MARTIAL LAW CASES

MAIN POINTS FOR THE CONSOLIDATED CASES OF:

LAGMAN VS. MEDIALDEA
CULLAMAT VS. DUTERTE
MOHAMAD VS MADIALDEA
I. Locus standi of petitioners.

 Section 18 of Article VII which provides that any citizen may file
before the Supreme Court in an appropriate proceeding to assail
the sufficiency of the factual basis of the declaration of martial law
or the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. "[T]he
only requisite for standing to challenge the validity of the suspension
is that the challenger be a citizen. He need not even be a
taxpayer."
II. The Supreme Court has the
power to review the sufficiency of
the factual basis of the
proclamation of martial law or the
suspension of the privilege of the
writ or the extension thereof
III. The power of the Court to review the
sufficiency of the factual basis of the
proclamation of martial law or the suspension of
the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus under
Section 18, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution is
independent of the actions taken by Congress.
 The judicial power to review
The Court may strike down the
presidential proclamation in an
appropriate proceeding filed by any
citizen on the ground of lack of sufficient
factual basis.
In reviewing the sufficiency of the factual
basis of the proclamation or suspension,
the Court considers only the information
and data available to the President prior
to or at the time of the declaration; it is
not allowed td "undertake an
independent investigation beyond the
pleadings."
the Court's review power is passive; it is
only initiated by the filing of a petition "in
an appropriate proceeding" by a citizen.
Congressional power to
revoke
Congress may revoke the proclamation or
suspension, which revocation shall not be
set aside by the President.
Congress may take into consideration not
only data available prior to, but likewise
events supervening the declaration.
Unlike the Court which does not look into
the absolute correctness of the factual
basis as will be discussed below, Congress
could probe deeper and further; it can
delve into the accuracy of the facts
presented before it.
Congress' review mechanism is automatic
in the sense that it may be activated by
Congress itself at any time after the
proclamation or suspension was made.
IV. The judicial power to review the sufficiency
of factual basis of the declaration of martial
law or the suspension of the privilege of the
writ of habeas corpus does not extend to the
calibration of the President's decision of which
among his graduated powers he will avail of in
a given situation.
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.
Extraordinary powers of the
President distinguished.
Calling out power Power of suspending the privilege of the
writ of habeas corpus and the power to
declare martial law
the most benign and involves ordinary may be exercised only when there is actual
police action. invasion or rebellion, and public safety
requires it.
the President may resort to this
extraordinary power whenever it becomes involve curtailment and suppression of civil
necessary to prevent or suppress lawless rights and individual freedom.
violence, invasion, or rebellion.
 power of judicial review does not extend to calibrating the
President's decision pertaining to which extraordinary power to avail
given a set of facts or conditions. To do so would be tantamount to
an incursion into the exclusive domain of the Executive and an
infringement on the prerogative that solely, at least initially, lies with
the President.
VI. There is sufficient factual basis
for the declaration of martial law
and the suspension of the writ of
habeas corpus.
VI. Public safety requires the
declaration of martial law and
the suspension of the privilege of
the writ of habeas corpus in the
whole of Mindanao.
 The discretion to determine the territorial scope of martial law lies with
the President. The Constitution grants him the prerogative whether to
put the entire Philippines or any part thereof under martial law. There is
no constitutional edict that martial law should be confined only in the
particular place where the armed public uprising actually transpired.
 This is not only practical but also logical. Martial law is an urgent
measure since at stake is the nation's territorial sovereignty and survival.
As such, the President has to respond quickly. After the rebellion in the
Court's compound, he need not wait for another rebellion to be
mounted in Quezon City before he could impose martial law thereat. If
that is the case, then the President would have to wait until every
remote corner in the country is infested with rebels before he could
declare martial law in the entire Philippines. For sure, this is not the
scenario envisioned by the Constitution.
The Court upholds the validity of
the declaration of martial law and
suspension of the privilege of the
writ of habeas corpus in the entire
Mindanao region.