyaf Group, 3rd
20040729.html>. Edition (Quezon City: Philippine Institute for
56. Witness for Peace Delegation, Report on the Impact Peace, Violence and Terrorism Research, 2012).
54 MARAWI CITY SIEGE AND THE THREATS OF NARCOTERRORISM IN THE PHILIPPINES
68. Rex A. Hudson, Laverle Berry, Glenn E. Curtis, Rex in East Asia”, Rumiya, Issue 10, Ramadan 1438.
A. Hudson and Nina A. Kollars, A Global Overview 85. Ibid., p. 41.
of Narcotics-Funded Terrorist and Other Extremist 86. “ ‘Burn them in their homes’: What IS’ new
Groups (A Report Prepared by the Federal Research propaganda video reveals about their changing
Division, Library of Congress under an Interagency strategy,” The New Arab, 10 August 2017.
Agreement with the Department of Defense, May 87. For more discussions, see Rommel C. Banlaoi,
2002). “The Role of Foreign Terrorist Fighters during the
69. Joseph Hincks, “A Bloody Drug War and an ISIS- Marawi City Siege,” (Lecture delivered at the Border
Linked City Siege Mark Duterte’s First Year in Control Officers Module I Class 18 organized by
Office”, Times 30 June 2017. the Bureau of Immigration Center for Training and
70. Alexis Romero, “Link Between Marawi Siege, Drugs Research of the Philippine Immigration Academy
Confirmed”, The Philippine Star, 25 June 2017. held in Clark, Pampanga on 16 April 2017).
71. Ibid. 88. “Marawi City siege shows foreign fighters being
72. Ibid. drawn to the Philippines as ISIS’ Asian hub,” Strait
73. Amanda Lingao, “Duterte: Terrorism in PH Funded Times, 30 May 2017.
by Drug Money,” CNN Philippines, 13 June 2017. 89. “ISIS claims Manila casino attack despite police
74. “Secretary Ernesto Abella, Press Statement read denial,” CNN, 2 June 2017.
during the Press Conference on 24 September 2017. 90. “ISIS sanctioned if not directed Resorts World
75. “44 Narco execs Fund Marawi Siege,” Manila attack,” Rappler, 2 June 2017.
Bulletin, 24 September 2017. 91. “PNP rules out terrorism as gunman found to be
76. Mick Basa, “Duterte’s new matrix links Maute ex-DOF employee”, The Philippine Star, 4 June
Group to drugs,” Rappler, 24 September 2017. 2017.
77. Catherine Valente, “‘Matrix’ tags drug lords, 92. For a very good graph on how ISIS funds itself, see
politicians in Marawi siege,” The Manila Times, 24 “Funding ISIS”, Washington Institute https://www.
September 2017. washingtoninstitute.org/uploads/Documents/
78. Ibid. infographics/Islamic-State-of-Iraq-and-al-Sham-
79. Amanda Lingao, “Duterte: Terrorism in PH Funded ISIS-Funding.pdf <accessed on 29 March 2018>.
by Drug Money,” CNN Philippines, 13 June 2017. 93. Colin P. Clarke, “ISIS is so desperate it’s turning to
80. Jaime Laude, “Terrorism, drugs top defense chief ’s the drug trade,” RAND, 25 July 2017.
meeting agenda,” The Philippine Star, 29 September 94. National Security Strategy 2018 (Manila: National
2017. Security Council, draft as of 12 February 2018).
81. For more discussions, see Rommel C. Banlaoi, “ 95. Jason Gutierrez, “War on Terror Took Backseat as
“Marawi City Siege and the Nexus of Transnational Duterte Focused on Drug War, Analysts”, Philippine
Crimes and Terrorism in Southeast Asia: Current Daily Inquirer, 30 June 2017.
Threat Assessment and ASEAN Response” (Lecture
delivered at the International Law Forum on the
Philippine Response to Terrorism: Perspectives COUNTERING NARCOTERRORISM: POLICY
and Strategic Actions organized by College of Law, OPTIONS AND ALTERNATIVES FOR THE DUTERTE
GOVERNMENT AND BEYOND
University of the Philippines on 5 April 2017).
82. US State Department, “State Department Terrorist
96. Presidential Communications Operations Office,
Designations of ISIS Affiliates and Senior Leaders”,
The Duterte Administration Year-End Report:
27 February 2018 at https://www.state.gov/r/pa/
2017 Key Accomplishments (Manila: Malacanang
prs/ps/2018/02/278883.htm.
Palace, December 2017).
83. Rommel C. Banlaoi, “Maute Group and the Rise of
97. Jorg Friedrichs, Fighting Terrorism and Drugs:
Family Terrorism”, Rappler, 15 June 2017.
Europe and International Police Cooperation.
84. “Interview with Amir of the Soldiers of the Khilafa
London and New York: Routledge, 2008. 115. See Rommel C. Banlaoi, “Counterterrorism
98. Ibid., p. 1. Measures and Deradicalization Efforts in Southeast
99. The Alternative World Drug Report, 2nd edition Asia: A View from the Philippines” in Henning
(Transform Drug Policy Foundation, 2016). Glaser, ed., Talking to the Enemy: Deradicalization
100. Ibid. p. 10 And Disengagements of Terrorists (Berlin: Nomos
101. Ibid. Verlagsges.MBH + Company, 2017), pp. 91-104.
102. Ibid., pp. 15-16.
103. Report of the Global Commission on Drug Policy
(June 2011), p. 2.
104. Ibid.
105. Ibid., p. 10.
106. See Richard Barrett and Laila Bokhari,
“Deradicalization and Rehabilitation Programmes
Targetin Religious Terrorists and Extremists in the
Muslim World: An Overview” in Tore Bjorgo and
John Horgan (eds), Leaving Terrorism Behind:
Individual and Collective Disengagement (London
and New York: Routledge, 2009), pp. 170-180.
107. Charles E. Allen, “Threat of Islamic Radicalization
to the Homeland” (Written testimony to the US
Senate Committee on Homeland Security and
Government Affairs, Washington DC, 14 March
2007), p. 4.
108. Ibid., pp. 1-2.
109. Omar Ashour, “Lions Tamed: An Inquiry Into
the Causes of Deradicalization of Armed Islamist
Movements: The Case of the Egyptian Islamic
Groups”, The Middle East Journal, Volume 61,
Number 4 (Autumn, 2007), pp. 596-624.
110. Ibid.
111. Angel Rabasa, Stacie Pettyjohn, Jeremy Ghez
and Christopher Boucek, Deradicalizing Islamist
Extremists (Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2010), pp.
1-2.
112. John Horgan, “Individual Disengagement: A
Psychological Analysis” in Bjorgo and Horgan, p.
27.
113. For more discussions, see Rommel C. Banlaoi,
Deradicalization Efforts in the Philippines:
Options for Disengagement Strategy (Quezon
City: Philippine Institute for Peace, Violence and
Terrorism Research, 2013).
114. Angel Rabasa, Stacie Pettyjohn, Jeremy Ghez
and Christopher Boucek, Deradicalizing Islamist
Extremists (Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2010), p.
xiii.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Dr. Rommel C. Banlaoi is the Chairman of the Philippine Institute for Peace, Violence and
Terrorism Research (PIPVTR) and the President of the Center for Intelligence and National Security
Studies (CINSS). He is currently a Professorial Lecturer at the Department of International Studies of
Miriam College and a Faculty Member of the ABS-CBN University’s Journalism Academy where he
facilitates a course on Conflict Journalism.
He provides advisory services to the current Director of the Drug Enforcement Group (DEG) of
the Philippine National Police (PNP).
While performing his work in the academe where he enjoys more than 25 years of experiences,
Dr. Banlaoi has also served as a civilian consultant of the Director of the now defunct Anti-Illegal
Drugs Group (AIDG) of PNP under the Duterte Administration. He became a member of the
Advisory Council of the Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) of the PNP during
the Aquino III administration. He briefly worked at the Office of the Secretary (OSEC) of the
Department of National Defense (DND) during the Estrada Administration and at the Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Plans and Programs (ASPP) of the DND during the Arroyo Administration
during his stint as Professor of Political Science and International Relations at the National Defense
College of the Philippines (NDCP) where he also served as Vice President. He was a Non-Resident
Fellow of the Center for Global Counterterrorism Cooperation (CGC) based in New York City and
a Chairperson of the Council for Asian Terrorism Research (CATR) supported by the Institute for
Defense Analysis (IDA) based in Washington DC. He participated in the Comprehensive Security
Responses to Terrorism (CSRT) Course 09-2 by the Asia Pacific Center for Security Studies based in
Honolulu, Hawaii where he also finished his Executive Course on Security Studies.
The author earned his PhD in International Relations at Jinan University, Guangzhou, China
and he finished his BA and MA in Political Science at the University of the Philippines where he also
worked on his PhD in Political Science (ABD status). He is the author some books, several journal
articles and book chapters including his terrorism trilogy: Philippine Security in the Age of Terror
(CRC Press/Taylor and Francis, 2010), Counter-Terrorism Measures in Southeast Asia: How Effective
Are They? (Manila: Yuchengco Center, 2009), and War on Terrorism in Southeast (Quezon City: Rex
Book Store, 2004), among others. Dr. Banlaoi is happily married to Grace Quilitorio Banlaoi. They
are blessed with three children: Rome Melchizedek (Zed), Ronaiah Gail (Zoe), and Rommel Gian
(Zac).
ABOUT PIPVTR
The Philippine Institute for Peace, Violence and Terrorism Research (PIPVTR) is an independent,
non-stock, non-profit, non-governmental research-oriented organization. It is officially registered
at the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on 29 November 2007 originally as Philippine
Institute for Political Violence and Terrorism Research. It was first conceptualized on 11 September
2005 by Rodolfo “Boogie” Mendoza with the support of Bert Ferro and a group of security experts,
academics and practitioners who saw the urgent need to establish a center in the Philippines dedicated
to the study of political violence and terrorism and their implications for peace and security.
Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita, the founding Chairman of the Philippine Anti-Terrorism
Council (ATC), officially launched the PIPVTR through then Undersecretary Ricardo Blacaflor on 6
March 2008 at the Hotel Intercontinental Manila on the occasion of Protect 2008. Ermita described
the PIPVTR as the country’s “pioneering think tank on terrorism research and studies”. PIPVTR
became a member of the Council for Asian Terrorism Research (CATR), a research partner of the
International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR), and an institutional
friend of the Southeast Asian Research Center for Counter-Terrorism (SEARCCT).
The PIPVTR was renamed as PHILIPPINE INSTITUTE FOR PEACE, VIOLENCE AND
TERRORISM RESEARCH in order to bring peace studies into political violence and terrorism
research. SEC approved this new name on 10 August 2010. PIPVTR launched its new name on 11
September 2010 and became an active member of the peace-building community in the Philippines.
To broaden the research agenda of the Institute in the light of post-9/11 security challenges
that have tremendous impacts on peace, violence and terrorism issues, it establishes the Center for
Intelligence and National Security Studies (CINSS) as its vital research partner.
With the support of CINSS, PIPVTR has organized various events on issues related to terrorism,
South China Sea disputes, Mindanao conflict, and Philippine security relations with other countries.
PIPVTR has also published most of its research works in international and local publications as well
as international and local academic journals. PIPVTR has also provided donor-confidential risks and
threat assessment reports to private firms and international donor agencies.
Philippine Institute for Peace, Violence and Terrorism Research