Worrisome phase
The country is entering a worrisome phase as three petitions have been filed with the Supreme Court, one questioning the factual basis of Proclamation 216 that imposed military rule and suspended the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in Mindanao and the other two seeking to compel the Senate and the House of Representatives to convene in a joint session and vote on the legality of Proclamation 2016.
The first petition was filed by five members of the so-called “Magnificent 7” opposition in the House of Representatives namely Liberal Party Reps. Edcel Lagman of Albay, Emmanuel Billones of Capiz and Teddy Baguilat of Ifugao and party-list Reps. Tomasito Villarin of Akbayan and Gary Alejano of Magdalo.
Human rights lawyers and civil society members led the filing of the second petition, which also had the detained Sen. Leila de Lima as petitioner. They were former senator Rene Saguisag, former Commission on Elections (Comelec) chairman Christian Monsod, former Philippine Health Insurance Corp. President Alexander A. Padilla, lawyer Rene B. Gorospe, former Commission on Human Rights chairman Loretta Ann Rosales, plus around 300 lawyers led by former Solicitor General Florin Hilbay.
The third petition was filed mostly by the religious together with former senator Wigberto Tañada. They were Manila Auxiliary Bishop Broderick Pabillo, Bishop Antonio Tobias, Bishop Emeritus Deogracias Iniguez and Mother Adelaida Ygrubay of the Order of Saint Benedict. Also among the petitioners were Shamah Bulangis and Cassandra Deluria.
The High Court later consolidated the second and third petitions.
The petitions were filed amidst the recent stern statements by President Rodrigo Duterte and House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez. The Duterte statement was made days ago in front of soldiers, whose voices he said are the ones he would listen to and not the Supreme Court or Congress. Malacañang later issued a clarification assuring that the President would actually listen to what the judiciary and the legislative branch would say about the martial law declaration.
This was followed by Alvarez’s reaction to the filing of the second and third petitions. “Ah, balikan muna nila ang law books,” he said. “How can the Supreme Court dictate Congress what to do? Co-equal body ‘ yan. O, mag- issue ng direktiba ang Supreme Court telling Congress, dictating Congress na, ‘Uy, mag- convene kayo ng joint session.’ Punitin ko ‘ yan,” he said.
I am not a lawyer so I would leave it to the experts to dissect the President’s and Alvarez’s statements. What I can just say is that a conflict between the legislative branch and the judiciary can be as damaging to our brand of democracy as the legislative acting servile to the executive branch, especially on the issue of martial law and the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. Rule of law would be subsumed by the rule of man.
But I still hope that the proverbial cooler heads would prevail if ever things come to a head. Or that our democratic processes would eventually be up to the challenge that the country’s political setup is posing.