No to martial law

It is difficult for the President to declare martial law under the 1987 constitution. Under Section 18 Article 7 the declaration of Martial Law cannot exceed 60 days and must be submitted to Congress within 48 hrs. upon its proclamation. I think what this gov’t is thinking is not the proclamation of martial law but declaring a state of emergency. But please observe what is happening right now isnt there a suppression/curtailment of the basic rights of the people under the bill of rights, this is very obvious.

softly, nothing is difficult for gloria. the impeachment has proven that the arroyo-congress tandem can be fatal. hawak nya na lahat legislative and judicial, ipso facto nga.

apay kalilian ayan nan ngay dagitay pilipino na napigsa ti ngiwat da a mangsupyat ti kastoy a klase ti gobyerno ni gloria?

kaasi tayo pay ta kastoy RINUKER ti panunot ti gobyerno tayo

paki translate

mabuti ngang paghuhulihin yang mga anti gloria nakakasagabal sa kalye puro naman bayaran.

GMA will defenitely not allow the opposition some reason to legitimize protest against her by the imposition of martial law in obvious manner. If she has indeed to resort to martial law, her lieutenants in malacanang will couch it in different term. they are already starting with so called “preemtive calibrated response”.

“preemtive calibrated response” is none other than martial law disguised in better terms. I can’t see a democracy without freedom of assembly. Simula lang ito. And Gloria is not Marcos, but then again, she may be worst than Marcos. I have lived one hell of a life during Marcos’ years in Malacanang as a student activist. I still remember eating rice with corn and a never ending shortage of LPG. Man, it’s tough.

even si tabako na kakampi ni gloria komontra rin sa plano ni gma na pagbabawal sa mga rallies.

below is a news report taken from abs-cbnnews.com about this so called no permit no rally policy of the arroyo administration. CHR declaration is a welcome news to all freedom fighters.

i think magandang ichallenge sa supreme court to. lalo na yung pinaggagawang dispersal at arrest ng mga pulis sa mga rallyist. si gloria lang ang nakapagbawal magrally sa mendiola. previous presidents have not done that… not even marcos.

>>>>>>>>

CHR: No permit, no rally policy illegal

The administration’s “no permit, no rally” policy is illegal and without constitutional basis, Commission on Human Rights Chairwoman Purificacion Quisumbing said Tuesday.

“A blanket ‘No permit, no rally’ [policy] does not have any legal basis,” she said in an interview with ANC.

Quisumbing said the policy on protest demonstrations should not include prior restraint.

The government has enforced the rule of calibrated preemptive response, which bans groups from holding rallies anywhere they want. Authorities have designated certain places called “freedom parks” where protesters can hold rallies.

“If it’s preemptive rather than preventive of any violence, it sounds like prior restraint,” Quisumbing said, adding that the government must clarify what it means by “calibrated preemptive response.”

She said the terms sounded like it requires consent from the government. She added that authorities must discuss the policy in detail.

“Citizens ought to know. Arbitrariness in governance is one of the worst forms of human rights violation,” she said.

Regulation, not prohibition

Quisumbing said the government cannot stop protesters from holding demonstrations but can only regulate them to balance public interest.

She cited Batas Pambansa 880, which is “an act ensuring the free exercise by the people of the right peaceably to assemble and petition the government for other purposes.” The law on public assembly was promulgated in 1985 under the dictatorship of former president Ferdinand Marcos.

“There are times when permits are required… but there should not be no prior restraint,” she said.

When permits are needed under certain circumstances, local governments can issue them but mayors cannot refuse demonstrators from holding mass actions, she said.

Quisumbing said this is implemented when there is clear and present danger on “public order, public safety, public morals, public convenience and public health.”

Protesters can apply for permits and if mayors fail to act on them within two working days, demonstrators can post the application in the office of the mayor and go on with their rally.

The President’s spokesman Ignacio Bunye earlier said the preemptive calibrated response policy does not mean that the government is “poised for the exercise of martial powers.”

“The constitutional avenues of protest are open to the people, but the government is keeping its option of enforcing all laws that will protect commerce, mobility, jobs, livelihood and the overall peace of mind of the community of the streets,” he said in a statement.

Bunye added that people were feed up with the “tyranny of the noisy minority.”

Police began cracking down on street protests against President Arroyo on Monday, breaking up a march near the presidential palace and arresting a dozen people after a brief scuffle.

“We’re just imposing the law,” Manila Police District chief Pedro Bulaong told reporters. “These people just wanted to test us. They are provoking violence.”

He said police would file illegal assembly charges against the 12 leaders of the protest.

Acting Manila Mayor Danny Lacuna said the rally did not have a permit.

Leftist groups and personalities such as former president Fidel V. Ramos lambasted the Palace move to limit rallies and called it a curtailment of freedom of expression

hindi ba’t ang EDSA 1 at EDSA 2 ay isang KUDETA?
EDSA 3 kaya?
nagtatanong lang po.

If the government is really concern about how rallies affect/disturb other people, why then, is there still a rally in front of the Philippine Hearth Center. Are they not disturbing other Patients too? Where is their so called CPR now?

THAT IS CALLED DOUBLE STANDARD!!

We are a democracy, as such we are given freedom of speech and assembly!!

As regards the thing called “calibrated preemptive response” matagal ng wala yan. In truth and in fact, if you apply for a permit and the mayor did not act on it within two (2) days, it is considered as approved.

Plus may mga designated FREEDOM PARKS tayo where we can express anything we want WITHOUT even obtaining a permit. Example of freedom parks are Plaza MIranda and the Edsa Shrine.

Eto ang ebidensya, unless i-amend ng mga tongressmen, BP 880 is still good.

BATAS PAMBANSA BLG. 880

AN ACT ENSURING THE FREE EXERCISE BY THE PEOPLE OF THEIR RIGHT PEACEABLY TO ASSEMBLE AND PETITION THE GOVERNMENT FOR OTHER PURPOSES

Section 1. Title – This Act shall be known as “The Public Assembly Act of 1985.”

Section 2. Declaration of policy – The constitutional right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances is essential and vital to the strength and stability of the State. To this end, the State shall ensure the free exercise of such right without prejudice to the rights of others to life, liberty and equal protection of the law.

Section 3. Definition of terms – For purposes of this Act:

(a) “Public assembly” means any rally, demonstration, march, parade, procession or any other form of mass or concerted action held in a public place for the purpose of presenting a lawful cause; or expressing an opinion to the general public on any particular issue; or protesting or influencing any state of affairs whether political, economic or social; or petitioning the government for redress of grievances.

The processions, rallies, parades, demonstrations, public meetings and assemblages for religious purposes shall be governed by local ordinances: Provided, however, That the declaration of policy as provided in Section 2 of this Act shall be faithfully observed.

The definition herein contained shall not include picketing and other concerted action in strike areas by workers and employees resulting from a labor dispute as defined by the Labor Code, its implementing rules and regulations, and by the Batas Pambansa Bilang 227.

(b) “Public place” shall include any highway, boulevard, avenue, road, street, bridge or other thoroughfare, park, plaza, square, and/or any open space of public ownership where the people are allowed access.

(c) “Maximum tolerance” means the highest degree of restraint that the military, police and other peace keeping authorities shall observe during a public assembly or in the dispersal of the same.

(d) “Modification of permit” shall include the change of the place and time of the public assembly, rerouting of the parade or street march, the volume of loud-speakers or sound system and similar changes.

Section 4. Permit when required and when not required – A written permit shall be required for any person or persons to organize and hold a public assembly in a public place. However, no permit shall be required if the public assembly shall be done or made in a freedom park duly established by law or ordinance or in private property, in which case only the consent of the owner or the one entitled to its legal possession is required, or in the campus of a government-owned and operated educational institution which shall be subject to the rules and regulations of said educational institution. Political meetings or rallies held during any election campaign period as provided for by law are not covered by this Act.

Section 5. Application requirements – All applications for a permit shall comply with the following guidelines:

(a) The applications shall be in writing and shall include the names of the leaders or organizers; the purpose of such public assembly; the date, time and duration thereof, and place or streets to be used for the intended activity; and the probable number of persons participating, the transport and the public address systems to be used.

(b) The application shall incorporate the duty and responsibility of applicant under Section 8 hereof.

(c) The application shall be filed with the office of the mayor of the city or municipality in whose jurisdiction the intended activity is to be held, at least five (5) working days before the scheduled public assembly.

(d) Upon receipt of the application, which must be duly acknowledged in writing, the office of the city or municipal mayor shall cause the same to immediately be posted at a conspicuous place in the city or municipal building.

Section 6. Action to be taken on the application –

(a) It shall be the duty of the mayor or any official acting in his behalf to issue or grant a permit unless there is clear and convincing evidence that the public assembly will create a clear and present danger to public order, public safety, public convenience, public morals or public health.

(b) The mayor or any official acting in his behalf shall act on the application within two (2) working days from the date the application was filed, failing which, the permit shall be deemed granted. Should for any reason the mayor or any official acting in his behalf refuse to accept the application for a permit, said application shall be posted by the applicant on the premises of the office of the mayor and shall be deemed to have been filed.

(c) If the mayor is of the view that there is imminent and grave danger of a substantive evil warranting the denial or modification of the permit, he shall immediately inform the applicant who must be heard on the matter.

(d) The action on the permit shall be in writing and served on the application within twenty-four hours.

(e) If the mayor or any official acting in his behalf denies the application or modifies the terms thereof in his permit, the applicant may contest the decision in an appropriate court of law.

(f) In case suit is brought before the Metropolitan Trial Court, the Municipal Trial Court, the Municipal Circuit Trial Court, the Regional Trial Court, or the Intermediate Appellate Court, its decisions may be appealed to the appropriate court within forty-eight (48) hours after receipt of the same. No appeal bond and record on appeal shall be required. A decision granting such permit or modifying it in terms satisfactory to the applicant shall, be immediately executory.

(g) All cases filed in court under this Section shall be decided within twenty-four (24) hours from date of filing. Cases filed hereunder shall be immediately endorsed to the executive judge for disposition or, in his absence, to the next in rank.

(h) In all cases, any decision may be appealed to the Supreme Court.

(i) Telegraphic appeals to be followed by formal appeals are hereby allowed.

Section 7. Use of public thoroughfare – Should the proposed public assembly involve the use, for an appreciable length of time, of any public highway, boulevard, avenue, road or street, the mayor or any official acting in his behalf may, to prevent grave public inconvenience, designate the route thereof which is convenient to the participants or reroute the vehicular traffic to another direction so that there will be no serious or undue interference with the free flow of commerce and trade.

Section 8. Responsibility of applicant – It shall be the duty and responsibility of the leaders and organizers of a public assembly to take all reasonable measures and steps to the end that the intended public assembly shall be conducted peacefully in accordance with the terms of the permit. These shall include but not be limited to the following:

(a) To inform the participants of their responsibility under the permit;

(b) To police the ranks of the demonstrators in order to prevent non-demonstrators from disrupting the lawful activities of the public assembly;

(c) To confer with local government officials concerned and law enforcers to the end that the public assembly may be held peacefully;

(d) To see to it that the public assembly undertaken shall not go beyond the time stated in the permit; and

(e) To take positive steps that demonstrators do not molest any person or do any act unduly interfering with the rights of other persons not participating in the public assembly.

Section 9. Non-interference by law enforcement authorities – Law enforcement agencies shall not interfere with the holding of a public assembly. However, to adequately ensure public safety, a law enforcement contingent under the command of a responsible police officer may be detailed and stationed in a place at least one hundred (100) meter away from the area of activity ready to maintain peace and order at all times.

Section 10. Police assistance when requested – It shall be imperative for law enforcement agencies, when their assistance is requested by the leaders or organizers, to perform their duties always mindful that their responsibility to provide proper protection to those exercising their right peaceably to assemble and the freedom of expression is primordial. Towards this end, law enforcement agencies shall observe the following guidelines:

(a) Members of the law enforcement contingent who deal with the demonstrators shall be in complete uniform with their nameplates and units to which they belong displayed prominently on the front and dorsal parts of their uniform and must observe the policy of “maximum tolerance” as herein defined;

(b) The members of the law enforcement contingent shall not carry any kind of firearms but may be equipped with baton or riot sticks, shields, crash helmets with visor, gas masks, boots or ankle high shoes with shin guards;

(c) Tear gas, smoke grenades, water cannons, or any similar anti-riot device shall not be used unless the public assembly is attended by actual violence or serious threats of violence, or deliberate destruction of property.

Section 11. Dispersal of public assembly with permit – No public assembly with a permit shall be dispersed. However, when an assembly becomes violent, the police may disperse such public assembly as follows:

(a) At the first sign of impending violence, the ranking officer of the law enforcement contingent shall call the attention of the leaders of the public assembly and ask the latter to prevent any possible disturbance;

(b) If actual violence starts to a point where rocks or other harmful objects from the participants are thrown at the police or at the non-participants, or at any property causing damage to such property, the ranking officer of the law enforcement contingent shall audibly warn the participants that if the disturbance persists, the public assembly will be dispersed;

(c) If the violence or disturbances prevailing as stated in the preceding subparagraph should not stop or abate, the ranking officer of the law enforcement contingent shall audibly issue a warning to the participants of the public assembly, and after allowing a reasonable period of time to lapse, shall immediately order it to forthwith disperse;

(d) No arrest of any leader, organizer or participant shall also be made during the public assembly unless he violates during the assembly a law, statute, ordinance or any provision of this Act. Such arrest shall be governed by Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended:

(e) Isolated acts or incidents of disorder or branch of the peace during the public assembly shall not constitute a group for dispersal.

Section 12. Dispersal of public assembly without permit – When the public assembly is held without a permit where a permit is required, the said public assembly may be peacefully dispersed.

Section 13. Prohibited acts – The following shall constitute violations of this Act:

(a) The holding of any public assembly as defined in this Act by any leader or organizer without having first secured that written permit where a permit is required from the office concerned, or the use of such permit for such purposes in any place other than those set out in said permit: Provided, however, That no person can be punished or held criminally liable for participating in or attending an otherwise peaceful assembly;

(b) Arbitrary and unjustified denial or modification of a permit in violation of the provisions of this Act by the mayor or any other official acting in his behalf.

(c) The unjustified and arbitrary refusal to accept or acknowledge receipt of the application for a permit by the mayor or any official acting in his behalf;

(d) Obstructing, impeding, disrupting or otherwise denying the exercise of the right to peaceful assembly;

(e) The unnecessary firing of firearms by a member of any law enforcement agency or any person to disperse the public assembly;

(f) Acts in violation of Section 10 hereof;

(g) Acts described hereunder if committed within one hundred (100) meters from the area of activity of the public assembly or on the occasion thereof;

1. the carrying of a deadly or offensive weapon or device such as firearm, pillbox, bomb, and the like;

2. the carrying of a bladed weapon and the like;

3 the malicious burning of any object in the streets or thoroughfares;

4. the carrying of firearms by members of the law enforcement unit;

5. the interfering with or intentionally disturbing the holding of a public assembly by the use of a motor vehicle, its horns and loud sound systems.

Section 14. Penalties – Any person found guilty and convicted of any of the prohibited acts defined in the immediately preceding Section shall be punished as follows:

(a) violation of subparagraph (a) shall be punished by imprisonment of one month and one day to six months;

(b) violations of subparagraphs (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), and item 4, subparagraph (g) shall be punished by imprisonment of six months and one day to six years;

(c) violation of item 1, subparagraph (g) shall be punished by imprisonment of six months and one day to six years without prejudice to prosecution under Presidential Decree No. 1866;

(d) violations of item 2, item 3, or item 5 of subparagraph (g) shall be punished by imprisonment of one day to thirty days.

Section 15. Freedom parks – Every city and municipality in the country shall within six months after the effectivity of this Act establish or designate at least one suitable “freedom park” or mall in their respective jurisdictions which, as far as practicable, shall be centrally located within the poblacion where demonstrations and meetings may be held at any time without the need of any prior permit.

In the cities and municipalities of Metropolitan Manila, the respective mayors shall establish the freedom parks within the period of six months from the effectivity of this Act.

Section 16. Constitutionality – Should any provision of this Act be declared invalid or unconstitutional, the validity or constitutionality of the other provisions shall not be affected thereby.

Section 17. Repealing clause – All laws, decrees, letters of instructions, resolutions, orders, ordinances or parts thereof which are inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed, amended, or modified accordingly.

Section 18. Effectivity – This Act shall take effect upon its approval.

Approved, October 22, 1985.

What you guys are seeing today is an example of the Wild Animal principle.

The principle goes like this:

If you have to go up against a big wild animal, like a bear for example, you have to make sure that you kill it with your first shot or first blow.

If you miss your first chance, you will have made it hopping mad by the time you make your second attempt.

By which time, it will have worked up a full resolve to crush you before you even think of a second attempt.

That’s where the Administration is at the moment. Because of the pathetically botched attempt to remove the President from office (because of the all-too-familiar stupidity by which things are done in the Philippines and all the half-brained logic that is dished out and eaten up by the public), the Administation has now re-consolidated its power and now occupying the high ground. The Opposition has been scattered like flies, and People Power is SIX FEET UNDER, led to a pathetic defeat by Madame Edsa’86 herself. All we are left with are straggling and pathetic calls to “action” that we see here today.

Tough luck folks.

Maghintay na lang kayo sa susunod na eleksyong kongresyonal and make sure on that occassion that you vote with your heads rather than with your dancing shoes.

O kaya, sumuot kayo ng hardhat o helmet sa susunod niyong “rally”.

ha ha! 😀

Time and time again it has been shown here in the Philippines that Third World countries and Demonstrations (rallies) are synonymous. These demonstrations most of time can turn wild and any government have to respond in whatever means possible to neutralize it. It would be safe to assume that the more democratic a society is, the more its propensities to these demonstrations. Some would like to preferrably call it ‘demo crazy’. Crazy as it is but no one can really blame some disgruntled populace for doing this exercise.

Poverty is pasted all over our walls. The people have to look for answers to share the blame and that is whoever sits in the Government. Clouded by the austerity measures imposed by our ‘pinagkakautangan’ such as IMF/Worlbank. These agrevates our plight because along with these austeries are their (IMF/WORLDBANK)subtle control of a country.
Thus, It would be next to impossible to say that Pandakekoks exit is a good sigh of relief. It is the total liquidation of our $70 billion loan that sets us free from these choking, manipulating IMF/Worldbank poverty induced terms and conditions. For the meantime, happy carping muna tayo sa presidente natin, wala na naman tayong magawa,e! hehehe

you dont even understand a de facto martial law dont you…

You and your imaginary heavy pockets. hahaha.

I wasn’t even alive when the late President Marcos imposed the eye-popping, blood-pounding, ever-so-contorversial Martial Law; but we have to admit that the economy was way better than it has become nowadays.

So typical of us Filipinos. Trading gossips on this forum makes you feel good..and yes, stroking your ‘bruised’ egos on such issue would therefore make you money? I am so appalled by this.

Shine, you lonely,ambitious bastards from the Southern part of this country, and dream on making it big!

Get real, people. There was once a thief; but those days were so abundant.

No use brooding over what has happened.

Go get a brain somewhere until it fits you.