An Analysis of Media Coverage, Judicial Sentencing, and Law Enforcement Perceptions of Drug Trafficking Cases in the Philippines: Implications for Fairness, Effectiveness, and Public Discourse

Biased media coverage of crime entails more negative public perceptions toward crime and the offenders. In the Philippines, this dilemma is rampant; the Philippine media and news tend to portray criminality with exaggeration, often insinuating that criminals and all crimes, regardless of intensity, deserve the stigma. Grounded in the Framing Theory, this study investigated the media coverage of drug trafficking cases in the Philippines from 2019 to 2023. Additionally, the research examined sentencing outcomes in drug-related cases, as determined by the Supreme Court, and covered them in the same timeline. Furthermore, the research explored law enforcers' perceptions of the fairness and effectiveness of these sentencing outcomes. Diverse results were presented by several studies in relation to the three variables. Using descriptive study design and total enumeration, the study analyzed data from 200 news articles, 308 Supreme Court decisions, and 271 law enforcement respondents through content and moderation analyses to identify correlations between media representation, judicial decisions, and perceptions of fairness in drug trafficking cases. The current study of drug trafficking cases in the Philippines (2019-2023) showed fluctuating media attention, procedural lapses affecting judicial outcomes, and a call for reforms from law enforcers, with weak to moderate correlations between media coverage, sentencing outcomes, and crime factors, notably influenced by Supreme Court rulings. As such, this study suggests improved media reporting, stricter chain of custody protocols, and addressing socioeconomic factors to enhance the handling of drug trafficking cases and reduce vulnerabilities in high-risk areas.