Martial Law and the Suspension of Habeas Corpus

Two weeks ago, in a southern Philippine Province, 57 people were killed in a massacre said to be headed by the Ampatuan family (a powerful political family). Over this weekend, President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo proclaimed martial law in Maguindanao; the reason was a breakdown of law and order. Since then, nearly 50 people have been detained. Among those detained were the Ampatuan Family, and when their house was raided the military found forty firearms, including Armalite assault rifles and ammunition. The Ampatuans used to be among Arroyo's closest allies in the south, but now they have been removed Arroyo's political party. Arroyo has been under pressure to call martial law because of the deaths of dozens of people, including reporters, supporters, and even relatives of the rival political leader (Mangudadatu). The victims were on their way to file Mr. Mangudadatu's papers for candidacy when they were stopped on a national highway and taken to a hilltop where they were shot, hacked, and buried. Many claim that martial law, the suspension of habeas corpus, and the arrest of of suspects without a warrant was necessary because of the violence and brutality. However, others like Fidel Ramos calls it an "overreaction" and that martial law was too extreme. Amidst all this, some Filipinos are grateful for Mrs. Arroyo's decision.

Martial law, the suspension of habeas corpus, and the arrest of suspects without a warrant should not be taken lightly. In history we have learned what a big deal it is to suspend the writ of habeas corpus. I think Mrs. Arroyo was under a lot of pressure to impose martial law because of all the deaths and violence. I don't agree that it was an "overreaction", but I do think her decision was prompted somewhat by all the pressure put on her. However, imposing martial law may have been the only thing to do in order to quell the rebellion because it wasn't just the one family committing the massacre; it was the supporters of the family as well.