Home 
The military has taken over Maguindanao province following the declaration of martial law on Friday night.
President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo signed Proclamation No. 1959 after the military received reports that supporters of the Ampatuans, who were blamed for the Nov. 23 massacre of a rival?s convoy that included 30 journalists, had plans to ?undertake hostile action? against the government if any of the clan members was arrested.
The move was aimed to ?quell a rebellion in the offing? from ?disparate armed groups threatening to cause more disorder and lawlessness.?
With the declaration of martial law, some 4,000 soldiers were deployed to the province while the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in Maguindano is suspended.
Maguindanao Gov. Andal Ampatuan Sr. and his four sons were arrested and would be charged with rebellion, a political crime which carries a penalty of up to 40 years in prison. At least 47 persons were rounded up while government troops raided palatial homes of the Ampatuans.
While the Nov. 23 massacre may be the worst election-related violence in the country and the victims deserve justice, a declaration of martial law is unnecessary and unwarranted.
Other government agencies are still functioning in Maguindanao. The governor?s son, Datu Unsay Mayor Andal Ampatuan Jr., was arrested for his alleged role in the massacre and was charged in the Regional Trial Court in Cotabato City.
While the courts in Cotabato may have received threats, reportedly from supporters of the Ampatuans, there is already a pending request before the Supreme Court to transfer the venue of the trial.
A judge in Kidapawan has also issued at least six search warrants authorizing the search on Ampatuan residences.
In short, government control remains in place in Maguindanao.
The 1987 Constitution doesn?t list ?imminent threats? as a basis for a proclamation of martial law. It specifies as grounds the prevention or suppression of ?lawless violence, invasion or rebellion.?
As Pacifico Agabin, a former dean of the University of the Philippines College of Law, said, ?The Constitution contemplates actual rebellion, not even threatened rebellion.?
Christian Monsod, one of the framers of the 1987 Constitution, explained that perceived threats were removed as basis in the declaration of martial law to avoid a repeat of the country?s tragic experience when the late strongman Ferdinand Marcos put the country under martial rule in 1972 to ?arrest growing communist insurgency and lawless violence and to reform society.?
About 37 years later, the government is using the same excuse of ?imminent threats? as basis to declare martial law, triggering howls of protests from various sectors.
There is a reason history should be told and retold: Lessons must be learned and mistakes must be prevented.
Martial law brought the country to its knees; freedom was stifled and countless victims of injustice were either killed, sent to jail or disappeared against their will.
Never again must we submit to this abomination.
Justice must be given to the Ampatuan massacre victims but let democracy prevail.
