[go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd
Upload
4K views2 pages

Lagman v. Pimentel III Case Digest

This document summarizes Lagman v. Pimentel III, a Supreme Court case from February 2018 regarding the extension of martial law in Mindanao, Philippines. The Court ruled that the President and Congress had sufficient factual basis to extend Proclamation No. 216, which declared martial law in Mindanao, because remnants of rebellion seeking to establish an ISIS territory continued armed resistance, posing a threat to public safety. The Court held that the President met the probable cause standard for valid declaration of martial law based on increasing rebel group numbers and resoluteness in overthrowing government control of Mindanao.

Uploaded by

LIERA
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
4K views2 pages

Lagman v. Pimentel III Case Digest

This document summarizes Lagman v. Pimentel III, a Supreme Court case from February 2018 regarding the extension of martial law in Mindanao, Philippines. The Court ruled that the President and Congress had sufficient factual basis to extend Proclamation No. 216, which declared martial law in Mindanao, because remnants of rebellion seeking to establish an ISIS territory continued armed resistance, posing a threat to public safety. The Court held that the President met the probable cause standard for valid declaration of martial law based on increasing rebel group numbers and resoluteness in overthrowing government control of Mindanao.

Uploaded by

LIERA
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Lagman v. Pimentel III, G.R. No.

235935, February 06, 2018

FACTS:

On July 18, 2017, the President requested the Congress to extend the effectivity of Proclamation
No. 216. In a Special Joint Session on July 22, 2017, the Congress adopted Resolution of Both
Houses No. 2, extending Proclamation No. 216 until December 31, 2017. In a letter to the
President, through Defense Secretary Lorenzana, the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP)
Chief of Staff, General Rey Leonardo Guerrero (General Guerrero), recommended the further
extension of martial law and suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in the entire
Mindanao for one year beginning January 1, 2018.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the President and the Congress had sufficient factual basis to extend
Proclamation No. 216?

RULING:

Supreme Court reiterated the case of Lagman v. Medialdea. The Court sustained the
constitutionality of Proclamation No. 216, holding that the President had probable cause to
believe that actual rebellion exists and public safety required the Proclamation. The Court held:

A review of the aforesaid facts similarly leads the Court to conclude that the President, in
issuing Proclamation No. 216, had sufficient factual bases tending to show that actual rebellion
exists. The President's conclusion, that there was an armed public uprising, the culpable
purpose of which was the removal from the allegiance of the Philippine Government a portion of
its territory and the deprivation of the President from performing his powers and prerogatives,
was reached after a tactical consideration of the facts. In fine, the President satisfactorily
discharged his burden of proof.

After all, what the President needs to satisfy is only the standard of probable cause for a valid
declaration of martial law and suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. x x x

In this case, the reasons cited by the President in his request for further extension indicate that
the rebellion, which caused him to issue Proclamation No. 216, continues to exist and its
"remnants" have been resolute in establishing a DAESH/ISIS territory in Mindanao, carrying on
through the recruitment and training of new members, financial and logistical build-up,
consolidation of forces and continued attacks. In recommending the one-year extension of
Proclamation No. 216 to the President, AFP General Guerrero cited, among others, the continued
armed resistance of the DAESH-inspired DIWM and their allies. As to public safety, the rising
number of these rebel groups, their training in and predilection to terrorism, and their
resoluteness in wresting control of Mindanao from the government, pose a serious danger to
Mindanao. In a short period after the Marawi crisis was put under control, said rebel groups have
managed to increase their number by 400, almost the same strength as the group that initially
stormed Marawi. Their current number is now more than half the 1,010 rebels in Marawi which
had taken the AFP five months to neutralize. To wait until a new battleground is chosen by these
rebel groups before we consider them a significant threat to public safety is neither sound nor
prudent.

You might also like