Is martial law needed by the military? Sereno asks AFP

MANILA, Philippines — Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno on Wednesday said that the military should explain to the public what is martial law for.

During the resumption of the oral arguments on the consolidated petitions on martial law extension, Sereno asked Gen. Rey Guerrero, Armed Forces of the Philippines chief-of-staff, to expound how did martial law help the military forces last year in Mindanao.

"We have to have clear message to the people: This is what martial law does," Sereno prodded.

The Supreme Court is currently deliberating whether Duterte's second request for extension of martial law in the southern region of the Philippines has sufficient factual basis.

In July last year, the SC upheld the constitutionality of Proclamation No. 216 that placed Mindanao under martial law and suspended the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.

READ: Monsod tells SC democracy is on the line during martial law hearing

Eleven justices voted to junk the petitions challenging the constitutionality of Duterte's martial law declaration.

Sereno is among the three justices who said that martial law should be limited in certain areas. In her dissenting opinion, Sereno said that martial law should only be declared in Lanao del Sur, where Marawi City is, and not the whole of Mindanao.

Sereno, in interpellating Guerrero, stressed that the military only said that martial law in Mindanao was good, but failed to expound on specific effects in military operations.

Guerrero, meanwhile, said that martial law encouraged "greater compliance on all government entities" and "enhance climate of safety and security."

"People in affected areas could attest that they appreciate the implementation of martial law," Guerrero added.

READ: Military claims there are 48 foreign terrorists in Mindanao

Guerrero added that with martial law in effect, they have observed that they were "able to enjoin other agencies to cooperate with us," such as information sharing and mobilization of people.

The petitioners, composed of opposition lawmakers, human rights lawyers and constitutionalist, claim that martial law is not needed to quash the "remnants" of the terrorist groups in Mindanao. They cited that the other powers vested upon the president are enough to address the situation in the region.

The Supreme Court continues to deliberate on the consolidated petitions challenging the constitutionality of Duterte's year-long extension of military rule in Mindanao.

READ: Monsod: SC ruling in 2017 made martial law 'measure of first resort'