This story
was taken from Bulatlat, the Philippines's alternative weekly
newsmagazine (www.bulatlat.com, www.bulatlat.net, www.bulatlat.org).
Vol. VI, No. 4, February 26 - March 4, 2006
FLAG, Rights Groups,
Media Hit Emergency Proclamation In
Baguio City, a wide range of groups from the Free Legal Assistance Group, human
rights organizations, to local media practitioners have stood up in opposition
to President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's Proclamation No. 1017, which declares a
state of national emergency in the Philippines. They say the proclamation opens
the gates for violations of people's rights. BY
ARTHUR ALLAD-IW BAGUIO
CITY (Feb. 24) – They were supposed to
commemorate the 20th anniversary of the People Power I. Instead they
were surprised by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s issuance of Proclamation
No. 1017, declaring a state of national emergency in the whole nation. Rights
advocates believe this has no constitutional basis and it gives the go-signal
for the violation of the people's rights. Around 4:30 p.m. on
February 24, human rights, militant and sectoral groups poured out to the
streets in this city to condemn the proclamation and reiterate their demand for
Macapagal-Arroyo’s resignation, claiming she has no mandate to rule the nation.
The said protest action
started with a march-rally along the city’s main roads and ended in a short
program at the People's Park. Speakers during the program explained the effect
of the proclamation and reiterated their call for Macapagal-Arroyo's ouster,
which they claim is the only solution to the on-going economic and political
crisis. Human rights advocates and
the media also aired their protest against the proclamation. The Free Legal Assistance
Group (FLAG), in a statement, condemned Proclamation 1017 as a “license given to
the military and police to use against whosoever they perceive to be enemies; it
silences all forms of criticism, including media reporting.” FLAG opposed
martial law and rendered legal services to the victims of human rights
violations during the regime of former President Ferdinand E. Marcos.
Lawyer Pablito Sanidad
said, in a press conference, that if the proclamation aims to quell opposition,
that will not happen, instead it would draw more opposition. He added that it
has always worked that way as he compared it with the martial law experience.
“GMA arrogated unto her the
power to promulgate decrees, orders and regulations, not different, in effect,
from Amendment No. 6, which Marcos used to legislate when there exists a grave
emergency or a threat or imminence,” the FLAG statement read. Unconstitutional GMA’s proclamation cited
two constitutional provisions as its basis in declaring a state of national
emergency. One of these is Art VII, Sec. 18, which stated, “The President shall
be the Commander-In-Chief of all the Armed Forces of the Philippines and
whenever it becomes necessary, may call out such armed forces to prevent or
suppress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion.” The other is Art XII, Sec. 17
which states that “In times of national emergency, when the public interest so
requires, the State may, during the emergency and under reasonable terms
prescribed by it, temporarily take over or direct the operation of any privately
owned public utility or business affected with public interests.” FLAG stated that under
Section 18, Art VII, the only grounds to call out the Armed Forces are lawless
violence, invasion or rebellion; while the only grounds to suspend the privilege
of the writ of habeas corpus, or to declare martial law are invasion or
rebellion. “Not one of these grounds
exists,” the FLAG statement read. “A so called 'conspiracy to bring down' Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo is not – in and itself – lawless violence, invasion or
rebellion.” FLAG further pointed out
“there is neither factual nor legal basis for the declaration of a national
emergency” as GMA claimed when she announced the proclamation that she was in
control of the situation and the threats against her government had already been
neutralized and quelled. FLAG further stated that
Sec. 17, Art XII may be exercised only during the emergency and under reasonable
terms. It tagged the proclamation as arbitrary as it explained that the
proclamation contains no clear directives or guidelines and no period for the
duration of the emergency. Human rights violation Human rights groups in the
region further condemned the proclamation as it will further human rights
violations. Atty. Randy Kinaud of the
Cordillera Human Rights Advocates (CHRA) said that the proclamation serves as
preview of what martial law is all about for those who were not there during
martial law. Lawyer Manja Bayang who
works with the indigenous people law center DINTEG said the proclamation is very
anti-human rights. She said the factual basis for the declaration is a product
of the imagination and there is no imminent danger. Another lawyer Chyt
Daytec-Yangot said that the proclamation is clearly a move to thwart the growing
sentiment of the people against the present administration, despite how legal
the people’s protests are. With the proclamation’s
possible effect on human rights, CHRA and DINTEG said they would strengthen
their institutions to address possible rights’ violations. Media curtailment
Joining the opposition
against the proclamation are media practitioners in the city. They criticized
the proclamation as it institutionalized curtailment of media reporting, even
objective reporting of an event. The Baguio-Benguet chapter
of the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP) pointed out that
the proclamation blames some segments of the media for “recklessly magnifying”
the viewpoint of conspirators who repeatedly tried to bring down the president.
Macapagal-Arroyo and the
Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) allege that a “tactical alliance” exists
between the opposition, “adventurist soldiers,” and the Left for the purpose of
bringing down the present government. NUJP stated that the role
of media is to report an event, regardless of how bad or good the event is as
part of the exercise of media practitioners' constitutional right to freedom of
expression and of the press. The NUJP Baguio-Benguet
chapter supports its mother organization’s call urging media practitioners “not
to be cowed by threats, open or veiled, which seeks to scare us from boldly
performing our jobs, as we must.” Meanwhile, the militant
Tongtongan ti Umili (TTU or People's Dialogue), the city chapter of the
Cordillera Peoples’ Alliance (CPA), who led the rally, urged the people to join
them in their opposition against the proclamation and for the ouster of GMA in
different protests to be launched in the future. With reports from Kimberlie
Quitasol for Nordis / Posted by Bulatlat © 2006 Bulatlat
■
Alipato Publications Permission is granted to reprint or redistribute this article, provided its author/s and Bulatlat are properly credited and notified.
NORTHERN DISPATCH
Posted by Bulatlat