The menace of illegal drugs is not yet over even after the relentless “war” that the past administration has waged to combat it. Proof of this is the series of anti-drug operations that netted pushers and users, even the arrest of an actor who was caught with shabu and marijuana. With that scenario, the public once again raised the possibility of mandatory drug tests on celebrities and talents before they can appear on movies or television shows.
In a press conference last week, no less than Philippine National Police (PNP) chief Gen. Rodolfo Azurin, Jr. called on television networks and actors’ groups to help in the campaign against illegal drugs, citing the fact that celebrities should serve as “role models” for the youth. “We encourage them to conduct voluntary drug tests on their talents… we hope that actors and actresses would volunteer to be tested so that it will be proven that many of them are good role models,” the PNP chief said.
Though the message from the PNP is timely and relevant, Senator Robinhood Padilla stressed the “voluntary” aspect of drug testing—that it should not be obligated as it may violate human rights. Instead of focusing only on celebrities and showbiz personalities, the senator called on all government workers and officials to also undergo voluntary drug testing.
Rep. Robert Ace Barbers of Surigao del Norte supported Padilla’s call, which encourages voluntary drug testing. Barbers, who is also chairperson of the House Committee on Dangerous Drugs, has filed resolutions calling for members of the House to submit themselves to a mandatory drug test before assumption to office, and every year thereafter. He also thinks that it is not unconstitutional to implement mandatory drug tests as these are done, for example, to those who will apply for a firearm license or those who engage in sports competitions. He also added that it is the right of every employer (government or private) to craft anti-drug policies in the workplace and compel their employees to undergo drug testing.
The “mandatory” part here is quite controversial as some quarters of the population do not agree with it and would rather have it as “voluntary.” In a study by the International Labour Organization, it stated that employers in favor of mandatory workplace drug testing cite “business safety in terms of productivity and property” and that they have a “duty to provide a safe working environment for all.” Meanwhile, opponents argue that it raises “a range of ethical violations, including the confidentiality of personal information and whether an employer has a right to know what employees do outside of working hours.”
To create a drug-free workplace requires the cooperation of all. Any employer should not “force,” but instead, make drug testing a transparent process, allowing each employee the chance to participate in a non-discriminatory and non-judgmental way. And if there are those who have fallen by the wayside, employers need to provide the appropriate rehabilitation and treatment. Employees, on the other hand, should also realize that there is nothing to benefit from illegal drugs and that it is something that must be avoided at all costs.
In the end, “mandatory” or “voluntary” will not matter as long as one keeps away from illegal drugs. And like what Padilla did last week when he submitted himself to a voluntary drug test at the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency office, he tested negative, confident that his example will soon be followed by both showbiz and government personalities.