Hontiveros: Suspects behind Adamson student’s death should be meted ‘full force of anti-hazing law’
MANILA, Philippines — The full force of the Anti-Hazing law should be brought down to perpetrators in the death of chemical engineering student John Matthew Salilig, who allegedly died due to hazing, opposition Senator Risa Hontiveros said on Thursday.
The remains of Salilig, a student of Adamson University, was found in a vacant lot in Cavite last Tuesday, more than a week after he was reported missing.
Hontiveros said that while fraternities and sororities are not illegal, activities involving violence such as hazing should never be tolerated.
“Hazing simply has no place in our society. We should never tolerate violence and criminality, including of this sort,” she said in Inquirer.net’s INQsideLook.
“The full force of the anti-hazing law should be brought down on the perpetrators,” the senator added.
She said the anti-hazing law and other regulations should be “proactively implemented” to avoid a repeat of what happened to Salilig.
Hontiveros, however, said that the law, while it is enough in letter and in spirit,” should be “put to the test” in Salilig’s case in terms of implementation to determine if it needs further amendments.
Police earlier said Salilig was attending the initiation rites of a fraternity–Tau Gamma Phi–in Laguna on the day he was reported missing.
A total of 12 persons allegedly involved in Salilig’s death have been identified, of which nine remains at large.
Police said out of the 12, one is confirmed as a suspect while 11 are persons of interest.
Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla has also ordered the National Bureau of Investigation to conduct a parallel investigation on Salilig’s death.
President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. earlier vowed to the family of Salilig that justice will be served for his death.
Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of Cebudailynews. We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.