Will there be Martial Law? January 30, 1971

January 30, 1971

Will There Be Martial Law?
By Napoleon G. Rama
Staff Member

HIS theme was sobriety and unity in the hour of crisis; his delivery, cool and slow; his tone, soft and supplicating. But the words were intimidating.

“If violence continues, if there should be massive sabotage, if there should be terrorism, if there is assassination, I will have no other alternative but to utilize the extraordinary powers granted me by our Constitution. These powers are the power to suspend the writ of habeas corpus under which [suspension] any man can be arrested and detained any length of time; and the power to declare any part or the whole of the Philippines under martial law. These powers I do not wish to utilize and it is for this reason I appeal to our people tonight.�?

With just this one paragraph President Marcos spoiled what could have been one of his best speeches, certainly the most impressive TV performance since he spoke before the U.S. Congress.

Our issue for April 1, 2006

PHILIPPINES FREE PRESS

April 1, 2006 Issue

Main Features

1.Cover: Sen. Rodolfo Biazon, Day of Reckoning

The dismissal of the impeachment complaints, the mailed-fist policy against protest rallies, the obstruction of the Arroyo tapes investigation in the House, Executive Order 464, Proclamation No. 1017, the continuing harassment of opposition leaders, the intimidation of the press—all these will come to a confluence and, Sen. Rodolfo Biazon says, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo will her “day of reckoning.�? The military is a veritable tinder box and despite Gen. Generoso Senga’s five-point “guidance�? Biazon, a former Marine commander and chief of the military who still has connections in the armed forces, knows the ranks are seething with anger. The administration had better be careful with handling the “case�? of former senator Gregorio Honasan who, according to Biazon, has a following in the military and in the civilian populace who may react if the government insists on putting Honasan away. Honasan has denied involvement in the July 27, 2003 junior officers’ mutiny, but he is a veteran of the coup attempts against the government of President Corazon Aquino and he has gone into hiding since the government brought coup d’ état charges against him in February. The military is bringing charges against Brig. Gen. Danilo Lim before a court-martial for planning to lead the Scout Rangers in a march with the people on February 24, an action construed by the military and the administration as a coup. Under investigation and possibly facing charges is Col. Ariel Querubin for leading the Marines in protesting the relief of their commander, Brig. Gen. Renato Miranda, on February 26. The military is investigating the extent of the action that had been planned against Mrs. Arroyo. Senga, who reportedly refused to join the march, says in his “guidance�? that the military should be apolitical and the troops must defend the Constitution. Biazon says Mrs. Arroyo, by proclaiming a state of national emergency and even after lifting it continues to intimidate the opposition and the press, has violated the Constitution. He says it is time to remind the soldiers that “anyone who violates the Constitution is your enemy.�?

By Ricky S. Torre

Our issue for March 25, 2006

PHILIPPINES FREE PRESS

March 25, 2006 Issue

Main Features

1.Cover: The Constitutional Commission (with 10-page supplement, Office of the

President)

2. Abuse of Power

The Senate has opened an investigation into the acts of the government following President Arroyo’s declaration of national emergency. What has emerged from the investigation so far is that the government carried out the proclamation as if Mrs. Arroyo had declared martial law. Since the country was not under martial law and since the Bill of Rights had not been suspended, police should not have broken up protest rallies, arrested people without warrants, and intimidated the press. Former Supreme Court justice Vicente Mendoza, testifying at the hearing on Monday, said Mrs. Arroyo would be liable if it could be proved that she authorized these acts. A group of lawyers also warned Mrs. Arroyo that she could not escape responsibility should those acts turn out to have been arbitrary—which they appear to be because the emergency proclamation gave no orders to either the military or the police to do anything that would violate people’s rights. All the arbitrary acts of the military and the police appear to have been carried out on a misunderstanding of General Order No. 5 and General Order No. 6—or on direct orders from some administration official. If it was Mrs. Arroyo, can she be prosecuted? Nope. You cannot sue a sitting president. You must wait until after she leaves office before you bring your lawsuit. Impeachment? Hmm: the Constitution allows the president to place the country or any part of it under a state of emergency but unless it can be proved that Mrs. Arroyo used the proclamation to violate the Bill of Rights, she cannot be held liable for violating the Constitution. Proclamation No. 1017 and General Orders 5 and 6 seem to have been written as generalizations, that is, without specifics that, if violative of the Constitution, can be blamed on Mrs. Arroyo. Add roundup.

By Ricky S. Torre, Butch Serrano, and Wendell Vigilia

A blunder worse than a crime. Editorial for September 25, 1909

Saturday, September 25, 1909

A blunder worse than a crime

IN SUCH category, we very much fear, must be included the action of the Chief Executive in cutting off the government’s advertising appropriation from El Renacimiento.

By the Chief Executive’s action the government is placed in the humiliating position of confessing that it has suffered from the periodical’s criticism. If there is any justification for the saying that “it is the truth that hurts”, the government is further placed in the position of admitting that the criticism has been true, and that the truth has rankled. The action of the government will be interpreted as a confession of weakness. And, far from crippling El Renacimiento, it will simply tend to strengthen it.

It is a common remark among Americans that El Renacimiento is the organ of the “demagogues” and “politicos”, but those best acquainted with that newspaper and its clientele know that it is much more than that—that it is the chief organ of the Filipino people, that it comes closer to them than any other, that it more truly voices their aspirations—that it is THE PEOPLE. The government is thus placed in the position of striking not only at El Renacimiento, but striking at the Filipino people, and using the money of the people to do it.

Further, the government is placed in the position of admitting that the money of the people spent in the form of advertising appropriations is nothing more than a bribe to the newspapers here to keep hands off the government. It is confessedly an effort to corrupt and stifle a free press. The presumption is that the government has its notices published for the benefit of the people, and, as there is no Filipino paper with one half the circulation of El Renacimiento, the government stultifies itself and by its action confirms the belief that the money is not spent for publicity purposes or as a business proposition but solely as a bribe to silence criticism and promote sycophantic adulation. Truly a most edifying picture!

The Constitution speaks. February 12, 1972

February 12, 1972

The Constitution Speaks
Luningning Cruz
Second-year Student
Quirino High School,
Quezon City

I AM the Constitution of the Philippines. I am different things to different people.

To some, I am a mere scrap of paper—a string of words beautifully woven without meaning, a flow of phrases attempting to articulate a hope too vague to grasp, a litany of praise to some ideal impossible to realize—a piece of paper on which are written only words, words, words.

To others, I am a sacred vessel—the repository of the highest hopes and aspirations of a people, the blessed covenant between the governors and the governed, the master plan of a people’s search for justice and a better life, the nation’s guard against oppression and the people’s ultimate expression of their sovereignty.

I am the Constitution—and I am neither one nor the other of these two opposite points of view.

And the January 30 Insurrection, February 7, 1970

February 7, 1970

And the January 30 Insurrection
–Jose F. Lacaba

JANUARY 26 seemed explosive enough—but it was a whimper compared with the horrendous bang of January 30. The papers called January 26 a riot. January 30 was something else. “This is no longer a riot,�? said a police officer. “This is an insurrection.�? And the President called it a revolt—“a revolt by local Maoist Communists.�?

January 26 was a Monday. On Tuesday the students met to plan a series of new rallies denouncing police brutality, and the President conferred with police officials. On Wednesday the President had a talk with some student leaders in Malacañang. On Thursday four groups of demonstrators, one of them led by U.P. President S. P. Lopez himself, staged simultaneous demonstrations at Malacañang, Congress, and Maharnilad. On Friday several other student groups held a sit-in outside the Malacañang gates—and just as their manifestation was about to end, all hell broke loose.

The Long Week, February 7, 1970

February 7, 1970

The Long Week
By Kerima Polotan

Bombs, Guns, Stones—Violence, Hate, Death.

1.
WHEN THE WEEK began, it seemed to hold no surprises. The country had seen how many Congresses open before and except for a mugginess in the afternoon, rare in January, the Seventh held no special portents. The young had, of course, taken over the streets and were on Ayala Street, thrusting leaflets at passerby: An Appeal for a Non-Partisan Constitutional Convention. All week the week before, they’d been pretty busy, demonstrating in front of Malacañang. A particularly “militant” group had roughed up an army sergeant moonlighting as a photographer; they had peppered the air with elegant language, the accepted idiom of student activism, amplified many decibels with the aid of loudspeakers, language like: Putang ina mo! Ikaw Marcos, bumaba ka rito, napakayabang mo, 27 ang medalya mo, halika nga dito at tignan natin ang galing mo! I am from Cabiao, kung talagang matapang ka, bumaba ka rito at papatayin ka namin! x x x

Bukas, ang aabutin mo rito kung akala mo ay minura ka na, ay hindi pa namin naaabot ang pagmumura sa iyo. Mumurahin ka namin ng gabi. Putang ina mo x x x Putang ina ninyong mga Americans kayo, sino ang pupuntahan ninyo diyan, ang demonyong Presidente namin? ‘Yang gagong Pangulo namin diyan, bakit ninyo pupuntahan, gago naman iyan?

“Spontaneous” demonstrations. Editorial for March 5, 1949

PHILIPPINES FREE PRESS EDITORIAL
March 5, 1949

“SPONTANEOUS” DEMONSTRATIONS

One man, observing the demonstration last Saturday night at Plaza Miranda, Manila, by students from the different universities and colleges of Manila and members of labor organizations and venders associations, estimated at more than 20,000, wondered how decent men and women could declare themselves for a man who represented all that is iniquitous in the government. For the object of the “spontaneous” demonstration, the man in whose defense the rally was held, was none other than Jose Avelino.

Yes, Jose Avelino, the same man who had taxed the President of their country with not covering up, or at least tolerating, abuses and anomalies by party men in the government, who would led a gang of unprincipled men rob the people at will—with impunity. Yes, the same Jose Avelino, who while in office amassed riches he had yet to explain. The very same man who, while invoking the Constitution in his need, had trampled on it in the past, denying to others the right to speak which be now claimed. The one and the same person who, crying for due process of law, had allegedly secretly sought to destroy that process by dictating, or attempting to dictate, to the courts.

It was in “honor” of this man that the demonstration was held. Shocking indictment of the sense of probity of the people of the capital! But there had been such demonstrations in the past, equally impressive and just as “spontaneous.” Who has not read of demonstrations hailing the arrival of some official from abroad—demonstrations by meek and subservient government employees who must be present, or else! No doubt there were those sincerely “for” Avelino in that mob in Plaza Miranda last week for in the past Avelino had dispensed favors liberally, if not illegally. And there were those present out of curiosity. And if students hailed Avelino’s name during that rally, it should also be recalled that students in a “homecoming” at Avelino’s alma mater, the Ateneo de Manila, had booed his name.

And, of course, one remembers the demonstrations for the cruelest oppressors of the Filipino people in history, who had robbed, murdered and raped for three terrible years: the Japanese. Those demonstrations, by the reports in the papers then in circulation, were “spontaneous,” too.

Honorable Gentleman’s Agreement? March 20, 1971

March 20, 1971

Honorable Gentlemen’s Agreement?

WHATEVER happened to the list of Delinquent Oligarchs released by Malacañang in its frantic effort to project an image of President Marcos as the leader of a Revolt of the Masses against the Rich, working, idle or profligate? That the little Goebbels of the Military Kickback Complex would succeed in their propaganda gimmickry is too absurd to consider even for a moment. Marcos as Man of the Masses—who can swallow that? Only the Insecure Oligarchs were bothered, but only for a moment.

Just the same, the release of the list was a good thing. The people knew who, among the Rich, owed them—and how much. It should also have served to prod the honorable members of Congress to look into the alleged delinquency and enact remedial legislation to prevent its recurrence and salvage what could be salvaged of the government’s, that is, the people’s investment in the controversial enterprise.

This is to assume that the senators and representatives give a damn about what happens to the people’s money.

The question is: Do they?

Nestor Mata’s story, April 6, 1957

Nestor Mata’s story
April 6, 1957
by Leon O. Ty
The lone survivor of the Mt. Pinatubo airplane crash in which President Magsaysay and 25 other persons perished gives his version of the tragedy. Newsman has second and third degree burns on thighs, arms and legs

PHILIPPINES Herald Reporter Nestor Mata, the lone survivor in the Mt. Pinatubo airplane crash in which President Magsaysay and 25 other persons perished, is still confined in the Veterans Memorial Hospital. He is fast recovering from second and third degree burns all over his body. We visited him last Saturday afternoon. As soon as he saw us, he said in a low voice:

“You are lucky you were not with us.”

Mata said these words because he personally knew that this writer had always been with him and the rest of the Malacañang newspapermen who used to accompany the late President on nearly all his trips to Mindanao and Visayas.

“You are the real lucky one,” we replied.

“Yes,” he said, “but I still do not know what God wants me to do. He spared my life because he wants me to do something. And I don’t know what it is.”