Petitioners: Gov’t claim of continuing rebellion in Mindanao ‘futile, feeble’

Opponents of the yearlong extension of martial law in Mindanao on Tuesday disputed before the Supreme Court (SC) the government’s argument that a continuing rebellion is taking place in the region.

Speaking at the oral arguments on the consolidated petitions against the extension, Albay Representative Edcel Lagman maintained that there was no longer factual basis to impose martial rule and suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus since the government declared that Marawi City—the center of skirmishes between troops and ISIS-inspired Maute group—has been liberated from terrorist influence.

“Now, Marawi is not burning. The President has confirmed that Marawi is liberated from ‘terrorist influence’: not only from the terrorists themselves but also from terrorist influence,” Lagman said in his opening statement.

“What remain are phantom ‘remnants’ of the vanquished terrorist groups, as admitted by the Executive and his advisers,” he added.

Lagman took exception to the government’s claim that martial rule is needed to quell continuing threats from terror groups and communist rebels, saying the threat of rebellion or invasion is no longer a ground because the 1987 Constitution deleted imminent danger as basis for martial law proclamation or extension.

He added there is “no convincing demonstration that public safety” requires such extension.

“Based on the foregoing, the cavalier assertion that there is ‘continuing rebellion’ in Mindanao is futile and feeble. It does not evince an actual rebellion,” Lagman said.

Lagman also slammed allies of President Rodrigo Duterte in Congress for allegedly railroading the approval of Duterte’s request for extension last month.

“The supermajority virtually acted as the President’s rubberstamp in granting the extension with undue and imprudent haste and without adequate deliberation. Resolution of Both Houses No. 4  is a copycat version of the justifications alleged in the President’s letter,” the lawmaker said.

Former Bayan Muna Representative Neri Colmenares said the bases for martial law extension “were not only contrived but also intended to suppress civil liberties.”

"During the Zamboanga seige in 2014, the government conducted aerial bombings without martial law, conducted house-to-house combat in the city using tanks, set up massive check points all over Mindanao, all without martial law. So what martial law power does government actually want with this inordinately extensive extension?" Colmenares said.

Colmenares urged the SC to “faithfully fulfill its duties as the court of last resort of the people when all other branches of the government have lamentably failed.”

Former Commission on Elections chairperson Christian Monsod said the extension must be nullified since there is “no theater of war, and the fighting with the New People’s Army (NPA) was not a basis for the original martial law proclamation” on May 23 last year.

Representing petitioner former Commission on Human Rights chairperson Etta Rosales, former solicitor general Florin Hilbay said martial law “can only be declared by the president in a theater of war or an area of military operations, where there is a need for the military to take over traditional legislative and/or judicial functions.”

After the opening statements, the magistrates took turns in grilling the petitioners which is ongoing as of posting time.

Solicitor General Jose Calida has since asked the high court to dismiss the petitions, insisting there is factual basis for the extension of martial rule in Mindanao.

"There is rebellion in Mindanao. Until the rebellion is quelled, there is reason to extend martial law and suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus," the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) said in its comment.

“The danger and risks the DAESH-inspired Da'awatul Islamiyah Waliyatul Masriq (DIWM), local terrorist groups, and the NPAs [New People's Army] pose still remain high and the extension of martial law will necessarily address the rebellion being waged by these groups,” it added.

The government said for as long as Congress believes that the rebellion continues to exist, and public safety requires it, the proclamation of martial law and the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus may be extended, subject only to the condition that any such extension be upon the initiative of the President and for a period to be determined by Congress. — RSJ, GMA News