EDITORIAL - Martial law (sigh!)

It is but natural for the declaration of martial law in Maguindanao to provoke heated debates and passionate discourse. Martial law is not something you meet around the corner each time you make a turn. Good or bad, its sheer uniqueness could not but jolt the people.

It is best to leave the matter of whether martial law is good or bad for the Maguindanao situation at the doorstep of the proper authority that will have to make that determination, as well as to history as it judges this new crinkle in our national life later.

To pass judgment on martial law now, as it applies to a yet still-unfolding Maguindanao situation, is to put the cart before the horse. Let us see how things turn out first. Let us not pretend to be any wiser before the fact.

What should involve our arguments instead is whether the imposition of martial law is warranted, whether it has met the constitutional requirements for its imposition. The law says martial law can only be imposed during an invasion or rebellion, or imminent threat thereof.

Clearly we have not been invaded nor under threat of invasion. Rebellion? There is rebellion in the south, but this was not the rebellion that necessitated the imposition. The rebellion being alluded to by government pertained to the Maguindanao-Ampatuan issue.

To be sure, there was no open outbreak of hostilities to qualify an armed rebellion was taking place. And while mountains of weapons and ammunition have been unearthed to underscore the fact that the Ampatuans have a virtual army, that alone may not constitute imminent threat.

To hear it from Interior and Local Government Secretary Ronaldo Puno, the rebellion was taking place when the local governments in Maguindanao stopped to function, when officials began to abandon their posts in abdication of their duties and causing all authority to collapse.

Now, that may be a novel way of interpreting a rebellion, but it is worth hearing out and evaluating. On the surface, it makes sense in that the willful abdication of duty, with a mind to cripple authority, is an act of defiance. The private sector calls it punishable insubordination.

But then again, it is best to leave such a delicate matter to the proper authorities, be it Congress or the Supreme Court. Ordinary citizens tend to get too passionate, and often quite too irrational. It adds to our problems to be all-knowing, especially if we turn out to be wrong.