{"id":196700,"date":"2019-01-07T03:56:01","date_gmt":"2019-01-07T08:56:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=196700"},"modified":"2019-01-07T03:56:18","modified_gmt":"2019-01-07T08:56:18","slug":"malacanang-confident-sc-will-shelve-new-plea-vs-martial-law","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2019\/01\/07\/malacanang-confident-sc-will-shelve-new-plea-vs-martial-law\/","title":{"rendered":"Malaca\u00f1ang confident SC will shelve new plea vs. martial law"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a>
Presidential Panelo said the case law dictates that the current petition merits dismissal because \u201cno new arguments have been presented while rebellion and the threat to public safety in Mindanao remain.\u201d (File Photo<\/a>: Office of the Presidential Spokesperson\/Facebook<\/a>)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

MANILA<\/strong>\u00a0— Malaca\u00f1ang has expressed confidence that the Supreme Court (SC) will dismiss the petition filed by Albay (1st District) Rep. Edcel Lagman on the third extension of martial law, noting a previous appeal questioning the second extension of martial law was also rejected by the high court.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe Executive remains confident that the High Court would uphold the continued imposition of martial law in Mindanao and dismiss the petition filed by Albay 1st District Rep. Edcel Lagman,\u201d Presidential Spokesperson Salvador Panelo said in a statement on Sunday.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe grounds cited by the members of the opposition in questioning the third extension of martial law are more or less similar with the grounds cited in their previous petition to nullify the second extension of martial law, which petition was dismissed by the Supreme Court,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n

Panelo said the case law dictates that the current petition merits dismissal because \u201cno new arguments have been presented while rebellion and the threat to public safety in Mindanao remain.\u201d<\/p>\n

He said Lagman\u2019s argument is \u201cnot only faulty but is likewise intellectually challenged\u201d and stressed that rebellion cannot be solved overnight.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe continuing rebellion in Mindanao as well as the demands of public safety require the continued operation of martial law in that area — a view shared by our lawmakers, the grounds cited therefore being met as required by the Constitution,\u201d Panelo said.<\/p>\n

Panelo added that it is \u201ccommon sense\u201d that martial law in Mindanao should be maintained because no arrest has been made on the rebels which only means that the rebellion persists.<\/p>\n

He said it was also common sense to know that if a substantial number of all the rebels have already been arrested, then it signifies that the rebellion has been crushed.<\/p>\n

Panelo, meanwhile, reiterated that the primary constitutional mandate of the President is to protect and serve the people and that public safety demands decisive action.<\/p>\n

\u201cProtecting and serving the people means ensuring the integrity of the Republic, the security of our people and the sustained growth and development in our territories, including Mindanao,\u201d Panelo said.<\/p>\n

Duterte declared martial law in Mindanao on May 23, 2017, after Maute terrorists attacked Marawi City.<\/p>\n

Martial law in Mindanao has been granted an extension for three times, the most recent extension will be from Jan. 1 to Dec. 31, 2019.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

MANILA\u00a0— Malaca\u00f1ang has expressed confidence that the Supreme Court (SC) will dismiss the petition filed by Albay (1st District) Rep. …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":44,"featured_media":191167,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1145,16,95],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-196700","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-headline","category-news","category-news-ph","mauthors-azer-parrocha","mauthors-philippine-news-agency"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/196700","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\/44"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=196700"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/196700\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/191167"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=196700"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=196700"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=196700"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}