Martial law
PRESIDENT Rodrigo Duterte finally actualized his threat to impose military rule in Mindanao following the rampage in Marawi City by the Maute group, which has proclaimed itself in 2015 as followers of the Middle East terrorist group originally known as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (Isis, recently shortened to Islamic State or IS).
The President announced the martial law imposition while in Russia for an official trip, which he cut short after Tuesday’s clash between Philippine Army troops and the Maute group and the terrorist group’s rampage Tuesday afternoon. When he got back to the Philippines on Wednesday, he raised the possibility of extending military rule to the Visayas.
For us who had been through the excesses of the 1972 martial law declaration by the then dictator Ferdinand Marcos, this is naturally a worrisome development. More so after Duterte himself warned that this martial law (ML) he declared would be as harsh as Marcos’s military rule.
But before jumping to conclusions, let us look at the difference between two MLs.
The recent declaration is apparently not as well-planned and sinister as the previous one. Marcos’s martial law declaration, because it was part of a thoroughgoing effort to extend his rule beyond the two-term limit set by the 1935 Constitution (his last term was to end in 1973), was all hush-hush and implemented only after Marcos got the unbending allegiance of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and Philippine Constabulary-Integrated National Police machineries.
President Duterte announced the plan to declare martial law as early as last year after the bombing in Davao City that killed 14 persons and wounded at least 60 others. He made this clearer just Friday last week during the 33rd national convention of Philippine Coast Guard Auxiliary in Davao City. He warned of declaring military rule in Mindanao if violence caused by rebellions continues. The Maute group rampage, coincidental or not, gave him that basis.
Meanwhile, there were no reports of clandestine meetings between the AFP top brass and top officials of the Philippine National Police (PNP) to plan the martial law imposition--which could mean that the entire AFP and PNP organization may not be in on this one. Which is interesting considering that the implementation of military rule is heavily dependent on the machinery: the armed units.
The other difference is, of course, the president declaring military rule. Marcos was what Cebuanos call “mat-an pas pinya.” He was the most intellectually gifted of the presidents this country had, only that political ambition consumed him and the other half of what was later known as the conjugal dictatorship. Duterte is definitely not a Ferdinand Marcos.
This is why my feelings on the President’s imposition of military rule in Mindanao is ambivalent. I am worried but I also want to see first where this one is headed.
But one thing good that Marcos’s martial law brought was that it provided the Filipino a lesson in handling a similar experience. Meaning that the strength of the mechanism set up postMarcos to prevent a repeat of the 1972 experience will finally be put to a test. SSCebu