MANILA, Philippines — Solicitor General Jose Calida slammed petitioners against the martial law extension for their "ignorance" of the situation in Mindanao even though one of them is actually from Davao.
"Anyone who says there is no ongoing rebellion in Mindanao is either ignorant of the factual situation there, or protective of the longest rebellion that has plagued our country," Calida said in a text message to reporters.
Calida, like other members of the Duterte administration, frequently paints critics as "destabilizers", enemies of the state or as being in cahoots with criminals and terrorists.
Lawmakers from the House of Representatives' "Magnificent Seven" opposition bloc have challenged President Rodrigo Duterte's year-long extension of martial law and suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in Mindanao before the Supreme Court.
One of the petitioners is Rep. Tomas Villarin (Akbayan party-list). Part of the petition reads: "In particular, petitioner Villarin is personally adversely affected by the assailed extension of martial law and the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus in Mindanao because he comes from and is a resident of Davao City in Mindanao."
Akbayan is, in fact, at ideological odds with the Communist Party of the Philippines and the New People's Army, which has been fighting to put up a revolutionary government since 1969.
The suspension of the writ allows warrantless arrests.
The writ itself is an order for authorities to present an arrested person before the court and to explain the circumstances of detention. It is meant to protect citizens from unlawful arrests and indefinite detentions.
Others who signed as petitioners were Reps. Edcel Lagman (Albay), Edgar Erice (Caloocan City, 2nd District), Teddy Baguilat Jr. (Ifugao), Gary Alejano (Magdalo party-list) and Emmanuel Billones (Capiz, 1st District).
They said: "As duly elected representatives, petitioners Lagman, Villarin, Erice, Baguilat, Alejano and Billones are sworn to protect and uphold the Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines and they have legal standing to challenge any violation of the Constitution and seek rectification."
The solons also argued that the "leadership and supermajority of Congress of the Philippines" violated the safeguards of the Constitution when it "approved baselessly and with prudent alacrity" Duterte's request for an extension.
READ: Lagman stresses constitutional limits on martial law extension
Calida: President, majority of Congress know better
But Calida said: "The congressional imprimatur on the validity of the extension is a political question that has been resolved by the legislature."
It took less than half a day for the two houses to swiftly approve Duterte's request, voting 240-27 at a joint session of the House of Representatives and the Senate on December 13.
The petitioners also said martial law is not needed to obliterate the "remnants" of terrorists groups—as stated by military reports.
But Calida said: "Do the petitioners know better than the President and the overwhelming majority of the members of Congress who approved the extension of martial law in Mindanao? Definitely not."
The Constitution, however, holds that any citizen can seek the SC to challenge the declaration or the extension of martial law.Section 18 of Article 7 provides: "The Supreme Court may review, in an appropriate proceeding filed by any citizen, the sufficiency of the factual basis of the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or the extension thereof."
On May 23, Duterte imposed martial law in Mindanao after the Islamic city of Marawi was stormed by heavily-armed extremists who pledged allegiance to ISIS.
In July, Congress overwhelmingly voted to prolong military rule in Mindanao until yearend after the proclamation reached its 60-day constitutional limit, giving Duterte more time to stabilize the strife-torn region where ISIS was gaining influence.
The president declared the liberation of Marawi in October, after five months of battle. But on December 11, Duterte asked the Congress to extend military rule on the southern region for another year.
The Constitution likewise holds that the SC should issue a decision on any petition "within thirty days from its filing."
READ: Solons question 'inordinately' long extension of martial law