QUESTION OF IMPLEMENTATION

By Philip M. Lustre Jr.

(Well-meaning netizen-friends have asked my views concerning presidential threats to declare martial law nationwide. This is my response.)

Whoever sits in Malacanang has the power to declare a nationwide martial law. That’s a settled doctrine. But the 1987 Constitution contains stringent conditions when it comes to the exercise of emergency powers.

Learning from the 1972 martial law declaration that led to the installation of the Marcos dictatorship, the framers of the 1987 Constitution have made sure that the martial law declaration would not lead to the suspension of the 1987 Constitution.

The framers have included provisions that allow the civilian courts and Congress to operate. Hence, it does not supplant the civilian authority over the military even when the entire country is in a state of martial law.

The Constitution specifies conditions before the president can declare martial law. He can only do it when the country faces invasion or rebellion. The duration is also specific: sixty days. It is also subject to automatic judicial review by the Supreme Court.

The President can declare nationwide martial law anytime, but only when the country faces two conditions: invasion or rebellion. He can’t use it to prolong his stay in power just like what Ferdinand Marcos did in 1972. Neither can he use those emergency powers to run after his political opponents.

The 1987 Constitution is clear on these issues. The martial law law powers are not meant to stifle dissent.

Ultimately, this is the question: “Can he implement a nationwide martial law?”

Given the questionable state of his mental health, it would be difficult for the president to use martial law powers to get what he wants. His motives would be suspect to the men and women of the Armed Forces, who would be tasked to implement it.

They would not follow orders because he says so. The men and women in uniform would certainly follow legal orders – and disobey illegal orders. 

Likewise, the president has to put every order in writing. Verbal orders would not be followed by those people, who, because they hold the guns, would be accountable for everything they do.

The president can’t just bamboozle his way to establish a new dictatorship. He is not in the position to touch the nerve of history the way Marcos did in 1972.

His hands are tied even if he declares a nationwide martial law. In fact, it would be foolish for him to place the entire country under martial law.