On social media, critics question Duterte’s declaration of Martial Law in Mindanao and a La Salle professor is tired listening to the whining of critics.
La Salle Prof. Antonio Contreras took to Facebook castigating hard-to-please critics of President Duterte whose penchant for fault-finding in the president’s policies and decisions has been there since day one.
Read the full text of the viral post below.
Can someone lend some people their brains?
It just pisses me off so early in the morning that people take issue with the President’s declaration of Martial Law in Mindanao while yesterday they were demanding that the President should do something substantial to address the crisis there.
I hear words like overkill, abuse of power, potential violation of human rights.
And some are even faulting the President for going to Russia at a time like this, as if he could have seen this coming like a typhoon approaching.
They say its a failure of intelligence.
Failure of intelligence my ass! If there is an intelligence that failed it would be theirs.
Oh. Some idiotic point was even raised that maybe the President planned this as part of a grand conspiracy to declare Martial Law.
People. Your hatred for this President and your fertile imaginations are no longer amusing. Get some help.
Netizen Joy Jimenez wrote: “In their unreasonableness, the yellows have lost whatever brains they use to have. I didn’t realise that hatred can bring about total brain damage!”
Orman Ortega Manansala offered a long comment to enlighten critics on Duterte’s Martial imposition in Mindanao:
Before you react, please read…
Section 18, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution:
Section 18. The President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of the Philippines and whenever it becomes necessary, he may call out such armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion. In case of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety requires it, he may, for a period not exceeding sixty days, suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or place the Philippines or any part thereof under martial law. Within forty-eight hours from the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, the President shall submit a report in person or in writing to the Congress. The Congress, voting jointly, by a vote of at least a majority of all its Members in regular or special session, may revoke such proclamation or suspension, which revocation shall not be set aside by the President. Upon the initiative of the President, the Congress may, in the same manner, extend such proclamation or suspension for a period to be determined by the Congress, if the invasion or rebellion shall persist and public safety requires it.
The Congress, if not in session, shall, within twenty-four hours following such proclamation or suspension, convene in accordance with its rules without need of a call.
The Supreme Court may review, in an appropriate proceeding filed by any citizen, the sufficiency of the factual basis of the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or the extension thereof, and must promulgate its decision thereon within thirty days from its filing.
A state of martial law does not suspend the operation of the Constitution, nor supplant the functioning of the civil courts or legislative assemblies, nor authorize the conferment of jurisdiction on military courts and agencies over civilians where civil courts are able to function, nor automatically suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.
The suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall apply only to persons judicially charged for rebellion or offenses inherent in, or directly connected with, invasion.
During the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, any person thus arrested or detained shall be judicially charged within three days, otherwise he shall be released.
The post has gathered 1,042 shares, 3,878 reactions and 13 comments.