Martial law foes concede defeat in SC | Inquirer News

Martial law foes concede defeat in SC

By: - Reporter / @deejayapINQ
/ 07:54 AM July 28, 2017

Opposition lawmakers have decided not to challenge the five-month extension of martial law in Mindanao, following a string of defeats in the Supreme Court and considering its “current temperament.”

Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman, leader of the so-called “Magnificent Seven” bloc, on Thursday said questioning the constitutionality of the decision of the joint session of Congress to extend President Duterte’s Proclamation 216 might only be an exercise in futility.

“The present composition of the Supreme Court may not be disposed to favorably act on the petition after it has refused to exercise jurisdiction against the legislature in two mandamus cases,” he said, citing his group’s two losing petitions with the high tribunal.

Article continues after this advertisement

Petitions denied

FEATURED STORIES

The first involved the court’s dismissal of a petition seeking to compel Congress to meet in joint session to consider the revocation of the declaration of martial law and the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in Mindanao.

The second was the Supreme Court’s denial of the petition to compel the House leadership to recognize and install Ifugao Rep. Teddy Baguilat Jr. as the legitimate minority leader based on tradition and the rules of the House as he was the clear runner-up to Speaker Alvarez during the election for Speaker.

Article continues after this advertisement

Exercise in futility

Article continues after this advertisement

“With the current temperament of the Supreme Court, it may be an exercise in futility to press for the declaration of nullity of the congressional extension,” Lagman said.

Article continues after this advertisement

He said the authentic minority would bide its time for the occurrence of identical issues in subsequent instances which may be adjudicated on the merits by the high court.

Even so, the Magnificent Seven will still file the necessary actions when the implementation of martial law “becomes errant and abusive like when human rights and civil liberties are violated,” he said.

Article continues after this advertisement

They may also do so “after the cessation of armed hostilities in Marawi City, martial law and the suspension of the writ are not immediately lifted, Lagman said.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

TAGS: Martial law, Supreme Court

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our newsletter!

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

© Copyright 1997-2024 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

This is an information message

We use cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more here.