Martial Law in the Promise of Change
I have spoken against the declaration of martial law by PRRD on several occasions and the reactions I get would include, “you are a protector of the Maute,” “naa ka sa payroll sa NPA no,” or “ikaw na lang pag president kay hawd man kaha ka.”
Comments like these signify the demise of critical discourses especially on issues of national concern. By doing so, we are already burying the culture of dissent and counter-consciousness with the reduction of the discussion into “yellowtards” vs “dutertards” lenses. We must embrace the democratic space we have fought for, some three decades ago. Therefore, I refuse to succumb to those arguments for my loyalty is not with anyone but only to the constitution of the Philippines and all its duly constituted laws.
The President is afforded the power to declare Martial Law under the constitution, to wit: “The President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of the Philippines and whenever it becomes necessary, he may call out such armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion. In case of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety requires it, he may, for a period not exceeding sixty days, suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or place the Philippines or any part thereof under martial law.” (Article VII, Section 18)
If the question is, CAN the president declare martial law? Then the answer is clear – YES, because the constitution says so. But SHOULD the president declare martial law, I would say, it was not necessary.
In the constitutional powers granted to the president, martial law is conceived to be the last card should all other mechanisms fail. According to constitutionalist Fr. Joaquin Bernas, SJ, the powers in section 18 are “graduated powers,” each varying in degree of severity in order to address the situation on ground, with the calling out powers being the “mildest” and most easily available, and martial law being that of last resort.
Since, September of 2016 the president subjected the entire country to a state of national emergency and called upon the AFP to prevent lawless violence following the Roxas night market bombing. This is still in effect until today. Here, the president may still use the full force of the AFP to ensure that acts of lawlessness, rebellion or invasion are suppressed. The more basic question is, what can the president do under martial law that he cannot do under his calling out powers during the state of national emergency? To my mind, there is none. The president did not optimize yet his calling out powers and hastily declared martial law.
Being the last resort, the declaration of martial law must consider the gravitas of the rebellion or invasion (granting there was), upon which it is based. The factual basis must be such that the integrity and life of the state is in imminent danger. Considering the fact that the local government of Marawi was still functioning and the military officers claiming that the situation in Marawi was under control, the martial law is therefore an excess of what was imperative given the situation.
In Presidential Proclamation 216, the president based the declaration of martial law for the entire island of Mindanao on the alleged rebellion by the Maute group in Marawi and some previous incidents in Lanao del Sur. The question now, “is there an actual rebellion in Mindanao to warrant the declaration?”
Article 134 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No.6968, provides that "the crime of rebellion or insurrection is committed by rising and taking arms against the Government for the purpose of removing from the allegiance to said Government or its laws, the territory of the Republic of the Philippines or any part thereof, of any body of land, naval or other armed forces, or depriving the Chief Executive or the Legislature, wholly or partially, of any of their powers or prerogatives."
Towards this end, the proclamation alleged that the Maute terrorist group has taken over a hospital in Marawi City, Lanao del Sur, established several checkpoints within the City, burned down certain government and private facilities and inflicted casualties on the part of Government forces, and started flying the flag of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in several areas as acts of rebellion.
Crucial to the definition of rebellion is the purpose of the uprising – to remove allegiance to the government, to remove the territory of the government or any part thereof, or deprive the government of its powers. It is my humble submission that the factual circumstances do not constitute rebellion.
The government categorically calls the Maute group as terrorists. What terrorists do is not an act of rebellion but simply sowing seeds of fear to disrupt the harmony that there is between peoples of all faiths in Mindanao. The use of violent force is only incidental to their primary goal of radicalizing the Filipino Muslims – to proselytize through terror and advance one and only one extreme belief. This is no rebellion. This is violent extremism.
On the other hand, secretary Delfin Lorenzana of DND justified that because of security issues in other parts of Mindanao, the entire island was declared under martial law. This to me is a dangerous and sweeping conclusion where a defense secretary equate rebellion with security issues. The constitution is clear – declare martial law where there is rebellion and not where there are security issues.
And just an aside, since invasion is also being used as justification in the public pronouncements of our authorities, I do not think that invasion can be successfully carried out by the presence of only six foreigners. I bet invasion needs more to effect a complete take over.
During this time of crisis, the peoples of Mindanao have shown compassion for one another. Many shared their homes for the displaced, protected one another, gave food and water – all these without regard to religion but on sheer humanity. For this alone, I believe that the Filipinos have won the war against the terrorists. They lost in their attempt to sever the bonds that tie the peoples of Mindanao. The good Muslims remain to be good. The good Christians remain to be good as well. There is still faith in humanity.
(Photo Credit: Rappler.com)
