Digital vigilantism: where the end does not justify the means
When Boracay was closed in 2018 by virtue of President Duterte’s Proclamation No. 475 declaring a state of calamity in the island of Boracay and ordering its closure for a maximum of six months, two residents of the resort island who lost their means of livelihood together with a regular visitor filed a petition at the Supreme Court questioning its constitutionality.
Describing the island as a paradise, a place of bliss, felicity, and delight that has been disrespected, abused, degraded, over-used, and taken advantage of by both locals and tourists, the majority of the Supreme Court justices declared the proclamation as a valid exercise of the police power of the state and brushed aside the petitioners’ plea of deprivation of their right to work and earn a living as interests that must yield to the welfare of the many.
Justice Alfredo Benjamin Caguioa has strongly dissented, saying: “I cannot, in conscience, give my imprimatur to yet another constitutional shortcut. In a democratic state governed by the rule of law, fundamental rights cannot be traded in exchange for the promise of paradise. Without question, under the rule of law, the end does not, and can never ever, justify the means.”
By constitutional design, police power rightfully belongs to the state, and it is a power so pervasive that many rights of individuals must yield to the common good. The exception, however, is fundamental human rights since the government has the primary duty to protect these rights by all means possible.
Recently, there has been a rising trend of using the common good as a disguise for political ambitions, offering swift justice and retribution against the alleged malefactors using social media as the platform. Some legal scholars call this movement “digital vigilantism”, while others brand this movement as a “digital mob”.
Even if police power rightfully belongs to the state as part of its inherent powers, Justice Caguioa criticized the executive’s action as a constitutional shortcut that cannot be justified with good intentions. To emphasize his strong dissent, the good justice quoted John Milton’s Paradise Lost: “As one great furnace flamed, yet from those flames No light, but rather darkness visible.”
When confronted with the populist movement of digital vigilantism, the good justice certainly will quote John Milton again, saying: “To reign is worth ambition though in Hell: Better to reign in Hell, than serve in Heav’n.”