LAGMAN V. MEDIALDEA (Dissenting Opinion- Caguioa, J.
)
G.R. NO 231658. | (2017)
SUFFICIENCY OF DECLARATION OF MARTIAL LAW
ISSUE 1: Was there sufficient basis to declare martial law in Marawi City? (YES)
RATIO: It has been sufficiently shown that at the time of the declaration of martial law and the suspension of the privilege of the writ, the
information known to the Executive constituted probable cause to believe that there was actual rebellion in Marawi City. The armed public
uprising in Marawi City is self-evident. The use of heavy artillery and the hostile nature of attacks against both civilians and the armed forces
are strongly indicative of an uprising against the Government. The multitude of criminal elements as well as the concerted manner of uprising
therefore satisfies the first element of the crime of rebellion. Anent the second element of intent, the Executive's presentation of its military
officials and intelligence reports in camera showed probable cause to believe that the intent component of the rebellion exists - that the
Maute group sought to establish a "wilayah," or caliphate in Lanao del Sur of extremist network ISIS, which has yet to officially acknowledge
the said group. The video footage recovered by the military showing the plans of the Maute· Group to attack Marawi City further evidences
the plan to remove Marawi City from its allegiance to the Government of the Republic of the Philippines.
ISSUE 2: Was there sufficient basis to declare martial law in the rest of Mindanao? (NO)
RATIO: The presentation of military officials heard in camera was similarly vague when it came to establishing the necessity of the
declaration of martial law and suspension of the privilege of the writ in the entire Mindanao. Given that the only justification offered in these
proceedings tends to show that the declaration of martial law41 is merely "beneficial" or "preferable," then the requirement of public safety
is necessarily not met. That something is beneficial or preferable does not automatically mean it is necessary - especially where, as here, the
government could not articulate what "additional powers" it could or wanted to wield that Proclamation No. 55 (s. 2016) did not give them.
LAGMAN V. MEDIALDEA (Concurring Opinion- Reyes, J.)
G.R. NO 231658. | (2017)
SUFFICIENCY OF DECLARATION OF MARTIAL LAW
ISSUE 1: Did the petitioners sufficiently prove the insufficiency of a factual basis for the declaration? (NO)
RATIO: The petitioners failed to prove that the President had insufficient basis in declaring martial law and suspending the privilege of the
writ of habeas corpus in the whole of Mindanao. It is incumbent upon the petitioners to present credible evidence to prove that the
President's declaration of martial law and suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus had insufficient basis. _However, a perusal
of the petitioners' allegations shows that the same are merely based on various newspaper reports on the ongoing armed fighting in Marawi
City between the government forces and elements of the Maute group. However, newspaper articles amount to "hearsay evidence, twice
removed" and are therefore not only inadmissible but without any probative value at all. The declaration of martial law and suspension of
the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus are official acts of the President, exercised pursuant to the Commander-in-Chief powers accorded
to him by no less than the Constitution. As such, the same enjoys the presumption of regularity, which is conclusive unless clear and convincing
evidence of irregularity or failure to perform a duty is adduced. There is none in this case, however, except for hearsay evidence consisting
of the unverified newspaper articles; the petitioners' allegations vis-a-vis the supposed irregularity in the declaration and suspension cannot
be justified upon hearsay evidence that is never given any evidentiary or probative value in this jurisdiction.
ISSUE 2: Was there sufficient basis to declare martial law in the rest of Mindanao? (YES)
RATIO: To stress, the conduct of the rebel groups at the time of the siege of Marawi City, and even prior thereto, coupled with the
aforementioned military intelligence reports in the possession of the President, are sufficient bases to engender a reasonable belief that the
Marawi City is but a staging ground for the widespread armed attacks in the whole of Mindanao, with the ultimate objective being the
establishment of an ISIS caliphate therein and, thus, removing Mindanao from the allegiance to the Government. Given the foregoing
considerations, it would be the height of absurdity to expect the President to dawdle around and wait for the armed attacks by the rebel
groups to reach the neighboring cities of Marawi and the rest of the provinces of Mindanao before he exercise his power to declare martial
law and suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. The continued armed attacks by the Maute group and other rebel groups not only
in Marawi City, but as well as in the rest of Mindanao, indubitably affects the residents therein who are forced to flee from their respective
homes to avoid being caught in the cross-fire. Also, the said rebel groups, even prior to the siege of Marawi City, have been perpetrating
several activities aimed at terrorizing the residents of Mindanao, such as bombing, kidnapping and attacks on military and government
installations.
