LAGMAN VS MEDIALDEA
Proclamation No. 216
- Section 18, Article VII: in case of invasion or rebellion,
when the public safety requires it, the President for a
period of not exceeding 60 days, suspend the privilege of
the writ of habeas corpus or place the Philippines or any
part thereof under martial law
- Article 134 of RPC: rebellion or insurrection:
o Rising and taking arms against the Government
o Purpose: removing the allegiance to said
Government or its laws, the territory of the RP
or any part thereof, of any land, naval, or other
armed forces or depriving the Chief Executive or
the Legislature or partially of any of their
powers or prerogative
- Reasons:
o Attack on the military outpost in Lanao
o Killing and wounding of several soldiers and
Mass jailbreak in Marawi
o Maute group has taken over a hospital in
Marawi City
o Established checkpoints
o Burned down government and private facilities
o Inflicted casualties
o Started flying the flag of ISIS
- Conclusion: Openly attempting to remove from the
allegiance to the Philippines
Written Report on the factual basis of PN 216 submitted to
Congress:
- Mindanao has been plagued with rebellion and lawless
violence which only escalated and worsened with the
passing of time
- Government operation to capture the high-ranking
officers of the Abu Sayyaf and Maute Group
- These groups confronted the government
o Sowing violence aimed not only againsta the
government authorities and its facilities but
against the civilians and their properties
- Events:
o Assaulted Marawi City Jail
o Supply power had been interrupted
o Ambushed Marawi Police
o Took control of at least 3 bridges
o Set up road blockades and checkpoints
o Burned educational institutions, Church, and its
nuns quarters
o Attacked hospitals
o Ransacked bank
o Reports: execution of Christians, recruit young
males to join their group
- These events left the President to conclude that:
o these groups intended to establish seat of
power in Marawi for their plan of the
establishment of DAESH wialyat
o remove Marawi City and eventually the rest of
Mindanao from its allegiance to the
Government
o Deprive the President his power, authority and
prerogatives within Marawi City
- These events also bought undue constraints and
difficulties to the military and government personnel
o Difficulty sending their reports to the Chief
Executive
o Personnel from the BJMP have prevented from
performing their functions
o Bridge and road blockades deprive the
government of its ability to deliver basic services
to its citizens
- Justification why Martial Law should bed in Mindanao
and not just in Marawi: strategic location of Marawi City
(center of Mindanao)
Military and police authorities conducted briefings with the
Senate and HoR
- Congress supports the declaration of martial law
- Satisfactory and constitutional
Lagman Petition
1. No factual basis that there is rebellion
a. Flying of ISIS flag mere propaganda
b. Maute private militia of the clan
c. Armed conflict (capturing high-ranking officers
of the groups)
d. Resistance shield these high ranking officers
and not to remove Marawis allegiance to the
govt and deprive the President of its power
2. Presidents Report: false and inaacurate
a. Not attacked the hospital but brough injured
member
b. Bank was not ransacked
c. Some educational institutions not burned
d. No beheading of police chief
3. Cited events that already happened before and already
resolved
4. President did not consult military establishments
5. Military: successful in pre-empting the ASG and Maute
a. ISIS undetermined, meager number
6. Prayers:
a. Court to review the sufficiency of the factual
basis
b. Declare the proclamation null & void
Cullamat
- No factual basis entire Mindanao
- Supposed rebellion in Marawi only
- other rebel groups in Mindanao vague
- Inaccuracies in the report of the President
- Prayer: declare PN 216 unconstitutional or constitution
only in Marawi
Moahammad
- Review the sufficiency of factual basis
- Martial law = last resort (exhaust less severe remedies)
o Sequential: calling out powers, suspension of
writ of habeas corpus, declaration of martial law
- Factual situation in Marawi: not so grave to require
imposition of martial law
o Gravity needed is reached when it is compelled
by needs of public safety
- Establishment of Islamic state unsubstantiated
- Compel President to disclose facts that would support
the imposition of martial law
Courts asked OSG to comment
OSG: defending the constitutionality of PN 216
- Acknowledges with the authority of the Court to review
the sufficiency of factual basis Section 18, Article VII
o Provision failed to specify the vehicle, mode, or
remedy through which the appropriate
proceeding may be resorted to
o Review power is not mandatory but
discretionary
- Factual basis should be reviewed under the lens of grave
abuse of discretion and not the yardstick of correctness
of facts
- Factual basis must be assessed from the point of view of
the President and based on the facts available at the time
the decision was made
o Information and data available to him at the
time he made the determination
- Facts established after the declaration of martial law
should not be considered in the review of the sufficiency
of the factual basis of the proclamation of martial law.
- President could validly rely on intelligence reports
coming from the AFP
- Declaration of martial law: vested solely on the President
o Lack of recommendation from the Defense
Secretary not needed
- News reports hearsay evidence (inadmissible and
probative value)
ISSUES
1. Petitions are appropriate proceeding covered by Section
18(3), Article VII of the Constitution?
2. Is the President:
a. Required to be factually correct or not arbitrary
in his appreciation of facts
b. Required to obtain recommendation from DND
secretary
c. Required to take into account only the situation
at the time of the proclamation
3. Power of the Court to review independent that have
been taken by Congress
4. Sufficient factual basis?
a. Parameters for review
b. Burden of proof
c. Threshold of evidence
5. Exercise of judicial review involves the calibration of
graduated powers of the Pres as Commander in Chief?
6. PN 216 vague and thus null and void:
a. Inclusion of other rebel groups
b. No guidelines specifying its actual operational
parameters within the entire Mindanao group
7. Hostilities mentioned in PN 216 and report are sufficient:
a. Existence of actual rebellion
b. In the entire Mindanao
8. Terrorism = rebellion and requirements of public safety
sufficient to declare martial law or suspend the privilege
of the writ of habeas corpus?
9. Nullification of PN 216:
a. Recall PN 55
b. Also nullify the acts of the President in calling
out the armed forces to quell lawless violence in
Marawi and other parts of the Mindanao region
RULING
1)Locus standi of petitioners
- Section 18 of Article VII: any citizen may file the
appropriate proceedings to assail the sufficiency of basis
of the declaration of martial law or suspension of writ
habeas corpus
o Need not be a taxpayer
- Cullamat and Mohamad: suing in their capacities as
citizens
- Lagman: as members of Congress
o Contrary to the position of the HoR
o Relax the issue of locus of standi due to
transcendental issues
- Respondents did not question petitioners legal standing
2)Petitioners are covered by appropriate proceeding covered
by Section 18(3), Article VII to invoke the mode of review
required by the Court?
- Section 18, Article VII: The Supreme Court may review, in
an appropriate proceeding, filed by any citizens the
factual basis of the proclamation of martial law
o Sui generis (special and specific jurisdiction of
the Supreme Court different from those
enumerated in Sections 1 and 5 of Article VII
a. Jurisdiction must be specifically conferred by the
Constitution or by law
- Jurisdiction cannot be implied from the language of the
Constitution or a statute
- Section 18, Article VII reveals that it specifically grants
authority to the Court to determine the sufficiency of
factual basis of the proclamation of martial law or
suspension of the writ of habeas corpus
b. In an appropriate proceeding does not refer to a
petition for certiorari filed under Section 1 or 5 of Article
VIII
- Certiorari: whether the respondent committed any grave
abuse of discretion
o Not the proper tool to review the sufficiency of
the factual basis of the proclamation or
suspension
- Section 18, Article VII: review the sufficiency of factual
basis of the exercise of emergency powers of President
c. Purpose or significance of Section 18, Article VII is to
constitutionalize the pre-Marcos martial law ruling in In
the Matter of the Petition for Habeas Corpus of Lansang
- Lansang ruling: factual basis of the declaration of martial
law and the suspension of the privilege of the writ of
habeas corpus is not a political question and is within the
ambit of judicial review.
d. Purpose of Section 18, Article VII: provide additional
safeguard against possible abuse by the President on the
exercise of the extraordinary powers
- Supreme Court: right to determine the factual basis
promulgate within 30 days
- Relaxed the rule on standing by allowing any citizen to Review: passive (initiated Automatic (may be
question before this Court the sufficiency of the factual by the filing of a petition) activated by Congress itself
basis of proclamation or suspension at any time after the
e. Purpose of Section 18, Article VII is to curtail the extent proclamation or suspension
of the powers of the President was made
- Emergency power: can only be exercised in two cases: b) Framers: judicial power to review to be exercised
invasion or rebellion when public safety demands it independently from the congressional power to review
- 60 days - If the Members are detained
- Reserving to Congress the power to revoke such c) Re-examination of the Courts pronouncement in Fortun
suspension or proclamation which may not be revoked vs President Macapagal-Arroyo
by the President - Fortun: Only when Congress defaults in its express duty
- Does not suspend the operation of the Constitution nor to defend the Constitution through such review should
abolish civil courts, legislative assemblies, or vest the Supreme Court step in as its final rampart
jurisdiction to military tribunals over civilians or suspend o Court clipped its own power
the privilege of the writ o Considered itself just on stand-by
f. To interpret appropriate proceeding as filed under - Court can simultaneously exercise its power of review
Section1 of Article VIII would be contrary to the intent of with, and independently from, the power to revoke by
the Constitution Congress
- Contradict the clear intention of the framers of the - Any perceived inaction or default on the part of Congress
Constitution to place additional safeguards against does not deprive or deny the Court its power to review
possible martial law abuse 4)The judicial power to review the sufficiency of factual
g. Jurisdiction of the Court is not restricted to those basis of the declaration of martial law or the suspension of
enumerated in Sections 1 and 5 of Article VIII the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus does not extend to
- Example: jurisdiction to be the sole judge of all contests the calibration of the Presidents decision of which among
relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of the his graduated powers he will avail of in a given situation.
President or Vice-President can be found in the last - Extraordinary powers:
paragraph Section 4, Article VII o Calling out the AFP
h. Unique features of the third paragraph of Section 18, o Suspending the privilege of the writ of
Article VII makes it sui generis habeas corpus
- Follow a different rule on standing as any citizen may file o Declaring martial law
it - These powers may be resorted to only under specified
- Limits the issue to the sufficiency of the factual basis conditions
- Usual period of filing pleadings in Petition for Certiorari is a) Extraordinary powers distinguished
likewise not applicable - Calling out power
- Limited period for the Court to promulgate its decision o Most benign and involves ordinary police
3) The power of the Court to review the sufficiency of the action
factual basis independent of the action taken by Congress o It becomes necessary to prevent or
- Powers subject to the veto powers of the Court and suppress lawless violence, invasion, or
Congress rebellion
a) Judicial power to review vs Congressional power to o Fully discretionary to the President
revoke o Not subject to judicial review
Court Congress o Only limitation: should be within the
Court may strike down the Congress may revoke the bounds of the Constitution
presidential proclamation in proclamation or - Suspending the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus
an appropriate proceeding suspension, which and/or declaring martial law
filed by any citizen on the revocation shall not be set o Only when there is actual invasion or
ground of lack of sufficient aside by the President rebellion and public safety requires it
factual basis o Limits
Time limit: 60 days
Court considers only the Congress may take into Review and possible revocation by
information and data consideration not only data Congress
available to the President available prior to, but Review and possible nullification
prior to or at the time of likewise events supervening by the SC
the declaration the declaration o Involve curtailment and suppression of civil
Not allowed to undertake rights and individual freedom
an independent o Serves as a warning to the citizens that the
investigation beyond the Executive Department called upon the
pleadings
 military to assist in the maintenance of law
and order
b) What happens during martial law
- Framers:
o Does not suspend the operation of the
Constitution nor supplant the functioning of
the civil courts or legislative assemblies
o Does not suspend the principle of
separation of powers
o President has the authority to issue orders
which have the effect of law but strictly in a
theater of war
- Bill of Rights remain
- Suspension of writ of habeas corpus applies only to
those judicially charged with rebellion or offense
connected with invasion
- Constitution has safeguards against the Presidents
prerogative to declare a state of martial law
c) Graduation of powers refers to hierarchy based on scope
and effect; it does not refer to a sequence, order, or
arrangement by which the Commander-in-Chief must
adhere to
- Power to choose among the powers judgment call on
the part of the President
- Power of judicial review does not extend to calibrating
the Presidents decision pertaining to which ordinary
power to avail given a set of facts or condition
d) The framers of the Constitution: Congress not to
interfere a priori in the decision-making process of the
President
- Supports the conclusion that judicial review does not
include the calibration of the Presidents decision
e) The Court must similarly and necessarily refrain from
calibrating the Presidents decision of which among his
extraordinary power to avail given a certain situation or
condition.
f) The recommendation of the Defense Secretary is not a
condition for the declaration of martial law or suspension
of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.
- Only requirements: actual invasion or rebellion and that
public safety requires it
g) In any event, the President initially employed the most
benign action before he declared martial law and
suspended the writ of habeas corpus
5)Whether or not PN 216 may be considered vague because
of (a) its inclusion of other rebel groups and (b) the
absence of any guideline specifying its actual operational
parameters within the entire Mindanao region
a. Void-for-vagueness doctrine
- Law is facially invalid if men of common intelligence must
necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its
application
o Repugnant to the Constitution in two
respects:
Violates due process for failure to
accord persons fair notice of the
conduct to avoid
Leaves law enforcers unbridled
discretion in carrying out its
provisions
b. Vagueness doctrine applies only in free speech cases
- Not appropriate for testing the validity of penal statutes
- Criminal statutes have general interrorem effect resulting
from their very existence and if facial challenge is
allowed for this reason alone, the State may well be
prevented from enacting laws against socially harmful
conduct.
c. PN 216 cannot be facially challenged using the vagueness
doctrine
- PN 216 does not regulate speech, religious freedom, and
other fundamental rights that may be facially challenged.
What it seeks to penalize is conduct, not speech.
d. Inclusion of other rebel groups does not make PN 216
vague
- The term other rebel groups in PN 216 is not at all
vague when viewed in the context of the words that
accompany it
e. Lack of guidelines/operational parameters does not make
PN 216 vague
- Judicial review covers only the sufficiency of information
or data available to or known to the President prior to, or
at the time of, the declaration or suspension.
- No need for the Court to determine the constitutionality
of the implementing and/or operation guidelines, etc.
6)Whether or not nullifying PN 216 will have the effect of
recalling PN 55 or also nullify the acts of President calling
out the armed forces to quell lawless violence in Marawi and
other parts of the Mindanao region
a. The calling out power is in a different category from the
power to declare martial law and the power to suspend the
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus; nullification of PN 216
will not affect PN 55.
- The President may exercise the power to call out the AFP
independently of the power to suspend the privilege of writ
of habeas corpus and to declare martial law
b. The operative fact doctrine
- The unconstitutional statute is recognized as an operative
fact before it is declared unconstitutional
- The actual existence of a statute prior to such determination
is an operative fact and may have consequences which
cannot always be erased by a new judicial declaration
7)The Scope of the Power to Review
a. The scope of the power of review under the 1987
Constitution refers only to the determination of the
sufficiency of the factual basis of the declaration of martial
law and suspension of the privilege of habeas corpus.
b. The sufficiency of factual basis test
- framers are presumed to know the prevailing jurisprudence
at the time they were drafting the Constitution
- sufficiency factual basis: only test for judicial review of the
Presidents power to declare martial law and suspend the
privilege of writ of habeas corpus
- The Court does not need to satisfy itself that the Presidents
decision is correct, rather it only needs to determine whether
the Presidents decision had sufficient factual bases
- Section 18, Article VII limits the scope of judicial review by
the introduction of the sufficiency of the factual basis test
- Must be based only on facts available to the President at
the time he made the decision
- Past events may be considered as justification
- President cannot be forced to divulge intelligence reports
and confidential information that may prejudice the
operations and the safety of the military
- Events that happened after the issuance cannot be
considered since these happened after the President had
already issued the proclamation.
- Court should look into the full complements or totality of
the factual basis and not piecemeal or individually.
o Should not expect absolute correctness
o President could not be expected to verify the
accuracy and veracity of all facts reported to
him due to the urgency of the situation.
o By the time the President is satisfied with the
correctness of the facts in his possession, it
would be too late in the day as the invasion or
rebellion could have already escalated.
- Constitution does not require precision in establishing
the fact of rebellion.
o President is called to act as public safety
requires.
- Courts review is confined to the sufficiency, not
accuracy.
- Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus: no application
o Falsities and inaccuracies in some of the facts
not enough reason
o There are other facts that support the
conclusion
8)The parameters for determining the sufficiency of the
factual basis for the declaration of martial law and/or
suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus
a. Actual invasion or rebellion and public safety
- set by Section 18, Article VII
- Parameters
o Actual invasion or rebellion
o Public Safety
- Concurrence of these two conditions
- Since the Constitution did not define the term rebellion,
it must be understood to have the same meaning as the
crime of rebellion in the RPC
o To give it a different meaning create
confession and give the President wide latitude
of discretion
- Requisites of rebellion
o There is a public uprising
o There is taking arms against the Government
o The purpose of the uprising or movement is
either
To remove from allegiance to the
Government or its laws; the territory of
the Philippines; any body of land, naval,
or other armed forces
To deprive the Chief Executive or
Congress wholly or partially of any
other powers and prerogatives
b. Probable cause is the allowable standard of proof for the
President
- Probable cause or evidence showing that more likely
than not a rebellion was committed or is being
committed
- Parameters:
o Actual rebellion or invasion
o Public safety requires its
o There is probable cause for the President to
believe that there is actual rebellion or invasion
9)There is sufficient factual basis for the declaration of
martial law and the suspension of writ of habeas corpus
- Reiteration: martial law is a matter of urgency and much
leeway and flexibility should be accorded the President
- Not expected to validate all the information
- The President deduced from the facts available to him
that there was an armed public uprising, the culpable
purpose of which was to remove from the allegiance to
the Philippine Government a portion of its territory and
to deprive the Chief Executive of any of his powers and
prerogatives, leading the President to believe there was
probable cause that the crime of rebellion was and is
being committed and that public safety requires the
imposition and suspension
- After reviewing the facts Court concludes that the
President had sufficient factual bases tending to show
the actual rebellion exists
- President needs to satisfy is only the standard of
probable cause
- Court is not concerned about absolute correctness,
accuracy or precision of the facts otherwise would
unduly tie the hands of the President
- Counter-evidence unverified news articles on the
internet
o Hearsay evidence
o News reports may be admitted on grounds of
relevance doctrine of independent relevant
statement
Exception to the hearsay rules
Where only the fact that such
statements were made is relevant and
the truth or falsity is immaterial
- There are other independent facts which support the
finding that more likely than not, rebellion exists and the
public safety requires its
10)Public safety requires the declaration and suspension
o Rebellion or invasion alone calling out
powers
o Acts of violence perpetrated by the ASG and the
Maute Group were directed not only against the
government but also against civilians and their
properties
11)Whole of Mindanao
- The overriding and paramount concern of martial law is
protection of the security of the nation and the good and
safety of the public
- As Commander-in-Chief, the President receives vital,
relevant, classified and live information which equip and
assist him in making decisions
o Closed door session some information came
to light
- The Court has no machinery or tool equal to that of the
Commander-in-Chief to ably and properly assess the
ground conditions
o Not constitutional lapse
o In line with the duty of the court to review the
factual basis
o Rely on the fact-finding capabilities of the
Executive Department
- The Constitution grants the President, as Commander-in-
Chief, the discretion to determine the territorial coverage
or application
o Merely stated the Philippines or any part
thereof depends on the assessment of the
President
- The Constitution has provided sufficient safeguards
against possible abuses of the Commander-in-Chief
powers; further curtailment of Presidential powers
should not only be discouraged but also avoided
o Importance of martial law in the context of our
society should outweigh ones prejudices and
apprehensions against it. The significance of
martial law should not be undermined by
unjustified fears and past experience
o Conscious of these fears framers placed
several safeguards:
60 days
Revocation by the Congress
Review of the Court
Does not suspend the operation of the
Constitution
- Rebellion: nature, scope, and range
o Rebellion is not required that all armed
participants should congregate in one place
not should be the determining factor for scope
o Discretion to determine territorial scope
President
o Public safety: involves the prevention of an
protection from events that could endanger the
public
Abstract term; does not take physical
form
Range, extent or scope could not be
physically measured by metes and
bounds
o Another reasons why rebellion need not be
limited to the particular vicinity
Rebellion consists of many acts
o It is difficult to fix the territorial scope of martial
law in direct proportion to the range of actual
rebellion and requirement of public safety
o Territorial scope arbitrary
- President: not limited to the place where there is actual
rebellion; extends to other areas where the present
hostilities are in danger of spilling over; cutting supply
lines coming from different parts of Mindanao
- The Court must stay within the confines of its power
o No technical expertise to determine the scope
o Should give the President sufficient leeway
o Declaration and suspension essentially an
executive act
- Several local armed groups have formed linkages aimed
at committing rebellion and acts in furtherance thereof in
the whole of Mindanao
o Marawi: lies in the heart of Mindanao
Kilometer Zero marker: point of
reference of all roads in Mindanao
o There is reasonable basis to believe that Marawi
is only staging point of rebellion
o Other events also show that the atrocities were
not concentrated in Marawi
o Cannot be justified as to be confined only in
Marawi
- Terrorism neither negates nor absorbs rebellion
o Rebellion is only one of the various means by
which terrorism can be committed
o Terrorism: to sow and create a condition of
widespread fear among the population in order
to coerce the government to give in to an
unlawful demand
o If the purpose is political (severing the allegiance
of Mindanao to the Philippine Government)
rebellion
o Instant case rebellion
o Assuming terrorism cannot prevent the
President from exercising his powers
o Nothing in Art 134 of RPC and RA 9372
rebellion and terrorism are mutually exclusive or
cannot co-exist
RA 9732 does not expressly or impliedly
repeal Art. 134
o Cannot absorb each other different elements