Perception

The problem with martial law, at least in the Philippines, and in this day and age, is mostly about perception than it is of real substance. This perception, which cuts both ways, meaning it is good to some and bad to others, is clearly born of the experience, real or imagined, that Filipinos had of the Marcos martial law beginning in the early 1970s.

Those who had it bad during the time of Marcos will naturally resist its new incarnation by President Duterte even if such martial law, first implemented in Mindanao during the Marawi crisis more than a year ago and extended once and now up for another extension, is welcomed by others, including the people of Mindanao themselves.

Of course, there are valid legal issues hounding this martial law, particularly with regard to the legal and justifiable bases for its implementation. But there is a lot of hot air in there, because as anybody willing to listen to reason will attest, there is always a legal remedy for every legal issue there is. If there is none, somebody will soon come along to invent it.

The real reason, to go back to my opening proposition, why some oppose it and some don’t, is that more than having a legal leg to stand on, it is perception that dictates the people’s response to it. Worse, perception is largely anchored on emotion, making it questionably doubtful rather than logically sound and stable.

This new martial law is not the same martial law that Marcos clamped down on the Philippines more than 40 years ago. It is certainly not for the same reason why it has become so loathed and feared by some. But painful memories die hard, it has to be admitted, which is why it is hard to blame people for being so obstinate and unseeing in their resistance.

But we need to move on, both as a people and as a country. We cannot stay rooted in the past just because those with bad experiences in the past truly have lessons worth learning from in their sad and sorry resumés. Just as the past is many things to many people, so is the future. It must be charted in accordance with the view of all and not just of a noisy few.

Besides, martial law is of itself not intrinsically bad. Otherwise, it would not have found its way into the system of governance of most civilized nations. In fact, right after the Marcos martial law and this nation was trying to cobble for itself a new way forward, it willfully chose to keep martial law for much of the same reason and necessity that it was invented.

For as you see, it is only in the implementation that martial law, or anything that can be of use to further all human endeavor, can go haywire. A useful gadget like a cellphone, for example, can cause such dreadful misery if jabbed into the eyeballs of a person. Martial law, therefore, must be allowed to do its work free of all the negativity that springs from bad perceptions.

‘Martial law, therefore, must

be allowed to do its work free of all the negativity that springs from bad perceptions.’