{"id":151639,"date":"2018-02-07T19:55:31","date_gmt":"2018-02-08T00:55:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=151639"},"modified":"2018-02-07T19:55:31","modified_gmt":"2018-02-08T00:55:31","slug":"solon-hails-sc-verdict-on-ml-as-rule-of-law-at-work","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2018\/02\/07\/solon-hails-sc-verdict-on-ml-as-rule-of-law-at-work\/","title":{"rendered":"Solon hails SC verdict on ML as \u2018rule of law at work’"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"FILE:<\/a>
FILE: Senator Sherwin Gatchalian (Photo: Sherwin Gatchalian\/Facebook)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

MANILA<\/strong> \u2014 Senator Sherwin Gatchalian on Wednesday chided members of the opposition for harshly criticizing the Supreme Court (SC) decision upholding the validity of the one-year extension of martial law in Mindanao saying the long deliberative process leading to the decision was a prime example of the rule of law at work.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe political opposition has been quick to brand the Supreme Court ruling, which upheld the validity of the extension of martial law, as the result of a failure of the rule of law. How can this be the case when the strict constitutional checks and balances that regulate the power to extend martial law have been observed in good faith?\u201d said Gatchalian, a stalwart of the Nationalist People\u2019s Coalition.<\/p>\n

He said the process \u2013 starting with the recommendation of President Rodrigo Duterte to extend martial law, the approval of the extension during a joint session of Congress, and the SC\u2019s review of the extension \u2013 were all conducted exactly as required by the Constitution.<\/p>\n

\u201cAt the end of this long deliberative process, the three great branches of government have come to the same conclusion – that the extension of martial law is a just and necessary medicine to cure Mindanao of the violent extremism that has afflicted the island for so long,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis is precisely the rule of law at work. The political opposition cannot simply proclaim its failure because they disagree with the result,\u201d Gatchalian said.<\/p>\n

Political battles, he said, must be set aside to give way to the real life-and-death battles being fought by state forces on the front lines of the conflict.<\/p>\n

With the SC decision, he said it is now time to form a united front in order to address terrorism once and for all.<\/p>\n

\u201cI urge all Filipinos, regardless of political affiliation, to unite behind the government’s efforts to defeat the rebellion and eradicate violent extremism. Only a united Filipino nation will be able to win the war and achieve lasting peace in Mindanao,\u201d Gatchalian said.<\/p>\n

The SC on Tuesday, voting10-5, dismissed for lack of merit the consolidated petitions seeking to stop the one-year extension of martial law.<\/p>\n

The justices maintained that the SC has no power to review the decision of Congress to grant the request of President Duterte for the one-year extension.<\/p>\n

Congress granted the request for the extension last December 13, with the House of Representatives voting 226-23 and the Senate voting 14-4.<\/p>\n

In its decision, the SC agreed that the \u201cthe rebellion that spawned the Marawi incident persists\u201d and ruled that \u201cpublic safety requires the extension, as shown by facts presented by the Armed Forces of the Philippines.\u201d<\/p>\n

The high court also ruled that there are safeguards against abuse under martial law implementation under the Constitution, dismissing as speculative the claims of human rights violations by the military.<\/p>\n

Opposition lawmakers were quick to decry the verdict.<\/p>\n

Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman, the lead petitioner in the first bid challenging the year-long extension of martial rule in Mindanao, expressed fears that the SC verdict would \u201cembolden President Duterte in flouting the rule of law.\u201d<\/p>\n

Senator Paolo Benigno \u201cBam\u201d Aquino said he was saddened by the failure of the SC to uphold the spirit of People Power against martial law, at the same month that it is being celebrated.<\/p>\n

\u201cSa desisyong suportahan ang mahabang<\/em>\u00a0Martial Law,\u00a0nabuksan ang pagdeklara ng<\/em>\u00a0Martial Law\u00a0sa buong kapulungan na walang klarong basehan ng hangganan<\/em>\u00a0(The decision supporting Martial Law extension opens the possibility of uncertainty on how long will this be implemented),\u201d Aquino said.<\/p>\n

On the other hand, Senate President Aquilino \u201cKoko\u201d Pimentel III as well as Senators Sonny Angara and Panfilo Lacson agreed with the SC decision.<\/p>\n

\u201cTama naman yan.<\/em>\u00a0(That is right.) They should defer to the political branches when it comes to matters like these,\u201d Pimentel said.<\/p>\n

For his part, Angara said the SC decision was no longer surprising as Congress and the Executive branch are the ones tasked to tackle the issue of martial law declaration.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, Lacson shared his colleagues\u2019 opinions, saying that \u201cthe matter of declaring martial law and extending the same is a political issue that is best resolved between the executive and legislative branches of government.\u201d\u00a0(PNA)<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

MANILA \u2014 Senator Sherwin Gatchalian on Wednesday chided members of the opposition for harshly criticizing the Supreme Court (SC) decision …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":33,"featured_media":148514,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,95],"tags":[581,46096,14359,21489],"class_list":["post-151639","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-news","category-news-ph","tag-mindanao","tag-one-year-extension-of-martial-law","tag-senator-sherwin-gatchalian","tag-supreme-court-sc","mauthors-jose-cielito-reganit","mauthors-philippine-news-agency"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/151639","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/33"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=151639"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/151639\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/148514"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=151639"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=151639"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=151639"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}