Opposition senators want joint session to tackle martial law
Senators Francis Pangilinan, Franklin Drilon, Risa Hontiveros and Antonio Trillanes IV. NIÑO JESUS ORBETA/ INQUIRER FILE PHOTO
The six-man opposition bloc in the Senate on Monday filed a resolution “to convene” Congress in a joint session and deliberate on President Rodrigo Duterte’s martial law order and the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in the entire Mindanao.
Senate Resolution No. 390 was filed by the minority group composed of Senators Francis “Kiko” Pangilinan, Franklin Drilon, Risa Hontiveros, Antonio Trillanes IV, Bam Aquino IV, and Leila de Lima, who has been detained at the Philippine National Police Custodial Center at Camp Crame in Quezon City.
“Pursuant to the constitutional mandates of transparency and accountability in government, respecting the right of the citizen to information of public interest, and the fundamental underlying principle of checks and balances and amongst the separate branches of government, it is incumbent upon both the Senate and the House of Representatives to conduct a joint session for the purpose of determining the constitutional and factual validity of the proclamation, of preventing abuses in its implementation, and ensuring the safety of the people of Marawi and the whole of Mindanao,” the resolution said.
“Now therefore, be it resolved, as it hereby resolved, that both the Senate and the House of Representative convene in joint session and deliberate on Proclamation No. 2016 dated 23 May 2017 entitled, ‘Declaring a state of martial law and suspending the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in the whole of Mindanao,’” it said.
While the Constitution allows the President to place the Philippine or any part of the country under martial law and suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, the resolution pointed out that Congress, under Section 18, Article VII, also has the “sacred duty and peremptory obligation to seek information surrounding the proclamation, assess its factual basis, and if warranted, revoke the same…”
“By Constitutional design and as observed through our history after its adoption in 1987, the President exercises the most extensive of government powers as head of state, head of government and the commander-in-chief. Thus, the President’s exercise of the extra powers to declare martial law and suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus must strictly comply with the Constitution,” it said.
The resolution said the powers to declare martial law and suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus are considered “extraordinary powers” as the former entails a militarization of a portion of otherwise civilian-controlled territory while the latter curtails the people’s rights against warrantless arrests and arbitrary detention.
“Our painful experience with the imposition of martial law under the Marcos dictatorship became the impetus for the clear limitations on the President’s exercise of the extraordinary powers, including the discretion granted to Congress to make an independent determination if the constitutional grounds for the limited curtailment of the people’s rights are followed,” it further said. JPV
