Maguindanao under Martial Law
December 7, 2009Maguindanao under Martial Law. The rebellion was not actual but imminent, according to the government, which raises questions about the validity of the martial law proclamation. The alleged rebellion loomed after the massacre, and the indictment should simply be added, if warranted, to the cases of kidnapping and multiple murder against the Ampatuan family members who are accused of planning and implementing the massacre.
Even without martial law, the president and commander-in-chief has sufficient powers to deploy the military in the name of public safety. Maguindanao, Sultan Kudarat and Cotabato City were already under a state of emergency, and the national government was supposed to have taken over governance of these areas. Government prosecutors said there was strong evidence against the Ampatuans. This would have warranted their arrest even without the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus. Yesterday, even with martial law, former governor Andal Ampatuan Sr. remained out of reach of the law, having confined himself in a Davao City hospital.
If the proclamation of martial law is upheld by Congress and later by the Supreme Court based on defective premises, it could give President Arroyo the go-signal to exercise this power arbitrarily, such as during the 2010 elections in Maguindanao.
The so-called Freedom Constitution, crafted after the 1986 people power revolution and ratified in 1987, was designed to prevent a repeat of the abuse of executive power, as Ferdinand Marcos did in imposing martial law. The new Constitution did not eliminate the power to impose martial law despite the abuses of the dictatorship, because when properly wielded, this power can achieve certain objectives for the greater good.
RELATED LINK
