(This artwork of the Philippine eagle is from an original by Jeffrey Duhaylungsod and Donnie Ray Lopez, both Davaoeños, published by and rightclicked from davaocitybattad.blogspot; i just put the graphics #DavaoStrong with apologies, used here non-commercially for academic purposes)
“Commander-in-chief powers & emergency powers: Zamboanga standoff “The President (PNoy, on Sept. 20, 2013) has been actively exercising his commander-in-chief powers by directly supervising the operations to end the Zamboanga standoff. “Last week, we had a post here on the commander-in-chief powers of the President: In particular: 1)the so-called “calling-out” power or the power to call out the armed forces to quell any rebellion, invasion, lawless violence. “This means that the President alone has the power to order, command, deploy, and direct the armed forces in order to suppress lawless violence, rebellion, invasion. But of course he can delegate the operational details to the defense secretary or the chief of staff. “But based on this president’s life history (PNoy, re-posted from Sept. 20, 2013), maybe he has experience in security matters and would probably like to see through the Zamboanga crisis first-hand with minimal damage to civilian life and property. “(The other commander-in-chief powers have been discussed here last week: the power to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus subject to constitutional limits and the power to declare martial law subject to the same limits. ) “What about the so-called “emergency powers”? What are those? “Only Congress can grant the President extraordinary powers under a state of emergency which Congress declares: In particular: “1.In times of war or a national emergency, Congress by resolution may grant the President emergency powers, such as the take-over of public utilities. “If the President on his own declares a state of emergency, that presidential declaration does not confer any extraordinary powers on him. “2.The second so-called emergency power (actually, it’s the first in the emergency powers clause Constitution) is dire . You don’t want it. They are war powers. As follows: Only Congress can declare a state of war by a vote of two-thirds of both Houses in joint session voting separately (that is: 2/3 vote of the lower House and 2/3 vote of the Senate). Only after such declaration of a state of war can the President exercise “war powers” . “Our generation has never seen a congressional declaration of war and God forbid that we do. Examples of war powers are: (compulsory military draft) — penalizing, based on a compulsory conscription law, those who refuse to heed the draft to the armed forces; directing the use of communication facilities and other utilities for national defense; directing and controlling the transport of basic commodities like rice and food stuff; controlling news media content for defense purposes; etc. “We’re good with basic commander-in-chief calling-out powers. The mopping up operations is on-going. “The plight of more than a hundred thousand displaced civilians need to be addressed urgently, though.” (Re-posted from Sept. 20, 2013)
“Commentary 6 (28 July 2013): Rappler writer implies ‘Muslims and Communists’ as responsible for CDO bombing” written by TDP
“Tragedy occurred last 26 July 2013 (Friday) in Cagayan de Oro City as forty-eight (48) were injured and six (6) civilians were killed in a bomb attack at a local bistro. Philippine troops and the police have since then been ordered to tighten security and stay vigilant in lieu of the recent event (France-Presse, 2013). Meanwhile, Interior Secretary Mar Roxas and investigators were on site to search for clues on Friday night’s attack: “We are doing everything (to determine the suspects). We have placed the police in Mindanao, the intelligence community, and the army on heightened alert to prevent a similar attack” (France-Presse, 2013). An investigation is ongoing to determine possible motives for the restaurant bombing.
“Despite the lack of substantive evidence to pit a certain person or a certain group as responsible for the attacks, France-Presse of Rappler makes some misleading and judgmental claims about the possible culprits. In the 28 July 2013 article published by rappler the author notes: “Cagayan de Oro is a bustling city that has been relatively unscathed by a decades-old Muslim and communist insurgency that have plagued parts of the south in this largely Catholic country” (France-Presse, 2013). Although the writer notes that “Roxas’s statement suggested the attack may not have been the work of Muslim militants who operate in other parts of the south and are known to use mortar bombs rigged to a timing device”, the writer links specific groups as suspects of the attack. Furthermore, the adjective ‘Muslim’ is used to describe ‘militants’, which is problematic because it unrightfully relegates the act as being religiously, as well as politically motivated.
“According to the Philippine Press Institute (2013), “all efforts must be exerted to make stories fair, accurate, and balanced”, and “language, photographs, visuals, and graphics that are racist, sexist, insensitive, and disrespectful of men, women, and children, religious dominations, cultural communities, and gender and political preferences” should be avoided at all times. By insinuating that the attacks may be politically motivated and by implying that such attacks may be attributed to a particular religious group, France-Presse is guilty of two major unethical practices. Rather than speculate and consequently feed the public unsubstantiated information, it is best to wait for the results of the formal, official investigation.” Posted by TDP.
