Drilon counters martial law statement of SC magistrate

Sen. Franklin Drilon

Senate Minority Leader Franklin Drilon on Thursday disputed a statement by retired Supreme Court Associate Justice Vicente Mendoza that there is no violation of the Bill of Rights under  martial law.

Drilon issued the statement after Justice Mendoza in an Inquirer report called President Rodrigo Duterte’s decision to impose martial law “justified and needed” due to rebellion in Marawi City, which was placed under siege by the Maute group.

READ: Martial law in Mindanao ‘justified and needed’ — retired SC justice

Mendoza said there could be no violation of the Bill of Rights under a martial rule and during suspension of the writ of habeas corpus, adding that one should look at the situation from the military’s point of view.

“You cannot speak of violation of the Bill of Rights when there’s martial law and the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is effective,” Mendoza told the Philippine Daily Inquirer in a telephone interview on Wednesday.

“You cannot speak of that because you have to look at it from the military’s point of view…If you’re the military, will you go to the court to get a warrant? No more. You will just arrest suspected rebels,” he added.

Drilon said he hoped the magistrate was misquoted, adding that under martial law the Bill of Rights cannot be set aside.

“I hope that Justice Mendoza was just misquoted. I remind him that the Constitution and the rule of law should continue to reign supreme,” Drilon said.

He said under the 1987 Constitution, there are rights that are “inviolable” even when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended under martial law.

“The Bill of Rights cannot be set aside even under martial law or even when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended. There are rights that are considered inviolable under the present Constitution. Those rights should be respected at all times,” Drilon said.

He said warrantless arrests could not be carried out even with the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.

Warrantless arrest could only be valid when made under the circumstances mentioned in Section 5, Rule 113 of the Rules of Court, such as when a person is caught in the act of committing a crime, Drilon, a former justice secretary, said.

Drilon also cited the provision of the Constitution that states: “A state of martial law does not suspend the operation of the Constitution, nor supplant the functioning of the civil courts or legislative assemblies, nor authorize the conferment of jurisdiction on military courts and agencies over civilians where civil courts are able to function, nor automatically suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.”

Drilon said that with the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, or “show the body,” the court could order a police authority to justify the arrest of a person and order his or her release.

But when this privilege is suspended, the right of the individual to avail of the writ as a speedy remedy to seek release from detention is likewise suspended, Drion said.

Drilon cited the case of Aberca versus Ver, where the Supreme Court ruled that “the suspension of the privilege of the writ does not render valid an otherwise illegal arrest or detention.”

“What is suspended is merely the right of the individual to seek release from detention through the writ of habeas corpus as a speedy means of obtaining his liberty,” Drilon said citing the decision.

Drilon said the suspension of the writ only applies to those charged with rebellion or offenses connected with invasion.

Drilon said persons arrested for rebellion must be charged within three days, to prevent the situation during the martial regime of the dictator Ferdinand Marcos, when protesters and critics were arrested without any criminal charges filed against them.

“The very reason for this is to prevent a situation similar to what happened in the Marcos years when hundreds of persons were detained and confined indefinitely, without any criminal charge filed against them,” Drilon said.

Duterte declared martial law and suspended the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in Mindanao following the attack of the Maute group in Marawi city, where buildings were burnt, people held hostage and flags of ISIS hoisted in the siege carried out by Maute members. JPV/rga

READ: Martial law will be harsh, says Duterte

RELATED VIDEO