A question of power: Why was ‘boxing champion’ Torre removed as PNP chief?

Jea Nicole Jacot

From the high-profile arrests of Duterte and Quiboloy to the “charity” boxing match dare from a missing-in-action Baste, General Nicolas Torre III has never stopped hitting headlines as the then-appointed Philippine National Police (PNP) Chief. Now, taking the spotlight once more, he becomes a symbol of questioned authority, a proof that even the country’s national police chief may not be all that powerful as we think he is.

On August 25, Torre was informed through a letter from Malacañang about his immediate relief from position. Less than three months into the job, the 85-day stint equates to the shortest in PNP Chief history, leaving the public shocked as his term — which still had four years to fill — was one that earned him national popularity. Marcos Jr. himself had even gone off-script in his State of the Nation Address to pride him as the “new champion.” So one had to ask why, after praising what must have been a series of strong punches, did the president bring his top cop out of the ring too soon?

Police force probed

Though the news came as a surprise to many, Torre had already been caught in circles of recent controversy that may have led to his removal.

Earlier in August, the National Police Commission (Napolcom) ordered the reversal of the assignments and reassignments of high-ranking senior PNP officials, consisting of 13 police generals and colonels, initially approved by Torre. 

Dispute first stirred with the swapping of positions between now-PNP chief Police Lieutenant General Jose Melencio Nartatez and Police Lieutenant General Bernard Banac.  Torre ordered the two to switch posts on August 6, but the appointment came only briefly as Nartatez was immediately brought back as his second-in-command in adherence to the Resolution 2025-0531 issued by Napolcom. As stated in a 2019 memorandum, the commission has the authority to oversee all promotions and appointments for officers ranking from police colonel to police general.

“Any designation, assignments, reassignments without prior review and confirmation of the Napolcom shall be deemed ineffective,” the resolution read. “Non-compliance with the requirements herein prescribed shall subject accountable officers to administrative sanctions.”

It was signed by Napolcom chairperson and DILG Secretary Jonvic Remulla along with other agency officials. Torre, however, did not sign the resolution and went on in recognizing Banac as the PNP’s deputy chief for administration in a flag-raising ceremony on August 18.

In a press conference held following Torre’s relief, Remulla confirmed that Torre’s defiance to the directive was indeed one of the reasons he was removed from the post by the president.   “That, among other things, is part of the consideration of the President […] the president saw it necessary that the institution of the PNP and Napolcom be upheld according to the spirit of the law,” he said, making clear that it was a matter of respecting institutional hierarchy, the chain of command, over a single police chief’s authority.

Napolcom’s authority over PNP

While reported as an order by the president, much of the decision is speculated to have stemmed from Napolcom’s move in the appointment of PNP officials, which brings us to ask: how much authority does it have over the national police?

Under the 1987 Constitution, the Napolcom — a civilian oversight body of the DILG — has the right to “exercise administrative control and operational supervision”  over PNP. It branches out to three main units,  the commission proper, staff services, and the Disciplinary Appellate Boards. To name a few, it consists the Secretary of the agency, who serves as the ex-officio chairperson, civilian commissioners who must not be active or former members of the police or military, one regular commissioner from the law enforcement sector, and the PNP chief as an ex-officio member. The president would also have to choose one of the three commissioners to be Napolcom’s vice chairperson and executive officer.

The commission has a wide breadth of responsibility over the PNP,  including investigating police errings, handling the dismissal of misbehaving officers, and facilitating police entrance exams. But what’s worth paying attention to in relation to Torre’s case is its power to consult the president on police functions and administration. Did the agency play a major role in influencing Marcos Jr.’s decision? 

In defense of Napolcom, Remulla clarified that although Torre’s non-compliance was one among other reasons for his exit, no sanction was being done. “The Napolcom has not taken any sanctions as a body, nor has it been discussed, nor has it been filed. This is a personal decision of the President,” he said.

As Torre continues to carry his status as a four-star general, the public is left to wonder if this recent decision had leaked signs of leadership instability in the PNP. Amid talks of a possible crisis within their body, Remulla maintained that the decision was made for the sake of institutional integrity and said that “politics is out of the equation.” But can this matter even be separated from politics?

Politicking lives, popularity dies

At the peak of the earlier Napolcom reassignment dispute, police officials and alumni of the Philippine National Police Academy backed Torre, calling the resolution  “abusive” and one “that overturned a lawful order issued under the Chief PNP’s authority.” 

Senior police officials insist the move violates the police chief’s legal authority under Republic Acts 6975, 8551, and 9708, laws that supposedly grant the chief full control and supervision over the PNP officers.

Beyond the police force, his removal from office also drew concerns from lawmakers.  Mamamayang Liberal party-list Representative Leila de Lima, for one, questioned the decision in a post on X (formerly Twitter) saying, “They better have a good reason in doing that to a very popular, much appreciated and high-performing PNP Chief!”. 

Akbayan party-list Rep. Percival Cendaña, on the other hand, noted that those involved in fraudulent flood control projects should be subject to the same treatment as Torre. The statement came alongside talks regarding Torre’s possible appointment to another position to join the ongoing probe. 

For others, his removal was both a symptom and a telltale sign of a larger crisis in PNP leadership.

While police officials called out the “abusive” move towards the ex-PNP chief, Makabayan Bloc through ACT Teachers party-list Rep. Antonio Tinio and Kabataan party-list Rep. Renee Co saw it as an “abuse” not to a single authority but towards the Filipinos.

Deeming it an issue reflective of the internal corruption under Marcos Jr.’s administration, Co said, “A simple reshuffle would not solve the long-standing problems of the PNP which is being used as a weapon to abuse the people.”

Co’s statement is one to ponder on now that two days after his removal, Torre was offered another government position by Marcos Jr. “He is being considered for another position because the President still believes in his capacity,” Remulla said. 

While the position offered has yet to be disclosed, the public anticipates Torre’s response — if he is to accept the new post or to retire.  Was the offer decided to prevent public backlash, or a genuine sign that, despite conflicts within the PNP hierarchy, Marcos still trusts his top cop?

Though a figure applauded by many, the debate was never just about who is popular, but of who knows how to throw the best punches in the game of politics. As Remulla himself put it, the issue is “not a popularity contest.” Holding the seat of a PNP chief is about surviving power structures — and politics is never out of the equation, it runs the game.