Does every martial law is a prologue to dictatorship? The Philippines has suffered a lot from the Marcos regime. And we could not deny that its repercussions are still present and immensely threatening the economic, political and judicial aspects of this country. Whenever there is a need for the suspension of the writ of Habeas corpus and declaration of martial law, Filipino's minds are conditioned to resist without any analysis. But this might be the time for calibrating such thinking, to begin with, we need to realize that martial law in Mindanao at President Duterte's term did not result in an autocratic dictatorship.
In studying this topic, knowledge about historical facts and provisions of the Constitution refering to Martial law is a must. As we all know martial law is a suspension of all civil norms, establishing a military court and eventually preside to one-man rule. As per 1987 Constitution, the chief executive has the power to declare martial law. Also, the writ of habeas corpus may be suspended before proclaiming martial law. The writ of habeas corpus is not new in the Philippine history, it was first suspended in the time of American occupation to suppress the insurgency in provinces of Batangas and Cavite under Governor-General Francis Smith. President Elpidio Quirino did the same in 1950 to combat the HUKBALAHAP during his administration. The prominent suspension of this writ was in 1971 by the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos after the bombing of Plaza Miranda. And the recent one was in 2009 under the Aroyo administration due to the Maguindanao Massacre. It is so important to reminisce all these events to understand the relevance of writ of habeas corpus to martial law, the writ of habeas corpus was derived from the Latin word which means you “may have the body'. Under this, the state shall present the accused before the court of law to validate the lawfulness of an arrest. If this will be suspended the state can deprive liberty of anyone without proper adjudication of the court and the right to bail, right to have counsel, right to be heard, warrant of arrest and all other forms of civil safeguards will be withdrawn. The writ of habeas corpus shall be suspended if there is rebellion, suppression and proper discretion if the public safety requires it, under the 1987 Constitution, Sec 13 Article 3. With all these given facts we can say that it is so dangerous to omit this from the public and so the proclamation of martial law.
The remarkable declaration of martial law in the country was on September 23, 1972, by Ferdinand Marcos under the virtue of proclamation 1081. Martial Law under the Marcos regime was described as a time of severe economic crisis, political oppression and unprecedented graft and corruption by Alice Guillermo, professor at UP Diliman. After that declaration, it serves leverage for Marcos to place himself as a dictator and committed culpable violation of fundamental laws of the land, Universal declaration of human rights and establishing a monopoly. That proclamation gives way to Marcos to amend, revised and ratified a new constitution for a new form government which is a parliamentary government, he put himself as a president which is powerful than his prime minister, Cesar Virata. These actions extended the time of Marcos in the seat of power, for it took 20 years until the regime ends. Maneuvering the purpose of martial law to align it for the vested personal interest is the same reason why there is a clamor protest against martial law in Mindanao by President Rodrigo Duterte. On May 23, 2017, a group of rebels claimed to be a member of Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) conquered the municipal hall of Marawi city and raised the flag of ISIS to inculcate the radical idea of an Islamic state in Mindanao. Which the local rebel is known to be the Maute Group. The government agency was tied up and sovereignty was put at risk at that time. The rebels are prepared with tactics and equipped of the high powered rifle, ammunition,on and weapon to take down the government forces. In line with that Armed Forces needed to put a 0 kilometer to raise the awareness to the public that it was not simple combat against insurgency but instead a total all-out war. That being said the president came into action to provide sufficient assistance to our military, by having the proclamation 216 placing the entire island of Mindanao under Martial law and so the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus. The degree of the rebellious act was not countered by the government by just a couple of days. The element of surprise and the presence of powerful aide from international terrorists gives an advantage to the rebels. It came to a point that the hope of defeating rebels may become impossible. So the martial law needs to strengthen. According to the 1987 Constitution, Article 7, Section 18, states that the martial law existence and suspension of the writ of habeas corpus shall be on 60 days. And Congress needs to be on session to examine its lawfulness. They agreed to extend it until the end of 2017. After the victorious crusade of our troops against rebels, Marawi city is freed from lawless violence and insurgency. But the martial law extends four times until the end of 2019.
First I would argue about the necessity of the proclamation 216. Based on the factual observable events the lawlessness of that time was immense that might destroy the sovereignty of the state in Mindanao. Some would say that the territorial extent of the proclamation is not reasonable. But the rebellious act in the island of Mindanao is not contained in just one city before Marawi nearby cities and provinces have been placed for practicing insurgency and as we all know the rebel groups are not limited into only one place but in all extent of Mindanao, they are more than five major groups waiting for the position of strength to initiate an attack. The war at Marawi weakens the number of our troops in other provinces of Mindanao and it might be the best timing for other entities to cause war against our soldiers. This was prevented by the inclusion of the entire island of Mindanao under martial law. Second to evaluate is the benefit of extending the Martial Law and suspension of the writ of habeas corpus, under our Constitution, it is only limited to sixty days that the president may lawfully do it. Now it will be the Congress which going to adjudicate its extension. Well, in fact, the President presents himself before in Congress in a writing to summarize the situation, and Congress decided that it is so beneficial to extend it until the end of 2019. It is a total of two years and six months that Mindanao is under martial law. I think it is beneficial for the people of Mindanao to assure their total security while recovering from the war. It would also be a preventive action of the government to restraint radicalism on the island. And there is no single objection heard from people of Mindanao, it is only the residence of Luzon which clamoring on its extension, well, in fact, the war was one major island apart from them. Third I must discuss the legality of whole the aspect of proclamation 216. The provision of suspension of the writ of habeas corpus and martial was not removed by the framers of the Constitution. For one reason that it is part of the police power of the state. It is an element to control the liberty of individuals for the common good. The inherent power of the state is irrevocable and can't be null or void. And so it’s power continues as the existence of Continuing State Doctrine. But the state cannot perform it’s will and need to address everything to its agent, which will be the government. But as we know the government is temporal and might be subject to corruption. That’s why the framers of the Constitution heavily guarded the proclamation of martial law and suspension of habeas corpus. In the case of proclamation 216, it’s was under legal proximity of the fundamental laws. The president clearly not maneuver the provision for his vested will but instead, it was based on being a “parens Patriae” or parent of the country. That time the fear and agony of the people motivated him for the proclamation. He also not take for granted of being a chief executive but instead, he allows separation of powers to lead. Congress decided to extended martial law and suspension of the writ of habeas corpus under the military report and degree of threat to our national security. Concerning this, laws are not violated but instead, the sharing of powers within the branches of the governments has been promoted.
To conclude, martial law is not always a prologue to dictatorship. President Duterte justifies this by saying that his going to end martial law at the end of 2019 without any promotion of extending it. That was also the advisement of defense secretary Lorenzana. Also, we can rely on our constitution concerning this topic, any citizen may question martial law at the Supreme Court. The Supreme court can legally check and lawfully decide if there is a factual basis of declaring martial law. The farmers of the Constitution also added safeguard that while martial law is governing all civil courts remain operational. And the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus covers only individuals who are charged with rebellion. With that all presented we can say the martial law in our country would not be the same as the Marcos regime. It would never be fertile for an autocratic dictatorship nor a tool for totalitarian government.
References:
Introduction to the Philippine Government and Politics
The Criminal Justice System in the Philippines
Marxism in the Philippines: continuing engagements
Comments
Post a Comment