|
Saturday, February 25, 2006
Undefined powers
By Karlon N. Rama
* But detainee-turned-lawyer sees no cause for anxiety
CEBU CITY -- Is the country under martial law following President Arroyo's issuance of Presidential Proclamation 1017?
Palace advisers and a former detainee dismissed comparisons between a state of emergency and martial law. Others, however, are wary because any emergency powers the President may wish to invoke aren't spelled out clearly in Proclamation 1017.
The proclamation also doesn't say how long it will stay in effect.
Imposed at noon Friday, Proclamation 1017 commands the Armed Forces of the Philippines "to maintain law and order throughout the Philippines, prevent or suppress all forms of lawless violence, as well any act of insurrection or rebellion, and to enforce obedience to all the laws and to all decrees, orders and regulations."
PROCLAMATION 1017 ALLOWS
* The President to mobilize the Armed Forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence, including the suspension of firearms permits
* Revocation of all permits for rallies
* Warrantless arrests
* State takeover of utilities or any business involving public interest, including media outlets, in the interest of national security
Source: Palace Chief of Staff Mike Defensor, quoted in AP reports |
Presidential Chief of Staff Mike Defensor said no curfew will be imposed. But he also told the Associated Press that the proclamation bans rallies, allows warrantless arrests, permits the President to call in the military to intervene and lets her take over facilities---including media outlets---that may affect national security.
Merely a statement
The proclamation, taken in context of what Malacañang calls a failed power grab and the large rally in observance of the 20th anniversary of the Edsa revolt, does make Manila appear like a flashpoint.
But lawyer Antonio Arellano, a Marcos-era political detainee turned constitutional law professor, doesn't understand what the hubbub is about.
"This is most definitely not martial law, and this is nothing extraordinary. It is merely the acknowledgement that there is a grave problem that the state needs to address," Arellano said in an interview.
"We've already undergone this before. Remember that so-called Edsa 3? We were under a state of emergency then," he pointed out.
The 1987 Constitution allows the imposition of a state of emergency in the entire country and authorizes the President to mobilize the Armed Forces of the Philippines to "prevent or suppress lawless violence."
The President may impose martial law but only whenever there is an invasion or rebellion or when the public safety requires it.
Even then, Arellano pointed out, the imposition can only last 60 days. Within 48 hours of the declaration, the President must report to Congress, which, in turn, may revoke the proclamation through a vote that the President cannot veto.
No intent
"People think of martial law and automatically think of times under (president Ferdinand) Marcos. The 1987 Constitution is different. It is the only Constitution in effect," he said.
"The statement of the President that there are attempts at destabilization is an indication that there is no intent to impose martial law. Destabilization is different from rebellion. You can destabilize through peaceful means like what happened in the first and second Edsa revolts," Arellano said.
Presidential Proclamation 1017 cites "elements in the political opposition" that have conspired with the "authoritarians of the extreme left" and the "extreme right represented by military adventurists" as "attempting to bring down the duly constituted government."
It says that "certain segments of the national media" have "recklessly magnified" the claims of the "conspirators" and that this has hurt the Philippines. (With AP)
(February 25, 2006 issue)
Write letter to the editor. Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board. Click here. |
|
|
|
[return to top]
[home]
|
|
