THE Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday unanimously dismissed the petition seeking to compel the House of Representatives and the Senate to convene in a joint session and vote jointly on the legality of Proclamation 216, or President Duterte’s martial-law edict, as mandated under the Constitution.
At a news briefing, SC Spokesman Theodore Te said 13 justices voted to dismiss the petition. In a decision penned by Associate Justice Teresita Leonardo-de Castro, the justices dismissed the petition on the ground that Congress did not gravely abuse its discretion in not convening jointly upon Duterte’s issuance of Proclamation 216 placing the entire Mindanao region under martial law and suspending the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.
The Court held that Article VII, Section 18 of the 1987 Constitution, which allows the President to declare martial law and suspend the writ of habeas corpus only “in case of invasion or rebellion, or when public safety requires it”, imposes no duty on both houses of Congress to convene jointly to make the edict valid.
It added that such duty to convene or vote is limited to instances where Congress intends to revoke or extend any proclamation of martial law or suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.
Two justices—Associate Justices Marvic Leonen and Alfredo Caguioa—concurred only with the result, but said the SC should no longer decide on the merit since “the controversy presented was already moot and academic.”
The petition was filed by Manila Auxiliary Bishop Broderick Pabillo, Bishop Antonio Tobias, Bishop Emeritus Deogracias Iniguez, Mother Adelaida Ygrubay of the Order of Saint Benedict, Shamah Bulangis, Cassandra D. Deluria and former Sen. Wigberto Tanada. The petitioners specifically asked the SC to order the Senate and the House to convene and vote jointly on the legality of Proclamation 216.
They claimed that the lawmakers committed grave abuse of discretion when the lower and upper chambers issued separate resolutions supporting Duterte’s martial law, which contravened the provisions of the Constitution.
They insisted that the House and the Senate should convene and decide on the fate of Proclamation 216, noting that a “transparent and deliberative process is necessary to quell the people’s fears against Executive overreach.”
Petitioners stressed that the constitutional mandate of the Senate and the House under Article VII, Section 18 of the 1987 Constitution cannot be legally carried out by separate briefings given by the Executive branch and the Armed Forces of the Philippines to both houses of Congress.
They also said that failure to convene a joint session deprives lawmakers the chance to scrutinize the declaration, and the public of transparent proceedings within which to be informed of the factual bases of Duterte’s action.