WHY NOT ROBOTS INSTEAD OF TROOPS?

DOES government really think people break the law on purpose? That is, with no other excuse but to show defiance?

When government sends troops and military equipment to virus hotspots like Cebu City, that would seem to be the basis for such action. People are hardheaded and cannot follow rules, therefore threats of state-sanctioned police and military force are needed.

The sight of soldiers in full battle gear and Israeli-made armored vehicles roaming the streets of Cebu City makes one wonder if we are in the middle of a civil war. Government officials tell us that there is an upsurge in the number of coronavirusrelated morbidities. That seems to be the official explanation for the invasion of Cebu by military troops. But, really, does government know something that we don’t?

Is there a clear and present danger in those places? Is the anti-terror bill designed to respond to something that is about to happen somewhere?

Without answers to those questions, I can only say this government has run out of wits to address this pandemic. A public health issue with military solutions?

It looks like the government has used this health crisis as a vehicle for establishing authoritarian rule. Even without the anti-terror bill becoming a law (it will lapse into one in a few days anyway), it has enforced regulations that undermines the sacrosanct provisions of the Constitution, particularly the Bill of Rights. (While at this, I must mention that President Rodrigo Duterte once trashed — perhaps in jest — the Constitution as nothing but a piece of paper. But no one needs to believe him. Elsewhere, the Constitution is still acknowledged as the supreme law of the land. No law — Cyberlibel Law, Bayanihan Law or whatever anti-terror law that may soon come to life — may debase it.)

Let me further note that under ideal conditions, authoritarian rule may have its merits. But our context has been far from ideal. The anti-terror bill may look good on paper, but the devil, it has often been said, is in the details.

This leads to people exercising their rights under the Constitution being arrested and subjected to health risks on grounds that they violate lockdown rules. We see reports on TV about arrests of violators of social distancing protocols, yet they are made to board cramped vehicles.

The arrest and detention of Elmer Cordero, W2, for participating in an illegal rally early this month is too recent an incident to be forgotten.

Cordero was one of what media has labeled as Piston V that rallied in protest for lost wages due to the three-and-a-half-month-old lockdown. Piston, or the Pinagkaisang Samahan ng mga Tsuper at Operator Nationwide, is an association of jeepney drivers and operators. Due to the lockdown, the operation of public transport vehicles, including jeepneys, has been restricted. The rally constituted an offense against lockdown regulations under the Bayanihan Law. But while his companions were later released from detention after they posted bail, Cordero remained locked in for at least four more days. Reports said a local court had certified that he had a pending estafa case. Cordero later admitted in a media interview that he was charged in 2002 for failure to pay rent.

When asked by certain groups to consider the release of Cordero on humanitarian grounds, Palace spokesman Harry Roque Jr. said in one of his media briefings that he (Cordero) must face charges against him “regardless of age...old age does not exempt a person from pending charges.”

Roque, of course, despite years of trying to reach celebrity status, has yet to upgrade from being a talking rubbish to scented dung. He should have known that Juan Ponce Enrile, who had been charged in court for plunder, is free for humanitarian reasons. Then there is the case of Imelda Marcos, convicted for a multibillion-peso graft case but released on bail, with the court taking notice of her health. She is the same lucky lady who celebrated her birthday last year with more than 2,000 guests. Some 200 of them, however, had to be rushed to hospitals for food poisoning. That these things happen at all — the trick is simply unknown to many.

What we know and should be wary about are the perils of militaristic solutions to almost all problems the government is trying to address.

Have we looked at many other possible means to address the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) If we are fond of looking at our seatmates like we did in grade school, we must have noticed how Vietnam, one of the few success stories in Covid response, has mitigated risks of infection among healthcare workers by deploying robots.

Although lacking in resources like the Philippines, Vietnam has managed to promote the safety of doctors and health workers by reducing their exposure to the virus with the help of robots. These robots have the main function of remote communication, remote diagnoses and treatment. Reports say that they “provide safe interface between the doctor and the patient for diagnoses and they enable doctors to see far more patients at a time. They are fully automatic and can be managed from a large distance and provided the added function of tele-medicine and tele-training, that will be very important for the interface between the National Hospital and hospitals in rural areas.”

So far, Vietnam has zero death from 355 positive cases of infections. The Philippines, on the other hand, has 1,255 fatalities from 3V,438 infections. Except for quarantine facilities, Vietnam addressed its side of the pandemic without that much involvement from the military.

Unlike the Philippines, Vietnam asserts its full sovereignty over certain areas in the South China (West Philippine) Sea that are either being claimed by, or under possession of, China. But that is another story.