Anti-martial law sentiments on day 1

MANILA, Philippines (1st UPDATE) - The supposed majority in Congress supporting the declaration of martial law in Maguindanao sat through the first day of its joint session as the anti-martial law senators and congressmen grilled Malacañang officials.

The closest to a defense of Proclamation 1959 declaring martial law and suspending the writ of habeas corpus in select areas in Maguindanao was Senator Joker Arroyo's appeal that Malacañang "recognize the continuing power of Congress to reconvene to check the abuses of the President."

Arroyo, who did not sign a Senate resolution calling for the revocation of martial law, wanted to make sure that even if Proclamation 1959 is not immediately revoked by Congress, they can convene again another time if abuses are committed in the implementation of martial law.

"This cannot be a one shot deal," Arroyo said.

Makati City 1st District Rep. Teodoro Locsin Jr.

From the House of Representatives, the closest defense Malacañang got was Makati City Rep. Teodoro Locsin's tirades--made before the presentation of the Malacañang report--against those who filed cases before the Supreme Court to declare the proclamation unconstitutional.

Three senators and three congressmen took turns in grilling representatives of the executive branch--Senators Benigno Aquino III, Joker Arroyo, and Jinggoy Estrada, and Congressmen Didagen Dilangalen (Maguindanao), Edcel Lagman (Albay), and Satur Ocampo (Bayan Muna).

The sequence of interpellators was arranged by Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile and House Speaker Prospero Nograles. The first day of the joint session lasted from 4:12 p.m. to 10:50 p.m. It will resume 2 p.m. on Thursday.

Among those who openly supported martial rule were House Speaker Prospero Nograles, Davao del Sur Rep. Antonio Lagdameo, Davao Del Norte Rep. Marc Douglas Cagas, and North Cotabato Rep. Emmylou Talino Mendoza.

Before the joint session, Nograles said 20 from the majority and 4 from the minority signed up to interpellate.

Nograles previously expressed confidence that majority of the congressmen are in favor of the declaration of martial law. He initiated House Resolution 1525 supporting Proclamation 1959, although he has not yet circulated it for signing.

At least 147 votes are needed to revoke martial law in Maguindanao. As of Wednesday, 51 lawyers (34 solons and 17 senators) had signed various anti-martial law resolutions.

'No actual rebellion'

Maguindanao Rep. Didagen Dilangalen

Critics of Proclamation 1959 declaring Martial Law and suspending the writ of habeas corpus in select areas in Maguindanao asked whether an actual rebellion exists in Maguindanao to justify the martial rule.

"By the language of the proclamation, walang actual rebellion," said Bayan Muna Rep. Satur Ocampo.

Ocampo recalled the dismissed rebellion case against him and five colleagues.

"It took nine months to prepare a case. There were 139 documents presented. Tingin ko, ang sitwasyon sa Maguindanao ay mayroong existing rebellion. But it is being carried out by the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, not by the Ampatuans," he said.

Senator Joker Arroyo agreed. He asked why the government did not declare martial law in the face of the uprising of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), but immediately placed Maguindanao under military rule just because of one incident.

"One incident and martial law is imposed. A continuing fight with MILF and no martial law is imposed," Arroyo said.

At the most, they said the Malacañang report only showed evidence of a looming rebellion and not of actual rebellion, which is the requirement of the Constitution in declaring martial law.

Devanadera replied that based on initial reports, there was only a threat of rebellion, but succeeding information from the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) showed that armed groups had already taken hold of "strategic" positions in Maguindanao.

"When it comes to rebellion, we had a situation based on the reports that the armed groups were already in effect depriving the chief executive of its powers to enforce the law. They were already having their own organization, they were already having their own government. It is not something that is looming. it is something that is already happening," she said.

"There need not be violent clashes. We have seen in the reports that there was really massing of these people who are heavily armed," Devanadera said.

"There was no physical exchange of fire. But the fact remains that the military and the police knew of groupings to prevent government authorities from enforcing the law," Ermita added.

Ermita said the MILF rebellion did not serve as a trigger point for martial law because there is an ongoing peace process.

Ex-state agents

The critics also questioned why members of the Special CAFGU Active Auxilliaries (SCAAs) helping the government fight the secessionist groups are now called "rebels."

"Those who were originally organizing, originally recruited to defend the public and the people, these are the same people who have been transformed into a private army. They now follow not the rule of the republic but their leaders, the Ampatuans," said Devanadera.

"They are viewed as rebels after the massacre," added Ermita.

Asked for other evidence to justify martial law, Devanadera said: "The courts were not functioning. There are no judges there even today. The judges came from the other provinces."

"We had the Department of Justice communicate with the Supreme Court just so a judge from another province would be designated just for the purpose of receiving the information being filed. Even our prosecutors were not there. We could not make them go back. Some of them were saying that they were afraid of their lives," she said.

"With respect to removal of allegiance, what were submitted to us was the armed men or the large group of armed men was not actually following orders from the legitimate or duly constituted government but merely from the Ampatuan clan," Devanadera said.

Maguindanao Rep. Didagen Dilangalen said the operations of the local government ceased because of the declaration of martial law.

Tempers fly between Locsin, Dilangalen

Congress' first joint session to tackle martial law started with tempers flying in the plenary, and it wasn't even between members of the Senate and the House of Representatives.

The congressman whose province is under martial rule, Maguindanao Rep. Didagen Dilangalen, had a heated exchange with a colleague, Makati City Rep. Teodoro Locsin Jr.

It started with Dilangalen questioning the absence of President Arroyo in the joint session, for which he got flak from Locsin, forcing Congress to suspend the joint session.

"Why is the President of the Philippines not here? This is a joint session. This is history," Dilangalen asked as soon as the joint session started.

Speaker Prospero Nograles tried but failed to pacify Dilangalen.

He explained that President Arroyo is not required to attend the joint session. Members of the Cabinet and heads of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police represented the executive branch in the joint session.

"Does the president not have any courtesy at all of informing us personally of the reasons why she declared martial law? I ask this because I am from Maguindanao. Only Congressman Datumanong and I are representatives of Maguindanao. We are very much affected. Considering the historical significance of this event, we feel that if the president has declared martial law, the president should be here and explain to us. Only congressman Datumanong and I could really experience what it is to be representing an area of this country that is affected by martial law. The president may not consider it as important to her," Dilangalen decried.

Forum Shopping?

After a quick suspension, Locsin took the podium to accuse Dilangalen of forum shopping.

"The gentleman who was so insistent on the physical presence of the President has filed a petition for the revocation of martial law in the Supreme Court. I suppose because he does not believe that he has a chance to get a revocation from the joint session of Congress. At the same time, he is planning to talk his case in the joint session. Well sirs, that is forum shopping. While this is the Christmas season, I advise him not to go Shoemart [department store] if he has already gone to the Supreme Court. Out of delicadeza, he should not use a forum he doesn't trust. That goes for the others who filed similar cases in the Supreme Court," Locsin argued.

An angry Dilangalen, who raised his voice while Nograles tried to control the situation, sought to declare Locsin "out of order."

"He's my idol in law school. He comes from Harvard. I come from [the school of] Hard Knocks. I will advise him to read the Constitution. Why will he ban me here? There is no such thing as forum shopping here?" Dilangalen protested.

"Whether or not we will revoke Proclamation No. 1959, I did not come here to be insulted," he added.

The session was suspended again and did not resume until Locsin withdrew his statement.

But it wasn't enough for Dilangalen, who complained that Locsin had humiliated him.

This prompted Locsin to take the podium again and say, "Mr. Speaker, if he continues I might change my mind [on apologizing]." He then slammed the desk with his fist and the big screen at the plenary showed him cursing.

After another suspension, Dilangalen, who was in a better mood, said, "Congressman Locsin is a good friend of mine. I forgive you Teddy Boy."

It took two hours before Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita began his presentation on President Arroyo’s report on the martial law in Maguindanao. The joint session started at 4:12 pm, but Ermita started his speech at 5:50 p.m.

Martial law may be extended

The government did not rule out the possibility of having the martial law in Maguindanao extended, as Ermita said the president’s decision will weigh largely on security developments on the ground.

Ermita stressed during the first salvo of the joint session of Congress that limiting martial law within a 60-day period – the time specified in the 1987 Constitution – will depend on how the situation in Maguindanao has changed.

The ticklish issue came up during the interpellations as Sen. Joker Arroyo asked the executive department for an assurance that martial law will not be “unnecessarily prolonged.”

Ermita said that since President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo based her decision to issue Proclamation No. 1959 on the report of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and the Philippine National Police (PNP), she will have to take her next step based also on what the security forces tell her.

He added that if the objectives of the AFP and the PNP have been "substantially achieved," and if the situation in Maguindanao has also "stabilized," there may be "no more need for further exercise."

Extending the duration of martial law in Maguindanao has been proposed by Major General Gaudencio Pangilinan, AFP vice chief of staff for operations. He recommended the military rule in the province be maintained until the May 2010 elections to ensure that there will be no cheating in the polls.

He said the military should be given ample time to arrest all the Ampatuans who have been accused of poll fraud in ensuring the victory of Arroyo in the 2004 presidential elections and the administration senatorial ticket in 2007.