OPPOSITION lawmakers on Monday asked the Supreme Court to reject President Rodrigo Duterte’s imposition of martial law in Mindanao, branding it unconstitutional.
Duterte declared military rule across Mindanao, home to about 20-million people, on May 23 to quell what he said was a fast-growing threat from the Islamic State group there.
Duterte made the declaration a few hours after Maute group militants flying black IS flags rampaged through Marawi City, triggering clashes with security forces that are still ongoing and have left at least 178 people dead.
The petition filed by opposition lawmakers led by Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman said martial law should be struck down for “utter lack of sufficient factual basis,” as it drew parallels with the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos’s military rule a generation ago.
“The grim specter of repression, atrocities, injustice and corruption again bedevils the Filipino people with the unwarranted, precipitate and unconstitutional declaration of martial law,” said the petition, filed by Lagman and Representatives Tomasito Villarin of Akbayan Party-List, Gary Alejano of Magdalo Party-List, Emmanuel Billones of Capiz, Teddy Baguilat Jr. of Ifugao, Raul Daza of Northern Samar and Edgar Erice of Caloocan.
Under the Constitution, the President may declare martial law and suspend the writ of habeas corpus only “in cases of invasion, rebellion or lawless violence and when public safety requires it.”
“There is no rebellion or invasion where the public safety requires the declaration of martial law and the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in Marawi City or elsewhere in Mindanao,” the petitioners argued.
They said the siege in Marawi was not a rebellion or an invasion, but rather an “armed resistance by the Maute group to shield [Abu Sayyaf leader Isnilon] Hapilon from capture, not to overrun Marawi and remove its allegiance from the republic.”
No less than the military establishment has admitted that the current armed conflict in Marawi City was government-initiated and the armed confrontation was precipitated by the military operation to neutralize or capture Isnilon Hapilon, a high-profile terrorist commander, which was resisted by the Maute group of terrorists, the petitioners said.
Thousands of critics, suspected insurgents and their alleged supporters were jailed, tortured or killed during the martial law regime of Ferdinand Marcos, according to historians.
Shortly after Duterte declared martial law, he praised Marcos’s version and vowed his own would be “harsh.”
The 1987 Constitution imposes limits on martial law to prevent a repeat of abuses under Marcos, including allowing the Supreme Court to review its factual basis.
However, Duterte vowed five days after declaring martial law he would ignore the Supreme Court on the issue, and only listen to the police and military.
“The Supreme Court will say they will examine into the factual [basis]. Why, I don’t know. They are not soldiers. They do not know what is happening on the ground,” Duterte said then.
The petition stated that Duterte’s reasons for declaring martial law were “mostly inaccurate, simulated, false and/or hyperbolic.”
It highlighted one of Duterte’s statements to justify martial law that the militants had beheaded a local police chief.
National police chief Ronald Dela Rosa later said the officer was not beheaded.
The Constitution allows martial law to be imposed only in the event of invasion or rebellion.
The petitioners said the unrest in Marawi did not amount to rebellion, as stated by Duterte.
The Supreme Court has 30 days to rule on the petition.
The Court is expected to tackle the petition Tuesday when it resumes session after a month-long break.
Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III dismissed the petition, saying the lawmakers were “just anti-Duterte, it’s as simple as that.”
“Well, obviously now they are wrong. Even other Asian countries admit there are Daesh [Islamic State] operatives in the Philippines,” he added.
Sotto was among the 17 senators who backed Duterte’s martial law declaration in the southern region.
Senator Francis Escudero said it was the right of the petitioners to question the basis for martial law, but said “it seems quite obvious… that there is an ongoing rebellion in Marawi.”
Senator Juan Edgardo Angara said the petition by minority congressmen was expected and part of democracy.
He said, however, that the issue would become moot once martial law in Mindanao is lifted.
But he also said it was important to talk about it so that there would be additional jurisprudence on martial law.
Liberal Party president Senator Francis Pangilinan backed the House minority petition.
“While we chose not to file a petition after we failed to get the Senate to agree to a joint session, we support the effort to get a factual determination as to the grounds of the declaration,” Pangilinan said.
Senator Joseph Victor Ejercito, on the other hand, said he was confident the Supreme Court would uphold the constitutionality of martial law.
The Palace on Monday maintained that there is actual rebellion in Marawi City and said this justified the declaration of martial law.
“I don’t think anybody can question there is ongoing rebellion right now in Mindanao. With respect to invasion, there are foreign participants. So that too can be a ground,” chief presidential legal counsel Salvador Panelo said.
“There have been civilians killed, soldiers. There have been properties destroyed. There have been invasion of public properties, raising of the ISIS flag, declaring that to be theirs. There is an attempt, the purpose of which is to remove allegiance from the government,” he added.
Ilocos Norte Gov. Imee Marcos expressed her support for Duterte’s proclamation of martial law in Mindanao.
Marcos, daughter of the late strongman Ferdinand Marcos who also declared martial law in 1972, said the people should trust Duterte in making decisions to solve matters of national security.
“We need to help the President and the military in solving this threat,” she said. With John Paolo Bencito, AFP