MANILA, Philippines — A group of opposition lawmakers led by Rep. Edcel Lagman (Albay) on Monday urged the Supreme Court to declare the Duterte administration’s third martial law extension over Mindanao as unconstitutional.
The petitioners are making their last case to the court, through a memorandum, before it rules on their pleas challenging the constitutionality and factual basis of Duterte’s third martial law extension.
‘No rebellion in report’
Lagman, citing the report given by the Armed Forces of the Philippines for 2018, pointed out that “no one has been apprehended, arrested or indicted for rebellion during the said period despite the overwhelming might and foreboding presence of the military, police and CAFGU [or military auxiliary forces].”
“Rebellion was not included in the monthly reports as having been committed during the second extended period,” the petitioners added.
Associate Justice Alfredo Benjamin Caguioa went through some of the specifics of the government’s report during the oral arguments.
The justice said that the list included incidents with unidentified perpetrators and motives behind the bombings.
“Since these reports were made at the time indicated, would you be in a position to submit any update by which you were able to identify the perpetrators?” Caguioa asked top military and defense officials, including Major Gen. Pablo Lorenzo, Armed Forces of the Philippines deputy chief of staff for intelligence.
The justice also pointed out that the report included a rift stemming from a “family feud” and an incident where a member of the Abu Sayyaf was killed by another member.
“How does that support the contention that rebellion persists?” Caguioa also said in the oral arguments last week.
EXPLAINER: Mindanao martial law: Similar petitions, slightly different SC
Bombings not rebellion
Solicitor General Jose Calida, in the government’s comment on the petition filed on January, argued that Duterte specifically mentioned in his letter to the Congress that there were at least four bombings in 2018 and violent incidents committed by the Abu Sayyaf Group and Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters.
The petitioners challenged this statement, explaining that the four bombings “were not reported to be related to any act of rebellion.”
“They were acts of terrorism and lawless violence unrelated to rebellion. In fact, the suspects in the Lamitan and Brgy. Apopong explosions were charged with multiple frustrated murder, not rebellion,” they added.
“While terrorism has the purpose of sowing fear and panic among the populace, rebellion is an armed uprising against the government for the culpable purpose of removing the country or a portion thereof from allegiance to the Republic, or preventing the President or the Congress from exercising their respective powers,” they also stressed.
All parties, including the Office of the Solicitor General, were given until Monday, February 2, to file their respective memorandum, after which the case would be deemed up for decision.
RELATED: Justices ask military: When is rebellion quelled?