Albay Representative Edcel Lagman expressed his disapproval of the 'historic ruling' of the Supreme Court over the validity of reasons for President Duterte's declaration of martial law in Mindanao. This is after the majority of justices voted in favor of the action taken by the administration in dealing with the terrorist group in Marawi City and dismissed the petitions against it.
 |
| Photo from Primer.com |
Lagman believes that the eleven justices who said aye for martial law could have made a mistake.
"The petitioners (opposing Congressmen) in G. R. No. 231658 are prepared to respect the majority decision of the divided Supreme Court upholding the declaration of martial law in Mindanao with a strong reservation or caveat that the majority could be in error," Lagman stated.
Lagman is also one among those petitioners who go against the declaration by President Rodrigo Duterte of martial law in the whole Mindanao although the Maute terrorist group is reported to be active only in the city of Marawi.
The day after the court officially got the President's back in resorting to martial rule in fighting against the Maute group, or leggally known as Proclamation No. 216, Lagman wasted no time to release a statement expressing incredulity about the court's ruling.
He made an argument that the justice should only base their decision on the factual happening and objective information that were happening on the day when the President issued the Proclamation No. 216, on May 23.
"The ongoing armed confrontation, military air strikes and land offensives and the escalating deaths, destruction, and displacement of civilians after May 23, 2017 are the aftermath or result of the martial law declaration which should not be considered as the appropriate actual basis for such controverted declaration and suspension," the Albay representative stated.
He meant to say that the basis of the justices in favoring the president was not what was actually happening on the day that it was declared, but instead they predicted on the facts on the succeeding days after the implementation of the proclamation.
"In fact, authoritatve military officials had consistently reported that hours before and contemporaneous to the declaration of martial law, the Marawi situation was under control, the military was on top of the situation and subsequently admitted that it was the military who precipitated and initiated the armed confrontation by attempting to arrest or capture Isnilon Hapilon and the Maute brothers, which offensives were resisted by the Maute and Abu Sayyaf group," he added.
He asserted as well that there is no element of rebellion in the ideological cause of Maute waging war against the state.
"This culpable purpose is not evinced by the mere raising of IS flags which has been done previously by the terrorists as cheap propaganda to support their claim that they are ISIS-inspired," he further explained.
Among the 11 justices who voted yes for martial law indirectly by their dismissal of petitions were Associate Justices Prebitero Velasco, Jr., Teresita de Castro, Diosdado Peralta, Lucas Bersamin, Mariano del Castillo, Jose Mendoza, Bienvenido Reyes, Estela Perlas-Bernabe, Francis Jardeleza, Samuel Martinez, and Noel Tajim.
Three justices gave a slight reservation while only one tool a firm stand to say no, in the person of Associate Justice, Marivic Leonen.
Source: GMA News
0 comments: