President Rodrigo Duterte’s request for the Congress to extend martial law in the entire Mindanao for one more year amounts to a:
- patent violation of the safeguards which the 1987 Constitution imposes for the limited grounds and duration of martial law and its extension;
- malevolent perpetuation of the subjugation of the supermajority in the Congress by the President even against the unequivocal provisions of the Constitution protecting civil liberties and the rule of law; and
- blatant mockery of the liberality of the majority of the Supreme Court in upholding the President’s past questionable actions.
Where is the actual invasion or actual rebellion in Mindanao? The Constitution provides that martial law can only be declared and its extension authorized in case of invasion or rebellion when public safety requires it.
Since the original or initiatory declaration of martial law is limited to not more than 60 days, it stands to reason that any extension is subject to the same constraints with respect to duration and grounds.
There is no more factual basis for the extension of martial law in Mindanao after President Duterte declared the liberation of Marawi City from rebels and terrorists almost two months ago, and government combat forces had been withdrawn.
The Philippine National Police (PNP) and the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) recommended the extension of martial law in Mindanao for another year purportedly to contain continuing threats by terrorists. This is not a constitutional ground because threat or imminent danger of an invasion or rebellion has been removed as a ground for martial law in the 1987 Constitution for being self-serving, contingent and even nebulous.
It is even arguable that not more than one extension is allowed because a series of extensions would violate the constitutional intent for a limited martial law duration, and the phraseology of the Constitution only authorizes the extension of “such proclamation” (original declaration), but not any extension thereof.
The President’s alternative is to call the armed forces to subdue lawless violence or declare martial law anew but limited by constitutional restraints and subject to the oversight powers of the Congress and the Supreme Court.
EDCEL C. LAGMAN