data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4852e/4852e6295e2558880d3eedeb8f7b091cc7cf3f2b" alt="SC: Unjustified fears, past experience should not cloud martial law significance"
(Supreme Court of the Philippines} MANILA, July 6 (Mabuhay) –Supreme Court justices believe fears and apprehensions stemming from the nation’s traumatic experience during the Marcos years should not dilute the significance of the imposition of martial law for the promotion of public safety. Affirming President Rodrigo Duterte’s martial law declaration in Mindanao aimed at crushing ISIS-inspired militants, the SC said the 1987 Constitution placed several safeguards to prevent possible abuses of the commander-in-chief’s powers. “Not only were the grounds limited to actual invasion or rebellion, but its duration was likewise fixed at 60 days, unless sooner revoked, nullified, or extended; at the same time, it is subject to the veto powers of the Court and Congress,” the July 4 decision stated. While the imposition of martial law would create apprehensions among the public, the SC said the “importance of martial law in the context of our society should outweigh one’s prejudices and apprehensions against it.” “The significance of martial law should not be undermined by unjustified fears and past experience,” the SC said. “After all, martial law is critical and crucial to the promotion of public safety, the preservation of the nation’s sovereignty and ultimately, the survival of our country.” It also added that martial law “is vital for the protection of the country not only against internal enemies but also against those enemies lurking from beyond our shores. As such, martial law should not be cast aside, or its scope and potency limited and unsubstantiated assumptions.” The late President Read More …