Lagman v. Medialdea G.R. No. 243522, February 19, 2019 (Political Law Digest)

 Lagman v. Medialdea (2019)

FACTS: These are consolidated petitions filed under Section 18, Article VII of the Constitution, assailing the constitutionality of the third extension from January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019, of the declaration of martial law and suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in the entire Mindanao.

Before the expiration of the second extension of Proclamation No. 216 or on December 4, 2018, Secretary Lorenzana in a letter to the President, recommended the third extension of martial law and the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in the entire Mindanao for one year from January 1, 2019 up to December 31, 2019. Secretary Lorenzana wrote the recommendation to the President primarily to put an end to the continuing rebellion in Mindanao waged by the DAESH-inspired groups and its local and foreign allies, particularly the Daulah Islamiyah (DI), and the threat posed by the Communist Party of the Philippines-New People's Army Terrorists (CNTs).

Likewise, the AFP Chief of Staff General Carolito G. Galvez, Jr. (General Galvez) and Chief of the Philippine National Police (PNP) Director-General Oscar D. Albayalde (Director-General Albayalde) recommended the further extension of martial law and the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in the entire Mindanao for one year beginning January 1, 2019 up to December 31, 2019, based on current security assessment for the total eradication of the Local Terrorist Groups (LTG), ASG, Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters (BIFF), DI, and other lawless armed groups and the CNTs, their foreign and local allies, supporters, financiers, in order to fully contain the continuing rebellion in Mindanao and to prevent it from escalating to other parts of the country, and to ensure complete rehabilitation and reconstruction of the most affected areas, as well as to attain lasting peace and order, and to preserve the socio-economic growth and development of the entire Mindanao.

Acting on these recommendations, the President, in a letter dated December 6, 2018 to the Senate and the House of Representatives, requested for the third extension of Proclamation No. 216 from January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019. 

On December 12, 2018, the Senate and the House of Representatives, in a joint session, adopted Resolution No. 6, entitled "Declaring a State of Martial Law and Suspending the Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus in the Whole of Mindanao for another period of one (1) year from January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019

 

RULING:

The Congress has the prerogative to extend the martial law and the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus as the Constitution does not limit the period for which it can extend the same.

This Court in the case of Lagman v. Medialdea explained the only limitations to the exercise of congressional authority to extend such proclamation or suspension:

a) the extension should be upon the President's initiative;

b) it should be grounded on the persistence of the invasion or rebellion and the demands of public safety; and

c) it is subject to the Court's review of the sufficiency of its factual basis upon the petition of any citizen.

The records of the Constitutional Commission show that Commissioner Suarez's proposal to add a similar 60-day limitation to the extension of an initial proclamation of martial law was not adopted by a majority of the members of the Commission. The framers evidently gave enough flexibility on Congress to determine the duration of the extension.

 

Proclamation No. 216 has not become functus officio with the cessation of the Marawi siege.

While Proclamation No. 216 specifically cited the attack of the Maute group in Marawi City as basis for the declaration of martial law, rebellion was not necessarily ended by the cessation of the Marawi siege. Rebellion in Mindanao still continues, as shown by the violent incidents stated in reports to the President, and was made basis by the Congress in approving the third extension of martial law. These violent incidents continuously pose a serious threat to security and the peace and order situation in Mindanao.

Martial law in Mindanao should not be confined to the Marawi siege. Despite the death of Hapilon and the Maute brothers, the remnants of their groups have continued to rebuild their organization through the recruitment and training of new members and fighters to carry on the rebellion. Clashes between rebels and government forces continue to take place in other parts of Mindanao. Kidnapping, arson, robbery, bombings, murder - crimes which are absorbed in rebellion - continue to take place therein. These crimes are part and parcel of the continuing rebellion in Mindanao.

Be it noted that rebellion is a continuing crime. It does not necessarily follow that with the liberation of Marawi, rebellion no longer exists. It will be a tenuous proposition to confine rebellion simply to a resounding clash of arms with government forces.

As noted in Aquino, Jr. v. Enrile, modern day rebellion has other facets than just the taking up of arms, including financing, recruitment and propaganda, that may not necessarily be found or occurring in the place of the armed conflict. (Citations omitted)

In sum, Proclamation No. 216 did not become functus officio with the cessation of the Marawi siege. Considering that rebellion persists and that the public safety requires it, there is sufficient factual basis to extend martial law in Mindanao for the third time.

 

The requirements of rebellion and public safety are present to uphold the extension of martial law in Mindanao from January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019.

Contrary to Monsod, et al., the Court need not make an independent determination of the factual basis for the proclamation or extension of martial law and the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. The Court is not a fact-finding body required to make a determination of the correctness of the factual basis for the declaration or extension of martial law and suspension of the writ of habeas corpus. It would be impossible for the Court to go on the ground to conduct an independent investigation or factual inquiry, since it is not equipped with resources comparable to that of the Commander-in-Chief to ably and properly assess the ground conditions.

Thus, in determining the sufficiency of the factual basis for the extension of martial law, the Court needs only to assess and evaluate the written reports of the government agencies tasked in enforcing and implementing martial law in Mindanao.

In finding sufficiency of the factual basis for the third extension, the Court has to give due regard to the military and police reports which are not palpably false, contrived and untrue; consider the full complement or totality of the reports submitted, and not make a piecemeal or individual appreciation of the facts and the incidents reported. The President's decision to extend the declaration and the suspension of the Writ, when it goes through the review of the Legislative branch, must be accorded a weightier and more consequential basis. Under these circumstances, the President's decision or judgment call is affirmed by the representatives of the People.

The factual basis for the extension of martial law is the continuing rebellion being waged in Mindanao by Local Terrorist Rebel Groups (LTRG) - identified as the ASG, BIFF, DI, and other groups that have established affiliation with ISIS/DAESH, and by the Communist Terrorist Rebel Groups (CTRG) - the components of which are the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP), New People's Army (NPA), and the National Democratic Front (NDF).

The Department of National Defense's (DND's) "Reference Material, Joint Session on the Extension of Martial Law in Mindanao," which was presented during the Joint Session of Congress, and offered in evidence as Slides during this Court's Oral Arguments on January 29, 2019, shows the following violent incidents from January 1 to November 30, 2018 as part of the continuing rebellion being waged by the LTRGs:

From the slides presented by respondents during the Oral Arguments on January 29, 2019, and as summarized by respondents in their Memorandum, the following events transpired in Mindanao:

a) No less than 181 persons in the martial law Arrest Orders have remained at large.

b) Despite the dwindling strength and capabilities of the local terrorist rebel groups, the recent bombings that transpired in Mindanao that collectively killed 16 people and injured 63 others in less than 2 months is a testament on how lethal and ingenious terrorist attacks have become.

c) On October 5, 2018, agents from the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) who conducted an anti-drug symposium in Tagoloan II, Lanao Del Sur, were brutally ambushed, in which five (5) were killed and two (2) were wounded.

d) The DI vulnerable Muslim continues to conduct radicalization activities in communities and recruitment of new members, targeting relatives and orphans of killed DI members. Its presence in these areas immensely disrupted the government's delivery of basic services and clearly needs military intervention.

e) Major ASG factions in Sulu and Basilan have fully embraced the DAESH ideology and continue their express kidnappings. As of December 6, 2018, there are still seven (7) remaining kidnap victims under captivity.

f) Despite the downward trend of insurgency parameters, Mindanao remains to be the hotbed of communist rebel insurgency in the country. Eight (8) out the 14 active provinces in terms of communist rebel insurgency are in Mindanao.

g) The Communist Terrorist Rebel Group in Mindanao continues its hostile activities while conducting its organization, consolidation and recruitment. In fact, from January to November 2018, the number of Ideological, Political and Organization (IPO) efforts of this group amounted to 1,420, which indicates their continuing recruitment of new members. Moreover, it is in Mindanao where the most violent incidents initiated by this group transpire. Particularly, government forces and business establishment are being subjected to harassment, arson and liquidations when they defy their extortion demands.

h) The CTRG's exploitation of indigenous people is so rampant that Lumad schools are being used as recruiting and training grounds for their armed rebellion and anti-government propaganda. On November 28, 2018, Satur Ocampo and 18 others were intercepted by the Talaingod PNP checkpoint in Davao del Norte for unlawfully taking into custody 14 minors who are students of a learning school in Sitio Dulyan, Palma Gil in Talaingod town. Cases were filed against Ocampo's camp for violations of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 10364, in relation to R.A. No. 7610, as well as violation of Article 270 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), due to the Philippine National Police's (PNP) reasonable belief that the school is being used to manipulate the minds of the students' rebellious ideas against the government.

The cited events demonstrate the spate of violence of rebel groups in Mindanao in pursuit of the singular objective to seize power over parts of Mindanao or deprive the President or Congress of their power and prerogatives over these areas. The absence of motives indicated in several reports does not mean that these violent acts and hostile activities committed are not related to rebellion which absorbs other common crimes.

In addition, these violent incidents should not be viewed as isolated events but in their totality, showing a consistent pattern of rebellion in Mindanao.

The test of sufficiency is not accuracy nor preciseness but reasonableness of the factual basis adopted by the Executive in ascertaining the existence of rebellion and the necessity to quell it.

 

PUBLIC SAFETY REQUIRES THE EXTENSION OF MARTIAL LAW IN MINDANAO

The Resolutions coming from the Regional Peace and Order Council (RPOC) of Region XI (Davao City) and Region XIII (Caraga); the Provincial Peace and Order Council (PPOC) of the Province of Agusan del Norte, Agusan del Sur, and Dinagat Islands; and the Office of the Governor, Province of Saranggani, expressing support for the President's declaration of martial law and its extension, reflect the public sentiment for the restoration of peace and order in Mindanao. These resolutions are initiated by the people of Mindanao, the very same people who live through the harrows of war, things and experiences that we can only read about. Importance must be given to these resolutions as they are in the best position to determine their needs.

Citing the Brief of Amicus Curiae of Fr. Joaquin Bernas, S.J. in Justice Velasco, Jr.'s Dissenting Opinion in Fortun v. Macapagal-Arroyo, the demands of public safety is determined through the application of prudential estimation

In sum, since the President should not be bound to search for proof beyond reasonable doubt of the existence of rebellion and since deciding whether public safety demands action is a prudential matter, the function of the President is far different from the function of a judge trying to decide whether to convict a person for rebellion or not. Put differently, looking for rebellion under the Penal Code is different from looking for rebellion under the Constitution.

Ultimately, it is the Commander-in-Chief, aided by the police and military, who is the guardian and keeper of public safety.