Has Duterte Normalized Martial Law in the Philippines?

Less than a year after assuming office, Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte had declared martial law in the southern part of the country and convinced the Supreme Court to affirm it. He was able to do this without generating widespread opposition while buttressing his hold on power and undermining alleged destabilization plots against his administration. The extension of martial law for several more months is also supported by Congress leaders.

The normalization of martial law as a legitimate tool of a sitting president to enforce law and order appears to be a political victory for Duterte, although this has remained unacknowledged.

If there’s an issue that instantly arouses loud reactions among various political forces, it is the idea of using martial law to deal with a state of emergency. Opposition to any proposal to declare martial law can easily gather momentum and inspire the people to challenge the president’s motives.

This is linked to the country’s painful experience during the term of President Ferdinand Marcos, who imposed martial law from 1972 to 1981. During this period, widespread human rights atrocities were committed by state forces, which prompted the rise of a broad opposition movement and led to the ouster of Marcos in 1986.

Reeling from this traumatic episode, the drafters of the 1987 Constitution inserted provisions that would prevent the repeat of another Marcos-type era of martial law by clipping the powers of the president and handing over to Congress the authority to extend a 60-day martial law declaration.

After 1986, governments accused of implementing repressive policies were often compared to the authoritarian regime of Marcos. It is a serious criticism if a particular state program is branded by critics and activists as similar to what transpired in the country under martial law.

In 2009, former President Gloria Arroyo placed Maguindanao under martial law following the massacre of 57 individuals in the province orchestrated by a warlord politician. Martial law lasted in less than two weeks but it managed to confirm Arroyo’s reputation as a dictator-like leader.

During the time of former President Noynoy Aquino, there were several attacks made by rebels in Mindanao but these were all resolved without needing to declare martial law.

Duterte proved to be more daring than his predecessors when he declared martial law in Mindanao on May 23, 2017 even if the supposed basis for the proclamation was questioned for both reliability and accuracy.

Will the recent ruling of the Supreme Court finally remove the negative perception of the people against martial law?

The answer is no. As long as victims of martial law during the Marcos era are not properly compensated for what they endured, there can be no successful rebranding of martial law. As long as the military institution refuses to exorcise its past by disavowing Marcosian tactics in dealing with communities that engage in organized resistance to mining, logging, and other aggressive development projects, there can be no long-term normalization of martial law as a political instrument. As long as perpetrators of human rights abuses are not brought to justice, the Marcos family included, there can be no real healing of the past.

Duterte got some of what he wants but not all. He got the backing of several important institutions in the government but not the silence of groups that have consistently fought against the return of martial law. He gave too much confidence to the “reformed” military and ignored human rights groups’ reminders about the bloody record of some of his trusted generals. An extended and expanded martial law is prone to all sorts of abuse, especially if the implementers are accused of causing the displacement of indigenous peoples in Mindanao, the violent dispersal of peaceful protests, the kidnapping of activists, and the sabotage of the peace process.

Perhaps the Duterte government is emboldened by his record-high public trust rating and the relatively smaller protests against his decision to declare martial law. This is the time for Duterte to remember what happened to his idol Marcos in the past. Wasn’t Marcos also popular during the early years of martial law? And wasn’t it also true that it took some years before a vibrant protest movement defied the dictatorship?