PDu30 Martial Law in Mindanao

This week, President Duterte who was in Russia when there was a big fight between the Armed Forces of the PH (AFP) and the Maute group of local terrorists, declared Martial Law for the entire Mindanao. I think PDu30 acted with paranoia here as he is too focused on anti-drugs de tokhang war vs ordinary civilians, or China-Russia-love ya affair. When faced with real war, his first instinct is to declare Martial Law.

The PH National Police (PNP) too has become too focused on drugs de tokhang that their intelligence gathering on the real organized, armed criminals has suffered. Below, I am reposting opinions from some friends, posted in their fb walls on dates indicated.

(1)  Jose Antonio Custodio, May 23:

The group that is attacking Marawi City is the Maute group with some reinforcements....it is not the ISIS.... They are taking advantage of the fact that the military and police are distracted by the lack of a coherent policy on internal security. It is as simple as that.

(2) Jojo Garcia, May 23:

Martial law means the suspension of civilian government and the installation of military rule. The functioning of regular civilian courts and sanggunians are explicitly the only exception among civilian offices that should continue under the military government. Martial law also means that Mindanao is now under a military governor or governors, usually the heads of the AFP commands in the island. They will govern the civilian population through AFP general orders to be carried out by soldiers, not by the civilian LGUs whose operation and authority are now effectively suspended if martial law is truly to take effect. Anything less than this will merely amount to a hodgepodge system that would result in a nominal declaration mainly intended for propaganda purposes of showing presidential muscle.

If this is real and not nominal martial law, this is the largest geographical area put under martial law since the superficial lifting of Marcos's martial law in 1981. I hope this is only a nominal presidential show of force and not a real implementation of martial law, since I am not sure if the AFP is capable of running a military government in such a large area without the concommittant human rights violations committed en masse.

In short, sana pang-PR at yabang lang yan, because the last time the AFP implemented martial law as declared by a tyrant, there was no turning back.

(3) Dan Adan, May 25:

Understanding Section 18 of Art. VII of the 1987 Constitution Bit by Bit

The President:

1. Is the Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of the Philippines.

2. As Commander-in-Chief, may call out such armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence whenever it becomes necessary.

3. As Commander-in-Chief, may call out such armed forces to prevent or suppress invasion whenever it becomes necessary.

4. As Commander-in-Chief, may call out such armed forces to prevent or suppress rebellion whenever it becomes necessary.

5. May suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus for a period not exceeding sixty days in case of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety requires it.

6. May place the Philippines or any part thereof under martial law for a period not exceeding sixty days in case of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety requires it.

7. Shall submit a report in person or in writing to the Congress within forty-eight hours from the proclamation of martial law.

8. Shall submit a report in person or in writing to the Congress within forty-eight hours from the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.

9. The Congress, voting jointly, by a vote of at least a majority of all its Members in regular or special session, may revoke the President's proclamation of martial law.

10. The Congress, voting jointly, by a vote of at least a majority of all its Members in regular or special session, may revoke the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.

11. The President cannot set aside the congressional revocation of the declaration of martial law.

12. The President cannot set aside the congressional revocation of the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.

13. The President may ask Congress to extend the proclamation of martial law if the invasion or rebellion shall persist and public safety requires it.

14. The President may ask Congress to extend the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus if the invasion or rebellion shall persist and public safety requires it.

15. The Congress, voting jointly, by a vote of at least a majority of all its members in a regular or special session, may extend the proclamation of martial law for a period to be determined by the Congress, if the invasion or rebellion shall persist and public safety requires it.

16. The Congress, voting jointly, by a vote of at least a majority of all its members in a regular or special session, may extend the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus for a period to be determined by the Congress, if the invasion or rebellion shall persist and public safety requires it.

17. The Congress, if not in session, shall, within twenty-four hours following such proclamation or suspension, convene in accordance with its rules without need of a call.

18. Any citizen may file a case before the Supreme Court questioning the sufficiency of the factual basis of the proclamation of martial law or the extension thereof.

19. Any citizen may file a case before the Supreme Court questioning the sufficiency of the factual basis of the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or the extension thereof.

20. The Supreme Court may review the sufficiency of the factual basis of the proclamation of martial law or the extension thereof.

21. The Supreme Court may review the sufficiency of the factual basis of the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or the extension thereof.

22. The Supreme Court must promulgate its decision on the factual basis sufficiency within thirty days from its filing.

A state of martial law does not:

23. Ssuspend the operation of the Constitution.

24. Supplant the functioning of the civil courts.

25. Supplant the functioning of legislative assemblies.

26. Authorize the conferment of jurisdiction on military courts and agencies over civilians where civil courts are able to function.

27. Automatically suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.

28. 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.

29. During the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, any person thus arrested or detained shall be judicially charged within three days, otherwise he shall be released.

(4) Bernard Ong, May 25:

GEO-FENCING MARTIAL LAW

After Mindanao Martial Law, the trial balloon for nation-wide Martial Law is now flying high.

Inclusions:

1. Mindanao of course - home of the Durterte este Maute Group

2. Visayas because it is just walking distance from Mindanao

3. Luzon because it is just walking distance from Visayas

4. Anybody named Luzviminda is covered

Exclusions:

1. Taiwan which is just walking distance from Luzon

2. Kalayaan Islands (a.k.a Spratly) because it will anger China

3. Panatag because that has been bartered to China for (scrap) trains

4. Davao because it has already been under authoritarian rule for 30 years

5. Anybody who can walk on water is exempted

For assurance that Martial Law will not be abused by unaccountable men in power, read up on Marcos history. Better yet, go dig some bones at Maa Quarry.

BWorld 102, Top 10 news of 2016

* This is my article in BusinessWorld last December 27, 2016.

Since government by nature consists of force and coercion, legislation and regulation, mandatory contribution and taxation, it naturally creates division among people anywhere in the world. Those who benefit from welfarism are happy while those who are affected by endless regulations and taxation express the opposite sentiment.

Below is my list of top 10 news around the world in 2016, five international and five national/regional.

INTERNATIONAL

1 “Brexit.” British voters opted last June to exit from the European Union (EU), a regional government that allows free trade and free mobility of people and services among member-states, but also imposes various protectionism and restrictions on goods and people mobility to countries outside the EU. This combination of free trade and trade protectionism, simpler migration for fellow EU citizens but difficult migration for non-EU people, tax harmonization and prevention of tax competition among member states, among others, have created confusion and even more animosity among the British. So far nothing is definite and details of the exit may not be known until 2019.

2 Trump victory. A big businessman without past political position but employed an unconventional campaign, President-elect Donald Trump outlasted 16 Republican rivals and then a famous Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton. Not being part of the entrenched political establishment, he is known more to reverse the various regulations and high taxation policies of the Obama and Bush administrations. For instance, he plans to cut the US corporate income tax from 35% to 15%, reverse the anti-coal, anti-oil sentiments and policies, and so on.

3 Terrorist attacks in Europe. Massacres in a newspaper office and rock concert in Paris, airport bombing in Brussels, lorry attack of people in the streets of Nice, France during a Bastille Day celebration, another lorry attack of people in a Christmas shopping in Berlin. Plus some foiled attacks in other cities in Europe. To fight this kind of war, governments will need less of those deadly fighter planes, huge battle tanks and ships. Instead, they will need more drones, CCTVs, crawling small robots, cyberware. The fight is not country to country but house to house, building to buildings.

4 Syria. Endless war among many armed factions has resulted in large-scale murders and displacement by the millions. Aleppo has become the main reference point of why civil war by some proxy countries should be avoided as much as possible. The volume of civilian deaths and destruction of properties is so big.

5 Malaysia and South Korea. Big governments always invite big opportunities for big corruption and wastes, the degree just vary from country to country. In particular, the corruption scandals of Malaysian PM Najib Razak over IMDB and S. Korean President Park Geun-hye over her friend Choi Soon-sil’s involvement in government affairs have pushed their people to conduct various rallies calling for their resignations. And these leaders continue to cling to power.

PHILIPPINES

6 Duterte victory. President Rodrigo Duterte was the first Mayor to move straight to Presidency with a different campaign strategy focused on fighting criminality, drug proliferation, and corruption. Unlike the three other major candidates -- former VP Jojo Binay, Sec. Mar Roxas, and Sen. Grace Poe -- who all focused on more welfarism. And he got huge support from the poor, which shows that the poor are not exactly asking for more welfarism and subsidies, but are seeking increased peace and order to protect themselves against thieves, murderers, rapists, drug pushers, corrupt officials, and other criminals.

7 Drug deaths. From a campaign promise of killing 100,000 criminals if he wins, President Duterte later mentioned that “like Hitler, (I will) annihilate 3 million drug criminals.” The on-going “war on drugs” has resulted in several thousand murders so far, about one-third from police operations and two-third from vigilante-type of executions. The rule of law and its long process of police investigation and court proceedings have been sidestepped.

8 PI Obama, Pakyu EU. Before and during the ASEAN summit and related meetings last September, President Duterte has directly or indirectly lashed out against US President Obama who attended the event in Laos. President Obama and later the EU have voiced criticism over the high number of deaths and disrespect for the rule of law, not the drugs war per se. President Duterte and his avid supporters did not make a distinction between these two and thus, the expletives and harsh words. These were reported heavily in international media.

9 Marcos burial at Heroes’ Cemetery. The sneaky burial of former President Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani has stirred some political upheavals that many protest rallies were held in Metro Manila and key cities in the country. Since the burial is supported by President Duterte and affirmed by the Supreme Court, the cemetery may better be renamed “Libingan ng mga Bayani at Magnanakaw” (LBM).

10 Non-assertion of territorial rights at SCS/WPS. Mid-December, the President said the Philippines and China can “share” oil in the disputed territories in South China Sea/West Philippine Sea despite an international arbitral award affirming the Philippines’ ownership in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ).

From this list, it seems that many people around the world are dissatisfied and disappointed with more government, more regulations, taxation and corruption. Authorities should deliver positive results in areas where stronger government is justified, to protect the people’s right to life, right to private property and right to liberty.

------------

See also:
BWorld 99, China insecurity and belligerence, December 30, 2016 
BWorld 100, Multinationals in the PH, what do they want? January 03, 2017 

BWorld 101, Christmas lights, energy mix and electricity production in Asia, January 09, 2017

Brussels bombing and new wars

The bombings in Brussels yesterday was horrible. More than 30 people died and several hundreds injured. And just a few months ago, several dozens also died when many areas in Paris were bombed. 

One problem I think is that nations, rich and poor, are still focused on those large-scale, country to country wars so they accumulate have huge tanks, jet fighters, warships, submarines, etc. New wars and terrorism are micro, house to house or buildings to buildings. Better weapons to secure are micro too -- CCTVs, drones, cyber intelligence, spies.

Flashpoints like the South China Sea or West Philippine Sea, Israel-Palestine conflict, are nice for selling huge, multi-billion dollars armaments and battleships, jet fighters. But those flash points don't kill people like you and me. It's terrorist attacks, them who blow up buses and cars, coffee shops and airports, that can kill you and me. And the criminals will do it not a decade or two from now, but within months or few years, depending on the "causes" of those terrorists.

Some good points made by a friend, Jemy Gatdula in his article in BWorld, War is what we make of it, March 04, 2016,

"At this stage of our country’s development we can’t fight a war hoping to beat the other country. This includes not making our defense strategy hinge on the assistance of allies. We shouldn’t waste spending and the developing of our plans on such thinking.

What we can do is build our national defense strategy around the idea of attrition and guerilla warfare: to make going to war against the Philippines an island per island matter, complicated, never-ending, so costly in terms of human and material resources that it would practically outweigh any benefit -- that any country would have to think twice if it’s worth attacking us at all."

Our Philippine National Police (PNP) cannot and do not catch too many thieves who can victimize us, our family members and friends, our office staff, our car or house, etc. Internal crimes and internal terrorism are much more dangerous, more fatal, than those "national wars" on territories. Paris and Brussels bombings are clear proof of that.

Terrorists have one clear goal: terrorize the people, both locals and foreigners, and inspire other militants. Tourists and investors should avoid Paris and Brussels, other big cities, hope for econ. slowdown as punishment for their governments for some "wrongdoing" somewhere.

That is why internal security should be efficient. Government failure here means govt failure in many other functions. In the Philippines, peace and order has been largely privatized a long time ago. Private security guards secure schools and universities, buildings and condos, shops and malls, airports and seaports, clinics and hospitals. The police are often busy catching motorcycle drivers with no helmets, motorists who make left turns or U-turns in non-U turn corners, or giving road assistance to VIPs, public and private.

Meanwhile, the rich countries would be in a quandary: more welfarism spending, or more internal security and peace and order? High welfarism creates high state dependency, high expectations and entitlement mentality, fueling more envy while punching huge holes in the budget and ever-rising public debt.

Soon, Belgium, France, other European countries will be peppered with lots of private security guards as the govt cannot secure internal security, too busy with welfarism and buying heavy armaments for "national wars".

Meanwhile, am waiting for this headline somewhere, "Climate change causes more suicide bombings like those in Brussels", heh heh.

Pol. Ideology 57: Radicalism, Islamic Militance and Terrorism

Yesterday I attended this important forum at Edsa Shangrila Hotel in Ortigas Center.  It was sponsored by Institute of Bangsamoro Studies (IBS), Philippine Institute for Peace, Violence and Terrorism Research (PIPVTR), Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue (HD Centre), and the European Union (EU) in the Philippines. I was invited by a friend, Prof. Rommel Banlaoi, Chairman of the Board of PIPVTR.

Keynote Address was given by Gen. Kakilala who represented Gen. Gregorio P. Catapang, Jr., Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippine (AFP). I came late and I was not able to catch his presentation. I saw the presentations on "Radicalism in Southeast Asia" by Dr. Sapto  Waluyo of the Ministry of Social Affairs, Indonesia (above photo) and Asst. Sec. Oscar Valenzuela, Anti-Terrorism Council (ATC), Office of the President, Philippines.

The venue, the air-con tent on the 2nd floor of the hotel was full. Many from different foreign embassies in Manila (40+ in the list of participants), from the PH government including the PNP and AFP (about 30), NGOs (30+, me included), academe and media.

The most interesting presentations that day were made by these two guys, Rommel (left) and Abhoud Syed M. Lingga, Executive Director of IBS (right).

Rommel's presentation was long but he delivered it fast and quick. I like his discussion delineating radicalism and terrorism, radicals and terrorists, that in most cases, these are two  different entities, not one and the same as we often hear and read.

To be radical means to have some innovative, creative, revolutionary yet sensical ideas that were not proposed before, or were proposed by only a small minority in society. In this sense, to be radical means being useful, not  harmful,  to  society. And this is not what we hear or read, especially from the government and mainstream media.

Nice quotes where Rommel partly got these insights. He also mentioned Jean Jacques Rousseau, a classical French political philosopher, on the subject of radicalism.

I like these quotes because they apply to what we are doing in Minimal (not zero) Government Thinkers -- advocating less and limited government, less taxes and mandatory fees, more personal freedom and responsibillity, rule of law -- without advocating violence. Zero tolerance for violence and physical attacks. To be radical means to have high degree of tolerance and respect for people's diversity and spontaneity. People can be very bright or very stupid in advocating something, fine, so long as no violence is used to advance such advocacies.

Here are portions of the presentations by Mr. (or Prof?) Lingga. I like his data on the peaceful nature of Filipino Muslims, their high tolerance to live and co-exist with non-Muslims.

Rommel has a longer list of violent Islamic fundamentalist groups aside from the Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG) and the BIFF. These include the Rogue MNLF Elements (RME), Jimayah Islamiyah (JI) and the Khilafa Islamiyah Mindanao (KIM).

During the open forum, I spoke and argued that the bloated and pampered AFP and PNP bureaucracies are part of the problem why violence by the local communists (CPP-NPA) and Muslim secessionist movement stayed too long. Dealing with these violent local groups should be primarily a police function (plus LGUs, civil society), not military function (their constitutional mandate is external defense) hat generally uses heavy armaments and often, commit human rights violations, deliberately or not  The police are not doing this job, the AFP comes in to do what the police should be doing, and huge AFP annual budget and perks are justified while the PNP also keep their huge annual budget.

I asked Mr.  Lingga if there is a  substantial sector of Filipino Muslims who  think this way too, of the negative impact of heavy military and police bureaucratism. Unfortunately, the impression I gave (or his impression) was that I was asking about overall government bloated bureaucracies. He answered that the new entity under the proposed Bangsamoro  Basic Law (BBL) will determine what is the appropriate and  optimal size of bureaucracy they will  have.

After the open  forum, I approached him and mentioned that I  was referring  to  the AFP-PNP bureaucracies. The people feel unsafe while paying many taxes to sustain these two huge armed bureaucracies (plus many other bureaucracies). So they get many private security agencies to have peace of mind, or they arm themselves and put justice in their hands, common in many provinces in Mindanao.

I met many new faces there. Since I came  late, all the seats in  the middle and rear  tables  were fully occupied. A staff of one of the organizers looked for a vacant seat, he found one -- in the front table. So I was seated with some foreign  diplomats, police and other PH  government officials. I am sure the PNP officials beside me did not  like what  I said during  the open forum, no problem.

Had a chat with two  diplomats, Greg (?) from the Australian Embassy, and Mr. Ueno , First Secretary of Japan Embassy. He asked me about MGT, I said that we are just a small, independent free market think tank advocating  limited government. The main function of government is to promulgate the rule of law, protect the citizens' right to private property, right to life,  right to liberty, and many other functions  like endless welfarism are secondary to unnecessary functions.

A photo with Rommel (right) and Steve Cutler (middle), a bright man whose ideas in fb I follow. Steve is now a private businessman and  was  a  former  US Embassy official here in  Manila.

Overall, it was  a great conference. Thanks again Rommel for the invite. Do invite me again. Defense security and terrorism research is not my cup of tea but I benefit from listening to the experts in  this field, and imparting part of my ideas whenever they might fit.
---------

See also:

Pilipinas Forum 8: On the Abu Sayyaf, September 11, 2011

Pol. Ideology 53: Zero Government, Zero Taxes, Then What?, November 11, 2013 

Pol. Ideology 54: On the Multiple "Death" of Capitalism, March 11, 2014

Pol. Ideology 55: Jules Maaten's Lecture on Liberalism, May 11, 2014

Pol. Ideology 56: Democracy and the Devils, June 11, 2014