Popular Justice or Populist Justice? Penal Populism and Its Impact on Democracy

Populism, a pervasive phenomenon in contemporary politics, manifests as an anti-establishment, anti-pluralistic, morally charged framing that advocates for direct rule between leader and populace. Among its variants, penal populism emerges as a particularly concerning manifestation. It is characterized by a leader's deployment of panicking, punitive, and politically targeted rhetoric to enhance social control and accrue political capital rather than address crime prevention. This research argues that penal populism poses the most significant threat to democratic rule, as evidenced by theoretical, framing, and mobilization analyses. A novel categorization of populist variants is proposed based on dimensions of social categorization and exclusivity. Within this framework, penal populism represents the most coercive form, employing criminalization as its primary target and advocating the broadest spectrum of exclusivity. Secondly, the study examines how penal-populist framing criminalizes social issues and targeted groups under the guise of law and order. Thirdly, the research utilizes the case of Rodrigo Duterte to illustrate penal-populist framing and mobilization. Duterte, exemplifying a typical penal populist, employed four rhetorical devices: problematization, dramatization, stigmatization, and dictatorization to generate moral panic and legitimize his social control and extrajudicial violence. Additionally, Duterte's implementation of the Narco list served to stigmatize political rivals. While Duterte's penal-populist rhetoric failed to influence elections as anticipated, the Narco list notably incited extrajudicial violence against listed political elites. The study concludes by proposing policy recommendations to counter penal populism, including enhanced media literacy and community policing.