Malacañang reminded on Friday the public, especially the residents in Mindanao, that the national emergency is still in effect despite the expiration of martial law in southern Philippines.

In a statement, Presidential Spokesperson Salvador Panelo said that Proclamation No. 55 issued by President Rodrigo Duterte last Sept. 4, 2016, which declares a state of national emergency on account of lawless violence, is still existing.

He explained that Proclamation No. 55 was issued pursuant to the calling out power of the President under Section 18, Article 7 of the 1987 Constitution.

The constitutional provision bestows upon the President, as the Commander-in-Chief, three extraordinary powers in connection with such designation, namely, to call out the armed forces, to place any part of the country under martial law, and to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.

Panelo, also the chief presidential legal counsel, said the calling out power “commanded the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and the Philippine National Police (PNP) to undertake such measures to suppress any and all forms of lawless violence in Mindanao and to prevent the same from spreading and escalating elsewhere in the Philippines.”

While this calling out power is contained in the same provision which sanctions imposition of martial law and suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, Panelo explained that the same is unique in that it can be used independently without the participation of Congress and its actual use cannot be subjected to judicial review unless constitutional boundaries are violated.

“Therefore, as long as the President deems it necessary to prevent or suppress lawless violence, invasion, or rebellion (such as at present times), then he is lawfully authorized to resort to this calling out power,” he said.

The official said the two other extraordinary powers – martial law and suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus – involve curtailment and suppression of civil rights and individual freedoms and they entail more stringent safeguards as they may be exercised only when there is actual invasion or rebellion, and public safety requires it.

As compared to previous constitutions, the 1987 Constitution has imposed the following limitations in declaring the same, as ascertained by the Supreme Court: an original period of 60 days; a review and a possible revocation by Congress; and a review and a possible nullification by the high tribunal, he added.

Panelo said the declaration of national emergency is still needed due to the continuous problem with the insurgency groups.

“While jurisprudence defines the power currently being utilized by the President through Proclamation No. 55 as the most benign among the three extraordinary powers, the same should remain imposed and strictly observed by the AFP and PNP to ensure the maintenance of law and order in all other parts of the country given that there remains the communist insurgency to reckon with, as well as there is yet a terrorist organization resurrecting to be crushed,” he said.

He said the Office of the President asks the citizenry for their usual cooperation, even as the governnent assured them that it will not allow any abuse of their fundamental civil and political rights during state of national emergency.

Martial law in Mindanao expired on December 31 since it was declared in May 2017 due to Marawi siege. Celerina Monte/DMS

It is a tragedy to welcome the new year with the death of a Filipina OFW.

The Commission on Human Rights expresses its deepest sympathies to the family and loved ones of Jeanelyn Villavende, an overseas Filipina worker in Kuwait.

Information reaching authorities in the Philippines claim that Jeanelyn allegedly died in the hands of her employer. This violence happened in spite of a memorandum of agreement (MOA) between the Philippines and Kuwait signed in 2018 granting better protection for the rights of Filipinos working in the Gulf state.

With another episode of violence and abuse, the challenge is to ensure that the MOA does not remain a piece of document, but would genuinely translate to meaningful protection and promotion of the rights of our overseas Filipino workers. We are urging the Kuwaiti government to fulfil their commitments under the MOA in order to finally put a stop these abuses and for them to uphold the Filipino workers’ rights in their country.

As we call on the Kuwaiti Government to fulfill its commitments under the MOA, we likewise urge the Philippine Government to improve its mechanisms in monitoring and preventing Filipinos working abroad from being further exploited and abused.

Closer and concrete coordination mechanisms between the agencies handling Filipino migrant worker concerns—such as the Department of Labor and Employment and its attached agencies, Philippine Overseas Employment Administration and Overseas Workers Welfare Administration, and the Department of Foreign Affairs and our embassies—should be functioning and well placed so that any form of abuse is immediately addressed, senseless deaths are put to a stop, and swift justice is obtained by our OFWs.

We condemn the gruesome death of Jeanelyn. No one should ever find themselves in harm’s way for simply seeking better opportunities abroad so that they may provide for their families and loved ones at home.

We call on both the Philippine and Kuwaiti governments to apply the fullest extent of the law in assuring that justice is served to Jeanelyn and her family and that every perpetrator is held to account.

For our part, CHR shall continue to monitor this case and the subsequent actions from the Philippine and Kuwaiti governments in addressing this tragedy. A partial deployment ban may be the response of government as a reaction to this tragedy but a more studied and permanent solution must be found in order to put a stop to any and all forms of abuses suffered by our OFWs especially in Kuwait where we already have a MOA for the protection of our OFWs.

At the same time, we encourage government to continuously look into spurring opportunities in the Philippines so that less and less of our workers would be forced to seek employment aboard as a matter of need—equally bearing in mind the social costs of overseas work to families left behind. CHR