THE Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered the government to comment on the second petition filed by human rights lawyers and party-list groups questioning the constitutionality of the one-year extension of martial law in Mindanao.
High court spokesman Theodore Te said the Court gave the respondents until Jan. 13 to submit their comments on the petitions.
The respondents in the second petition include Senate President Aquilino Pimentel III, Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez, Executive Secretary Salvador Medialdea, Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana, Armed Forces Chief Rey Leonardo Guerrero and Philippine National Police Chief Ronald dela Rosa.
The tribunal also ordered the conduct of oral arguments on the consolidated petitions on Jan. 16 and Jan. 17.
“The parties are directed to submit their respective memorandum not later than 5:00 in the afternoon on Jan. 20, 2018,” the high court said.
On Dec. 29 last year, the high court required Malacañang and congressional leaders to respond to the petition filed by Lagman and other opposition lawmakers in the House of Representatives within 10 days.
In a joint session held on Dec. 13, Congress approved the request of President Rodrigo Duterte for a one-year extension of martial law.
But the two consolidated petitioners both insisted that the martial law extension lacked the factual basis required by the 1987 Constitution since the government had already admitted that there was no more rebellion in the region.
They said Duterte even admitted that the government had defeated the ISIS-linked Maute terror group in October last year after a nearly five-month campaign to oust them from Marawi City.
They said even the new alleged grounds cited by Duterte in his letter to both Houses of Congress would still not logically and legally justify an extension because they did not rise to the level of rebellion that constituted a threat to public safety as contemplated by the Constitution.
In seeking the extension of martial law, Duterte cited the assessment of the military and the police pointing to the continuing recruitment of terrorist groups in Mindanao, the increasing violence of the communist New People’s Army and the need to speed up the rehabilitation of Marawi.
Solicitor General Jose Calida also said that, aside from the Maute, more than a dozen terrorist groups were recruiting members in Mindanao.
However, the petitioners said the extension violated the provisions of the Constitution, which only allowed the imposition of martial law when there was actual rebellion or invasion, and when the operations of civilian government were substantially impaired that public safety required its declaration, adding that this was not the case in Mindanao.