|
Sunday, February 26, 2006
Legal battle looms over emergency state proclamation
THE Arroyo administration and the opposition are headed for a collision in court over Proclamation 1017 issued by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo whereby she placed the entire country under a state of emergency following an aborted coup attempt last Friday.
This, as the proclamation earned more flak Saturday, most notably from former President Fidel Ramos, who is widely perceived as slowly withdrawing support from President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.
Malacanang however was unfazed by the strong criticism it got over Proclamation 1017 and welcomes any suits in court questioning its legality.
Cibac party-list Representative Emmanuel Joel J. Villanueva said in a television interview that the minority bloc in the House of Representatives, of which he is a member, will go to the Supreme Court (SC) on Monday to question Proclamation 1017.
Senate Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel Jr. said in a separate interview that he will also question Proclamation 1017 before the high court.
Ramos, for his part, said he was "appalled" and "dismayed" by the act. "It is an overkill in fact," he added.
It was by far Ramos' strongest criticism of Arroyo.
In an ABS-CBN News Channel (ANC) interview, Ramos said there was no need to place the entire country under such a state and it could have only been declared in Metro Manila.
Ramos also deplored the lack of implementing rules and regulations to accompany Proclamation 1017 so that military and police officials, the public, and the media can understand and know the limits of such declaration.
He also said the Palace should have stated until when the state of national emergency will be in effect because the longer it stays, the more it adversely affects the economy.
"It sends a bad signal (to the international community)," Ramos said.
Ramos said he didn't show up Friday in Malacañang to show his support for Arroyo "because he didn't want to be used".
Asked if he still supports Arroyo, Ramos said it "was waning".
Senator Rodolfo Biazon, on the other hand, said he will challenge before the Senate the legality and Constitutionality of Proclamation
1017.
At the weekly "Kapihan sa Sulo" Saturday, Biazon said he will deliver a privilege speech on Monday to question the proclamation.
He said government should delineate the specific powers that will be implemented and determine whether the proclamation will affect the basic rights of the people.
According to Biazon, there are also other senators who intend to challenge the proclamation.
He said under the Constitution, a state of emergency should be issued only if there is lawless violence, rebellion and invasion of the government.
"I don't think there is lawless violence or rebellion that happened in the country after the attempted coup d'etat. So why is there a need to issue such proclamation?" Biazon said.
Biazon also said he will file resolution in the Senate calling for an investigation on the aborted coup.
He expressed doubts over the veracity of a reported military take over led by Army Brigadier General Danilo Lim, commander of the elite First Scout Ranger Regiment based in Bulacan.
Biazon said there are talks that the attempted coup was just a ruse to justify the proclamation of a state of emergency.
Malacañang, for its part, defended the issuance of Proclamation 1017.
Press Secretary Ignacio Bunye, who is also Presidential spokesman, said, "the declaration of a state of emergency is borne out of necessity."
"The objective is to preserve the Constitution, defend the rule of law, prevent violence and disorder. Proclamation 1017 will never be abused and utilized against innocent persons, the proclamation does not authorized warrantless arrests, except as provided for in the rules of court," said Bunye.
He assured that President Arroyo vows "to limit the exercise of her powers to those that are necessary to contain the threats to national security."
"Those who feel aggrieved have recourse to the courts, which are open and continue to operate. Rumors of Martial Law have no basis. The situation is under control ad we expect to get over this in no time," said Bunye.
He said the administration thanks various sectors like the military, police, local governments, House of Representatives, the business sector and other well wishers "for their expressions of support and for rallying around the Constitution, the rule of law ad the preservation of calm and sobriety."
The Counsels for the Defense of Liberties (Codal) however condemned the issuance of Proclamation 1017 saying "it is no different from the proclamations issued by former President Ferdinand Marcos during Martial Law in his attempt to stay in power despite the peoples revulsion to his reign".
The Codal, through its spokesman Neri Javier Colmenares, said Section 17 of Article XII of the 1987 Constitution, which was used as basis by Proclamation 1017, "is a Martial Law provision initially crafted by President Marcos during his reign to empower him to take over private businesses".
Section 17 provides that "In times of national emergency, when the public interest so requires, the State may, during the emergency and under reasonable terms prescribed by it, temporarily take over or direct the operation of any privately owned public utility or business affected with public interest".
The Codal said Arroyo is not the State and there is no way that the Constitution could have granted the President the plenary powers of a "state" especially after the people's experience with Marcos.
"The intent of the 1987 Constitution, which is steeped in provisions ensuring Congressional checks to the powers of the President, is to grant such power to the President only upon a law passed by Congress. The 'state' in Sec. 17 therefore means Congress issuing a law and the President implementing such. It is impossible for the 1987 Constitution to have granted President Arroyo the unbridled power to take over private businesses without Congressional approval. It must be noted that Congressional approval is required even if she exercises her much bigger Martial Law powers," said the group.
The Codal said further "since the Constitution requires Congressional approval of the President's bigger powers of Martial Law and other national emergency powers, Proclamation 1017 cannot survive legally and Constitutionally without legislative participation".
"Clearly, there was no law or congressional concurrence with Proclamation 1017 which was unilaterally declared by President Arroyo. After attacking the legislative power of Congress through Executive Order (EO) 464, Arroyo, like Marcos, has again arrogated unto herself one more legislative function," they said.
Secondly, the Codal said using Section 18, Article VII of the Constitution does not grant Constitutionality to Proclamation 1017 not only because a state of emergency is not found in that section but also because of the absence of factual basis for such.
Section 18 states "The President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of the Philippines and whenever it becomes necessary, he may call out such armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion. In case of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety requires it, he may for a period not exceeding sixty days, suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or place the Philippines or any part thereof under martial law. Within forty-eight hours from the proclamation of martial laws or the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, the President shall submit a report in person or in writing to the Congress".
Nowhere in the provision is a "state of emergency" that grants her additional powers mentioned, the Codal added.
Since the Constitution expressly provided for emergency powers in other provisions, Codal said Arroyo cannot proclaim such emergency under Section 18 and should Arroyo insist that Proclamation 1017 is based under her Martial Law powers in Section 18 then such proclamation cannot be deemed to have granted her additional powers.
"She is just giving notice that she is calling on the Armed Forces to suppress rebellion or lawless violence within the framework of her current and existing powers prior to the proclamation. She cannot interpret this as a grant of additional powers to suppress rallies, arrest without warrants, or take over media facilities," said the Codal.
The Codal said there must be lawless violence, rebellion or invasion before the President may call out the Armed Forces.
"Rallies are not 'lawless' violence but are legitimate exercise of the peoples' rights under the Constitution. By deeming rallies as 'lawlessness' Arroyo, like Marcos, illegally considered the exercise of constitutional rights an attack on her and national security," they said.
Lastly, since the proclamation grants her no additional power, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are not suspended during a state of emergency as the Supreme Court had decided in a case.
Meanwhile, National Democratic Front (NDF) chairman Jose Ma. Sison said in a press statement "the real malevolent objective of Arroyo in issuing the proclamation is to suppress the people's assemblies in the nationwide celebration of the anniversary of Edsa People Power 1.
"She is terribly afraid that the people's mass actions critical of her rotten and hated regime would encourage her own military and police forces to withdraw support from her," said Sison.
"Proclamation 1017 is a tyrannical act of desperation by an utterly isolated usurper of authority and her small coterie. It proves that Arroyo will go to any length, including the bloody suppression of the people and her opponents. It is the prelude to worse tyrannical acts to come if the people and the broad united front of patriotic, progressive and all other anti-Arroyo forces do not act promptly to stop her", he also said. (Sunnex with reports from JMR/JPM)
(February 26, 2006 issue)
Write letter to the editor. Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board. Click here. |
|
[return to top]
[home]
[network page]
|
LOCAL NEWS
BUSINESS
OPINION
SPORTS
LIFESTYLE
FEATURE
|
