Can Barangay Officials Carry Firearms?

A barangay official in Pampanga had been criticized recently when a photograph showed him carrying a long firearm while manning traffic along a portion of the national highway.

Sun Star Pampanga reported that the barangay official justified his actions by saying that he was just responding to a robbery incident where a couple were shot and robbed by robbers riding in motorcycles.

Photo credit news.am.

Besides "barangay executives may carry firearms during hot pursuit operations" he further justified.

Which I believe to be partly correct because the law indeed allows barangay chairmen to bear arms, subject to appropriate rules and regulations. 

But brandishing a firearm by someone not properly identified in a national highway could not only cause alarm to passing motorists but could also be technically wrong, or even illegal.  A national highway is no longer barangay territory although it may be passing through a barangay.

The barangay chairman in question cited Section 389 of the Local Government Code which states that "In the performance of his peace and order functions, the punong barangay shall be entitled to possess and carry the necessary firearm within his territorial jurisdiction, subject to appropriate rules and regulations".

Speaking of “appropriate rules and regulations”, what are these rules?  And who issue the rules?

One time I saw a barangay chairman signed documents on the firearms issued to him by the provincial capitol.  Was the provincial government the one issuing the firearm or was it just merely facilitating it for the PNP?

In another instance, I witnessed the issuance of shotguns several years back by a senator (now a congressman) to the barangays of a town.  I learned that this was from his CDF funds or more notoriously known as “pork barrel”.  This former senator turned congressman is the father of an ex-congressman who is currently subject of a COA investigation. 

But that is another story.

My point here is this, are congressmen allowed too to issue high-powered firearms such as shotguns to barangays?  

Unfortunately, one of these shotguns was not used according to “appropriate rules and regulations”.  It even cost the life of a barangay constituent. 

A barangay chairman of the town who received one of these shotguns allowed a tanod in his barangay to use it in his regular patrols.  Take note that Section 389 specifically prescribes that only the chairman is authorized to carry firearms. 

One time the barangay hall received a call that a drunk was creating trouble in the neighborhood.  When the tanod arrived at the area to pacify the troublemaker, he was attacked by the drunk with a bolo.  Acting in self-defense, he was forced to use the gun on the man, according to those who witnessed the incident. The man died instantly from the shotgun’s blast to his face.

Because of this incident, this tanod who’s obviously just doing his job is now facing charges and is only out on bail.  Not because rules on handling firearms in the barangay was the issue.  He’s in trouble because of the election ban on carrying of firearms during an election period! Talking of technicalities.

Anyway, this issue of carrying firearms by barangay officials makes me ask questions. 

What should be the protocols?  Are barangay chairmen the only ones that should be allowed by law to carry firearms?  Should it not extend to qualified tanods as well? 

When you hear about sightings of armed men roaming around in your neighborhood in the middle of the night and the tanods are helpless to do anything about it, you might say yes to the idea.

Considering the shortage of policemen in our country, arming the tanods could be one great way of preventing crimes in our communities.    

But then again utmost care must be taken when we allow this. 

First, there must be a “rethinking” in the way we recruit, train and deploy tanods or village watchmen or barangay police or whatever, before we ever think of the idea of arming them. 

Photo credit sz-n.com

Unlike in advanced countries with relatively low crime rates such as Switzerland where it is required for everyone to own and be well trained in handling of firearms, we are not yet ready and are too “primitive” for this.

Oh well, maybe it’s just wishful thinking, but what a nice wishful thought. 

Imagine, not even Hitler dared in World War II to invade this country of well-trained militias and where requiring everyone to have a firearm and be good at using it is the rule rather than the exception.

No wonder most of the Popes throughout history trust only the Swiss guards to protect them.