MANILA, Philippines—On July 9, Pangasinan Rep. Jose de Venecia told the Rotary Club of Manila that President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo could declare martial law should the campaign for Charter change fail.
“If they are unable to get the three-fourths vote necessary to amend the Constitution, their ... fallback position is to declare martial law,” he told an audience that included the ambassadors of Germany, Italy, Indonesia, Thailand, India and Pakistan.
De Venecia, a close Arroyo ally until he was removed as Speaker of the House in a Palace-backed coup last year, had earlier told Inquirer editors and reporters that Ms Arroyo came close to declaring martial law during the November 2007 siege of Peninsula Manila led by Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV and Brig. Gen. Danilo Lim, and that he was asked by Malacañang at the time to seek US support.
He later corrected himself and said the plan to impose martial law was broached in 2005 at the height of the national crisis triggered by the “Hello Garci” election fraud scandal.
Intimate knowledge
On July 22, speaking before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, former Defense Secretary Avelino Cruz backed De Venecia’s statements.
“What I can say is that indeed, [Speaker De Venecia] has intimate knowledge of these events,” Cruz said, adding that he had also heard former Ambassador to the United States Albert del Rosario narrate on TV a similar version of events taking place “in the last quarter of 2005.”
De Venecia and Cruz cited similarities between the current national situation and that in 1972. Cruz noted that Ferdinand Marcos was also nearing the end of his term when he declared martial law; De Venecia warned that events such as the escalation of bombings and a failure of the 2010 elections could trigger a martial law declaration.
Early last month, bomb explosions rocked Jolo and the cities of Cotabato and Iligan, killing a total of eight people, including a year-old boy, and injuring scores of others.
Calibrated preemptive response
The “Hello Garci” controversy spawned not only the biggest threat to the legitimacy of the Arroyo administration but also three measures that led to fears of a second martial law era.
On June 6, 2005, in order to preempt an alleged opposition plot, Press Secretary Ignacio Bunye played to reporters two CDs of purported taped conversations between Ms Arroyo and then Elections Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano on the rigging of the results of the May 2004 presidential polls.
Ms Arroyo subsequently apologized to the nation on TV, saying she was the woman talking to an election official whom she did not name. But she denied attempting to rig the election results, saying she was only anxious to protect her votes in light of the slow canvassing.
The revelation of the tapes led to Congress hearings and street protests. On Sept. 21, 2005, incidentally also the 33rd anniversary of the declaration of martial law, Malacañang announced a “calibrated preemptive response (CPR) in lieu of maximum tolerance” in dealing with protests without permits.
The announcement was made amid reports of purported destabilization attempts.
EO 464
A week later, Ms Arroyo issued Executive Order No. 464 barring government executives and police and military officials from testifying at Congress hearings without her consent.
It drew overwhelming opposition even from her allies in Congress.
Lawmakers said EO 464 could be part of the administration’s push for a unicameral Congress, or a means to maintain the loyalty of the military and the Cabinet to ensure Ms Arroyo’s political survival.
The opposition called it a manifestation of her “paranoia.”
Opposition and administration senators, along with other groups, questioned EO 464’s legality in the Supreme Court.
In January 2006, the five House committees investigating the “Hello Garci” controversy wrapped up work without resolving the issue. Parañaque City Rep. Roilo Golez blamed EO 464 for the failure of the House to get to the bottom of the case.
Presidential Proclamation 1017
On Feb. 24, 2006, during the week commemorating the 20th anniversary of Edsa I, Ms Arroyo signed Presidential Proclamation No. 1017 declaring a state of emergency nationwide and demanding obedience to all decrees and orders “promulgated by me personally.”
The proclamation resulted from the military’s discovery of an alleged plot by key officers to join protest marches on that day and break away from the chain of command.
On that day, University of the Philippines Prof. Randy David was picked up at a march marking the anniversary of the Edsa People Power Revolution.
Past midnight a day later, police raided the office of The Daily Tribune, a broadsheet critical of the Arroyo administration, and seized editorial materials.
In a bald warning, the Philippine National Police said it would take over any media organization that would not follow “standards set by the government.”
A number of protesters were arrested in the seven days that PP 1017 was in effect.
Supreme Court moves
On April 20, 2006, the Supreme Court, voting 14-0, shot down EO 464. But it declared constitutional Ms Arroyo’s right to bar executive officials from appearing during the question hour in both chambers of Congress. (She formally revoked the order only in March 2008.)
Five days later, the high court declared CPR unconstitutional by a vote of 13-0.
On May 3, 2006, it declared unconstitutional the arrest of protesters, the forcible breakup of rallies and the raid on the Tribune carried out in accordance with PP 1017.
Voting 11-3, the high court upheld the President’s power to declare a state of emergency, but ruled as illegal a clause in PP 1017 giving herself authority to issue decrees.
The high court assailed the proclamation, saying it evoked shades of Marcos’ PP 1081 which imposed martial law in 1972. Kate Pedroso and Eliza Victoria, Inquirer Research
Source: Inquirer Archives
No comments:
Post a Comment