The imposition of Martial Law by Her Excellency Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, President of the Philippines, shortly after the gruesome ‘Maguindanao Massacre’ last November 23, 2009, has been and is still being hotly contested by public officials and private individuals.
I would like to share my own personal viewpoint on this matter.
The basis of the contentions is the provision in our Philippine Constitution which reads: “In case of invasion or rebellion, when 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” (Art. VII, Sec. 18).
The legalists contend that based on this provision of our Constitution the imposition of Martial Law in this particular case is illegal. On the other hand,others view the imposition as a necessity under the circumstances, and therefore, is morally right. Hence, there are differences in opinion between those who strictly stick to the provision of the Law and those who see things from the viewpoint of morality.
At this juncture, I recall the axiom that what is legally wrong may be morally right and vice versa, what is legally right may be morally wrong.
In the Gospel of Mark 2:27, Jesus said: “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath” He said this when He cured a paralyzed man on a Sabbath which according to the Law of the Pharisees should not have been done. Then in Matthew 12:3-5 we also read: “ Jesus answered: ‘Have you not read what David did when he and his men were hungry? He went into the house of God, and ate the bread offered to God, although neither he nor his men had the right to eat it, but only the priests. And have you not read in the Law that on the Sabbath the priests in the Temple break the Sabbath rest, yet they are not guilty?’”.
From the foregoing statements of our Lord Jesus Christ, laws are made for man and not man for the laws. This means that the good or welfare of man should prevail over whatever may be a prescription of the law. And the good of man is the objective of the law of love which according to Christ is the greatest commandment, next to the Love of God. (Mk. 12:29-31).
To love is to seek the neighbor’s welfare. It entails making a decision which must be omnified, taking everything into account, and optimific, doing what is best under the circumstances. In making such a decision one has to be guided not so much by what the law says but by what one’s conscience dictates. This is where morality comes in guided by a kind of inner voice, called “conscience” which makes someone conscious of the goodness or blameworthiness of his conduct together with a feeling of obligation to do what is right or good.
One’s decision, however, has always to consider the concrete circumstances of any situation. For as President Barack Obama says: “Each historical moment is different. You never step into the same river twice”.
To my mind, the decision made by Her Excellency President Gloria M. Aroyo in imposing Martial Law in order to restore peace and order in Maguindanao may be legally wrong, but is morally right.
by: Salvador 'Buddy' Cagurangan
Dec. 13, 2009
No comments:
Post a Comment