In a news conference at the Palace, National Security Adviser Roilo Golez and Presidential Spokesman Ignacio Bunye justified its continued implementation to better deal with "residual threats."
Even if Mrs. Arroyo had declared earlier that everything is under control and "back to usual business," Bunye said there are some elements (of the coup plotters) "that have still to be accounted for."
"The President did say that if you look at Makati, it’s business as usual. And we’re moving towards full normalcy as soon as possible," Bunye said.
Golez, for his part, confirmed the presence of "residual threats that have to be accounted for" but refused to say if he was the one who recommended the continued implementation of the state of rebellion.
"I’m sorry, I do not publicly divulge my recommendations. This is a matter that is part of the decision-making process and dynamics of (which are) not subject for public review," he said.
"All I can say is she (President) has already announced the state of rebellion will be lifted sooner than many people think."
Mrs. Arroyo declared the state of rebellion at the height of the mutiny by some 300 soldiers last July 27.
Various sectors joined some legislators and the business community in calling for Mrs. Arroyo to lift the state of rebellion on fears of its adverse effects on the economy and curtailment of civil rights.
While declaring the coup over, Mrs. Arroyo said the state of rebellion will stay as a "mantle of protection" of the people as they go on with their normal activities.
Other sectors contested the legality of the state of rebellion before the Supreme Court.
Party-list representatives J.V. Bautista of Sanlakas and Renato Magtubo of Partido ng Manggagawa claimed Mrs. Arroyo committed "grave abuse of discretion" since the Constitution does not provide for the proclamation of a state of rebellion.
Lawyers of the two party-list groups last Monday asked the Supreme Court to declare as unconstitutional the declaration of state of rebellion.
Their petition, however, was junked by the Supreme Court the following day for failing to comply with legal requirements of properly filing a petition. — Marichu Villanueva, Aurea Calica