Martial Law is still a sensitive word as this reminds a bleak and adversarial past that every Filipino despises. But,the Proclamation No. 216 of President Duterte, now causes fears and doubts among the citizenry and even raises a question, is there really a factual basis to declare such order? There are atleast three points why Martial Law in Mindanao is questionable. 

Looking on requisites provided by the 1987 constitutionn to declare Martial Law, the public could say that the declaration is justifiable because of the threats the Islamic State-inspired Maute has bestowed in the whole Marawi City, however, there are things the government need to explain.

According to the dissenting opinion of Associate Justice Marvic Leonen regarding the decision of the Supreme Court to uphold Martial Law in Mindanao, facts are sufficient if a) it is based on a credible intelligence and b) taken collectively establishes that there is actual rebellion and that public safety requires the suspension of the privilege of the writ of Habeas Corpus and the exercise of defined powers within the rubric of martial law.

6-year-old Solaiman Guro, a victim of a stray bullet despite living in the safe zone of Marawi City. Photo Courtesy of  JC Gitonga's Facebook account

However, the government has failed to present an evidence supporting their claim that the public safety requires Martial Law because of the inavailability of the reports reflecting the effectivity of the declaration to neutralize the terrorism. 

Adding to the aforementioned claim is the status of the Maranao evacuees who suffer unfortunate fate due to continuous battle, worsen by Martial Law. 

On the other hand, due to continous conflict in the country's premier Islamic City, another loophole was seen. Government displayed recklessness as public safety was jeopardized. Excessive artillery and aerial bombings for 55 days did not just weaken the militant enemies, but also taken lives of our own troops and even civilians. 

Hence, declaring full military force in a certain area would not wholly eradicate the threats and rebellion, but rather cause more casualties if the evacuation and safety of the civilians were not the priorities of the authority. And, this is justifiable as civilian casualties almost reached 40. 

The M-16 bullet that went through Guro's tin roof. Photo Courtesy of  JC Gitonga's Facebook account

Lastly, a paragraph in the Article 7, Section 18 says, "The suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall apply only to persons judicially charged for rebellion or offenses inherent in, or directly connected with, invasion.". During the height of the proclamation, Department of National Defense cleared that Martial Law will not specifically target rebel groups and narco-related personalities. 

However, in a press briefing conducted in Malacanan Palace on July 5, the spokesperson of the Armed Forces of the Philippines confirmed that rebel groups will also be covered by Martial Law, including the drug syndicates. These statements are proofs that Proclamation no. 216 of President Duterte is indeed vague, ergo deserves interrogations. 

The government is not failing to provide solutions but those remedies need to be appropriate and justifiable. But, Martial Law is not the best answer to address the problem; but instead, the armed forces and police should solely focus in fighting IS-inspired Maute,and prioritize public safety. The suspension of the privelege of Writ of Habeas Corpus might be a ground for abuse, on the other hand. 

Above all, the government should be reminded that the public has not yet recovered from the nightmares they had experienced in the hands of the dictator in 1972; and this Martial Law in Mindanao might be a sequel of the nightmare we are all afraid of.