'Military take over of the Water Concessions? Why not? Plus suspension of the writ of habeas corpus'

A lot of sectors are crying that the dictatorship has returned in the country.

In almost a month President Rodrigo Roa Duterte has made statements/threats as against two oligarchs controlled company – ABS-CBN and the two giant water concessionaires Manila Water Co. Inc. (for the east zone) operated by the Ayala group, and Maynilad Water Services Inc. (for the west zone) of the Pangilinan group’s Metro Pacific.

Opposition has cried that the Chief Executive has resorted to his threats and slowly creeping in the power of a dictator.

Maynilad Water Services Inc. and Manila Water Co. Inc. are here to stay despite threats from President Duterte to send the military to take over their operations.
(photo credit to PhilStar)

Bloggers and President Duterte supporter has laid down to explain the Constitutional background as well as jurisprudence which supports the statement of the President with respect to a military takeover of these vital operations such as that of the two water concessionaires.

For the information of the public and for full transparency, below is the full quote of the post penned by Trixie Cruz- Angeles & Ahmed Paglinawan, which was published last Dec. 14, 2019

 Military take over of the Water Concessions? Why not? Plus suspension of the writ of habeas corpus

HINDI NANANAKOT ang pangulo. Kaya nyang gawin ito.

Ayon sa PNA article:

“’Huwag niyo akong laruan na takut-takutin ninyo ako, ‘Sige, mag-sibat kami, bahala ka wala kayong tubig’ (Do not play dirty tricks and threaten me, ‘Fine, we will cease our operations but no one can supply you water.’) I will order the armed forces to operate your water,’ he said.

‘O sige, sundalo mag-take over kayo (To the soldiers, take over their operations). Then I will declare a suspension of the writ of habeas corpus, but only against economic sabotage,’ Duterte added.”

Kung inaakala ng ilang mga kritiko ng pangulo na hindi ito magagawa eksaminin natin ang powers ng pangulo. Ayon sa Art VII sec 18:

“SECTION 18. The President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of the Philippines and whenever it becomes necessary, he may call out such armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion.

In case of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety requires it, he may, for a period not exceeding sixty days, suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or place the Philippines or any part thereof under martial law.”

Sumasailalim sa extraordinary powers ng commander in chief ang mga sumusunod:

1. power to call out the armed forces to suppress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion

2. power to suspend the writ of habeas corpus

3. power to declare martial law

Sa mga powers na ito, ang suspension ng writ of habeas corpus at declaration of martial law ay maaaring i-extend o putulin ng kongreso.

Hindi pwedeng i-rebyu o i-overturn ng hudikatura ang power to call out the military. Hindi ito ina-affirm ng kongreso, at hindi sila ang mag extend o puputol nito. Ito ay sole power ng pangulo.

Paano naman ang power niyang isuspendi ang writ of habeas corpus?

Ayon sa saligang batas, pwede gamitin ng pangulo ang power na ito kapag may invasion o rebelyon. Since walang invasion, ano ba ang rebelyon?

Sabi ng Korte Suprema, para magkaruon ng rebleyon eto ang mga kailangan:

1. That there be (a) public uprising, and

(b) taking up arms against the Government; and

2. That the purpose of the uprising or movement is either:

(a) to remove from the allegiance to said Government or its laws the territory of the Philippines or any part thereof, or any body of land, naval or other armed forces or

(b) to deprive the Chief Executive or Congress, wholly or partially, of any of their powers or prerogatives.

Upang mapatunayan ang mga ito ang kailangan lamang na quantum of evidence ay iyong sapat para sa probable cause. Sabi ng hukuman sa Lagman et al v. Medialdea et al GR 231658 July 4,2017:

To summarize, the parameters for determining the sufficiency of factual basis are as follows:

l) actual rebellion or invasion;

2) public safety requires it; the first two requirements must concur; and

3) there is probable cause for the President to believe that there is actual rebellion or invasion.

Take note, si Pangulo lang ang mag determine kung ang ebidensyang isinumite sa kanya ay sapat na para sa probable cause. Hndi DOJ o ibang ahensya ang didinig nito. Limitado pati ang pag rebyu ng Korte Suprema dito. Sabi sa naturang kaso:

“At this juncture, it bears to emphasize that the purpose of judicial review is not the determination of accuracy or veracity of the facts upon which the President anchored his declaration of martial law or suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus; rather, only the sufficiency of the factual basis as to convince the President that there is probable cause that rebellion exists. It must also be reiterated that martial law is a matter of urgency and much leeway and flexibility should be accorded the President. As such, he is not expected to completely validate all the information he received before declaring martial law or suspending the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.”

Sa madaling salita, hindi tinitignan ng hukuman kung tutoo yung ebidensya. Hindi tinitignan kung tama. Ang rebyu ay limitado lamang sadeterminasyon kung ang isinumite sa pangulo ay SAPAT para makapag determine siya ng probable cause.

Hindi irerebyu ng hudikatura kung tutoo o hindi. Irerebyu lang kung sapat ito para maging basehan ng pangulo.

Ngayon hindi natin alam kung ano ang ebidensyang

hawak ng pangulo. Pero para maglakas loob siyang sabihn na gagawin niya ito, kung kaya’t marahil eto yung scenario na iniisip ng pangulo, base sa mga sinabi niya:

1.   Ipa take over ng presidente ang operations ng water concessionaires sa military. Palalabasin ang mga empleyado pero iwan lang ang mga technical personnel na kailangan sa day to day operations. I-shut off access sa mga (dating) opisyales ng Manila Water at Maynilad and buong operations nito.

2. I-audit ang operations at financials ng mga kumpanya.

3. Kakasuhan for investigation of plunder ang mga government officials na may kinalaman sa paggaa ng mga concession agreements at water executives nuon na may kinalaman sa paggawa ng kontrata na hanggang ngayon ay kumikita pa rito.

4. Base sa imbestigasyon, kung may relasyon sa rebelyon ang mga gawain nila, isusupindi ang writ of habeas corpus at aarestuhin ang mga kasankot.

Note: ang scenario na naka post dito ay ayn sa mga public statements ng pangulo, batas at naankop na kurisprudence ayn sa opinyn ng awtor.

What can you say about the article?

Share us your thoughts by simply leaving on the comment section below. For more news updates, feel free to visit our site often.

Stay updated with today's relevant news and trends by hitting the LIKE button.

Thanks for dropping by and reading this post.

Report from FB