REVISITING POLICE RECRUITMENT AND TRAINING PROTOCOLS

REVISITING POLICE RECRUITMENT AND TRAINING PROTOCOLS Recently retired Philippine National Police (PNP) Chief Rommel Francisco Dayrit Marbil, publicly expressed concern over the seemingly endless stream of misdeeds committed by police officers during his watch. His frustration is understandable—despite disciplinary actions, administrative penalties, and dismissals, errant cops continue to tarnish the institution’s image. But perhaps the real solution lies not in merely reacting to misconduct, but in re-examining the very foundation upon which the force is built: its recruitment and training protocols. At the core of this issue is a crucial question: Who do we allow to become police officers? Recruitment is the first line of defense in ensuring the integrity of the police force. If individuals with questionable backgrounds, weak ethical foundations, or unchecked aggressive tendencies are admitted into the system, it is only a matter of time before they misuse their authority. The old saying, "Do not tempt the mortals," applies. Giving someone a badge and a gun without fully evaluating their mental, emotional, and moral fitness is like handing matches to someone without checking if they have pyromaniac tendencies. In theory, the PNP has a recruitment process that includes physical fitness exams, psychological tests, background checks, and panel interviews. But how rigorously are these being enforced? Are psychological evaluations merely formalities, or are they truly screening out potential liabilities? Are background checks being conducted thoroughly, or are personal connections and influence playing a bigger role in admissions? Even more critical is what happens after recruitment. Training is not just about physical endurance and marksmanship; it must also emphasize values formation, human rights education, community relations, and de-escalation tactics. Unfortunately, reports have emerged over the years about toxic hazing, outdated instruction styles, and rote learning dominating police academies. Worse, there seems to be insufficient post-academy supervision—field training officers are often overwhelmed or inadequately equipped to mentor new officers effectively. Additionally, refresher courses and continuous professional development must be institutionalized. Policing in a democratic society requires not just brute force, but discernment, empathy, and a solid grasp of legal limitations. Without ongoing education, officers may revert to authoritarian impulses or be swayed by the influence of corrupt peers. There must also be accountability in the training hierarchy. Are instructors themselves properly vetted? Are they teaching the correct procedures? Are there evaluations of the training programs to assess their effectiveness in real-world policing? If not, then reform is necessary not just at the bottom, but throughout the chain of command. Perhaps the newly appointed PNP Chief Nicolas Deloso Torre III should prioritize a full audit of both recruitment standards and training protocols. This should be data-driven, transparent, and ideally include consultation with civil society, criminology experts, and the Commission on Human Rights. If the PNP truly wants to regain and sustain public trust, it must ensure that only the most qualified and principled individuals are recruited, trained, and promoted. A stronger, cleaner force begins not in the field—but at the very gates of Camp Crame. Ramon Ike V. Seneres, www.facebook.com/ike.seneres iseneres@yahoo.com, 09088877282, senseneres.blogspot.com 06-26-2025