The utter absence of sufficient factual and constitutional basis for a third extension of martial law in Mindanao was scored in a 35-page memorandum filed by Rep. Edcel Lagman and six other opposition Representatives with the Supreme Court today, February 4, 2019 at 12:16 PM.

The petitioners in G.R. 243522 said that both President Duterte’s letter to the Congress dated December 6, 2018 initiating the extension and the military-police assessment reports failed to link violent incidents committed by local terrorist and communist groups to rebellion or furtherance of rebellion.

In fact, all reports of the military and police establishments failed to show that rebellion was committed in Mindanao during the second extension and no person was captured, arrested or indicted for rebellion during the said period from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2018.

The petitioners contended that since rebellion does not exist or persist in Mindanao, the concurrent element of public safety requirement does not obtain.

Lead petitioner Lagman raised the issue that Proclamation No. 216 can no longer be extended because said proclamation has been rendered functus officio when the Marawi siege was crushed and the prime leaders of the Maute and Abu Sayyaf groups were killed, which led to President Duterte’s announcement on October 17, 2017 that Marawi has been liberated from terrorists and their influence.

An inordinate prolongation of martial law and suspension of the writ of habeas corpus in Mindanao violates the clear constitutional intent for a limited duration of martial law and suspension of the writ or extension thereof, Lagman added.

EDCEL C. LAGMAN