AFP: Lifting of martial law will affect Mindanao security

MANILA, Philippines — The lifting of martial law in Mindanao will have dire effects on the peace and order situation in the south, defense and military officials warned yesterday.

Armed Forces chief Gen. Rey Leonardo Guerrero said the success of military operations in Mindanao is heavily dependent on the enforcement of martial law.

“The conduct of checkpoints, patrols and of course our intensified military operations will be affected” without martial law, Guerrero said.

Guerrero supported Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana’s stand that martial law in Mindanao is needed for the military to be able to address major security threats.

However, the so-called Makabayan bloc in the House of Representatives, led by Bayan Muna party-list Rep. Carlos Zarate, questioned before the Supreme Court  (SC) the one-year extension of martial law in Mindanao.

Defense and military officials are expected to be summoned by the SC to justify the extension.

Lorenzana said, if allowed, he would use Microsoft PowerPoint before members of the SC to convince them that the country needs martial law in Mindanao.

President Duterte initially declared martial law in Mindanao on May 23 last year in the wake of the Marawi siege.

It was extended until Dec. 31 last year even as fighting in Marawi ended on Oct. 23.

The SC will again hold oral arguments to resolve petitions challenging the one-year extension.

In their first regular session this year, the justices set for next Tuesday and Wednesday, Jan. 16 and 17, the arguments on the two petitions filed by groups led by Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman and Zarate.

The SC had consolidated the two petitions, which sought the issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO) stopping the implementation of martial law and nullification of Duterte’s extension order.

It also directed the office of the solicitor general (OSG) to answer the petition filed by Zarate’s group last Monday and submit its comment not later than 5 p.m. on Saturday, Jan.13.

The OSG earlier filed comment on the petition of Lagman’s group and sought its dismissal for lack of merit.

Lastly, the SC set the submission of the respective memorandum of the parties on Jan. 20.

Under the Constitution, the SC has 60 days to resolve a petition challenging a martial law declaration by the President from its date of filing. The first petition was filed on Dec. 27 last year, which gives the Court until Feb. 25 this year to resolve the case.

The petitioners assailed the constitutionality of the martial law extension, arguing that there is no more rebellion or invasion in Mindanao so there is no factual basis for such declaration.

They cited Duterte’s admission that the government achieved victory over the IS-linked Maute terror group in October last year after a five-month campaign to oust them from Marawi.

The groups further argued that the grounds raised by the executive branch of government in extending martial law, which was approved by Congress, “do not rise to the level of rebellion that constitutes a threat to public safety as contemplated by the Constitution.”

They alleged that the real target of the extension of martial law are those who dissent or oppose Duterte’s policy, including the New People’s Army and their “supporters, financiers, coddlers.” In his comment on Lagman’s petition, Solicitor General Jose Calida argued that the extension of martial law was necessary. – With  Edu Punay