Because I don't really know how to explain what happened today, as such I am reproducing here a blog entry by Professor Teddy Te:

THE LAW IN THE GRAND MANNER

To say it was a mixed group is an understatement.

A motley group of about 300 lawyers, law students, paralegals and activists marched this morning to the EDSA shrine from the IBP National Headquarters to protest the dictator's decree 1017.  It was a reunion between civil libertarians from way back and  those they had mentored and are now leading the charge; it was also a reunion for the EDSA forces who had somehow parted ways after EDSA and found themselves on different sides of the fence. There were the new generation of lawyers with and of conscience;  there were the idealistic law students and paralegals.  And oh yes, there were the trapos as well—Cayetano, Binay, Maceda;  well, you can't have everything.

This group took over the EDSA shrine and for close to 45 minutes took turns telling the dictator "NO!" NEVER AGAIN!" After that, we marched back to the IBP National Headquarters for photo ops.  En route, we learned that 1017 had been lifted.

I  saw my students there, past and present;  and despite their being very new to this activism, I see their hearts burn with idealism and passion.  And I am suddenly even more hopeful for this country.  Now, if they can only learn to address a crowd in straight Filipino. . . (peace, faye.)

***

Bits of Info:

• Despite the mootness of the issue, I believe that the Supreme Court should rule on the merits of the petitions questionning the constitutionality of PP1017 and Gen. Order No. 5.
• In my opinion, IBASURA is not equal to lifting the proclamation as though it were the Sword of Damocles that may be thrust down upon hapless citizens at any moment.
• UP LAW students are NOT asking for the lifiting of the proclamation, but for its RESCISSION, that it be declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL by the Supreme Court so that such an assault on our freedom of speech may never happen again. Think about it, GMA declared a state of rebellion before (2003), then she declared a state of emergency (2006). What, save a ruling on the merits by the Supreme Court, will assure that such an assault on our civil liberties never happen again?
• My feet hurt. Remind me never to go to a rally wearing heels, ever again.

Memorable bits from today:

• Ma'am Gwen (aka Constitutional Law Goddess) told us: ""I just wanted to tell you, and please tell your classmates as well, that I am very proud that I had you as my students."
• Krystal shouted to riot police: "Studyante lang po kami! Ano ba manong, gwapo pa naman sana kayo."
• Allelu was in tears and interviewed by the media.
• Leni explaining to a radio reporter why she was there today.
• During the brief struggle, the crowd started chanting, "Maximum tolerance, maximum tolerance!" (Admittedly, the nerdiest chant ever to be used.)

More to follow, when I can actually look back at the events with some semblance of coherence.

Last Friday, February 24, 2006, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo issued  Presidential Proclamation 1017, declaring a state of national emergency. Immediately after, she issued General Order No. 5, directing the chiefs of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and the Philippine National Police (PNP) to “immediately carry out necessary and appropriate actions and measures to suppress and prevent acts of terrorism and lawless violence.”

Since then, these two issuances have been used to justify the imposition of severe limitations on — and in certain instances the outright denial of — civil liberties guaranteed and protected under the Bill of Rights, including the freedoms of speech, expression, of the press, and public assembly. Ostensibly on the strength of Proclamation 1017 and General Order 5, a general ban on rallies has been imposed, the PNP has raided one newspaper and threatens to take over other media outfits which “fail to conform to government standards,” and numerous persons, including several members of Congress, have been arrested without warrant.

We, the faculty of the University of the Philippines College of Law, speaking with one voice, condemn in the strongest possible terms this brazen assault on essential freedoms. We firmly and unequivocally take the position that Proclamation 1017 and General Order 5, and the manner in which they are being applied by the Executive, constitute an unconstitutional infringement on civil liberties.

We refuse to accept the half-hearted excuse, put forth by some officials in the Arroyo administration, that the two issuances were “not intended” to violate the Bill of Rights.

The simple and undeniable fact is that Proclamation 1017 and General Order 5 have been utilized by the PNP and other executive organs to mount a vigorous and unrelenting campaign against perceived critics of the administration, in full and flagrant disregard of the protections enshrined in the Bill of Rights as well as the legal rules of procedure. Equally undeniable is that the President has sanctioned, or at the very least tacitly approved, these actions undertaken by her subordinates, all of whom are fully within her control.

The indisputable truth is that the violations of the Bill of Rights done pursuant to Proclamation 1017 and General Order 5 are acts of the President.

It must be emphasized that nothing in the Constitution can authorize the suspension of the Bill of Rights. Even under a declared state of martial law, which the Arroyo administration repeatedly insists this is not, the Bill of Rights remains fully operative. Thus, the suppression of free speech, the muzzling of the free press, and the prohibition on public assembly sanctioned by the two issuances cannot be construed as anything other than clearly and unequivocally unconstitutional.

Our civil liberties, particularly the freedom of speech and public assembly are indispensable to our democracy. We cannot allow them to be arbitrarily suppressed. We therefore call for the immediate and unconditional rescission of Proclamation 1017 and General Order 5.

Today, UP law students together with some faculty members walked out of classes protesting Proclamation 1017. Our Consti II teacher refused to let us out of class early.

Another member of faculty, Prof. Florin Hilbay, came to the classroom ask the block if it would like to participate in the planned walk out of the College of Law.

To get our Consti teacher to adjourn classes earlier, Prof Hilbay said, "Professor Sison, it is time for the the students to exercise their constitutional rights."

And with that, the class adjourned. LOL. Sir Hilbay is so cute.

Today, I learned patience. We have to understand that things will take time. One rally will not topple our current dictatorship, several days of protest will not change our society.

It took 14 years to dethrone Marcos. For 14 years, he had a hold over the country, he refused to heed the calls of the people. He refused to heed any opposition. Any view contrary to his would be snuffed out.

However, what EDSA taught us is that dictators can be overthrown. One of my professors told me that before the first EDSA revolution occured, UP students for several years would actually have weekly rallies to protest Martial Law.

Things may not happen in our generation. The Arroyo Administration may not step down from its pedestal in the near future. However, in our little way, we can help. We can do something. We can let ourselves be heard. We can help people who have been unjustly arrested under the proclamation. We can say "no". We can openly defy the proclamation by exercising our freedom of speech. We can petition the government for redress. My class even plans to file a case in the Supreme Court, questionning the proclamation. All of us can tell people how wrong the proclamation actually is. We can disseminate information that will allow people to be properly outraged over this assault to our democracy.

Under the constitution, sovereignty resides in the people. That means that, we ctizens are the ones who truly have power in this country. Sovereignty is not vested in the presidency. However, this administration seems to believe that sovereignty in this country is actually vested to her office. When sovereignty is concentrated in one person, this is a dictatorship. At the core of our society is that we are a republican nation. The ultimate power in our country SHOULD be the people. (This is exactly why EDSA revolutions are entirely within the constitution. Power resides in the people, and when people actually say with one voice that we do not want this president anymore, then this is a manifestation of their sovereign will.)But the proclamation takes a different view. It ostensibly makes it appear as if absolute power and discretion on the affairs of the nation rest at the feet of the executive branch of government. General Order No.5 allows the AFP and PNP, "to immediately carry out the NECESSARY and APPROPRIATE actions and measures to suppress and prevent acts of terrorism and lawless violence." This gives the AFP and the Police the power to take any actions and measures necessary to carry out the purposes of the proclamation. This gives them the power to make warrantless arrests (Rep. Beltran) and to seize property (the Tribune). This proclamation seems to give them blanket, unfettered authority to do whatever they wish as longs as it is to prevent acts of terrorism and lawless violence. The proclamation does not include a list of what type of acts they may do. This proclmation is vague. This proclamation seeks to make us believe that a stroke of the president's pen may supersede the Constitution of the Philippines.  

Now therefore, we ask for the immediate rescission of Proclamation 1017 and General Order No. 5.

Admittedly, the rescission is not the end of the problem. The problem in our country is bigger in scope than this proclamation. But the death of this proclamation is but a start towards changing our country. It is a step to make things better. It is a step towards true democracy and towards public accountability.

It is a drop. But a drop leads to a bucket. This bucket leads to a stream. And the stream, by God, that stream leads to a roaring flood.

Keisie, damn it, you are SUCH an idiot.

Wish I had a secret blog where I can rant about this at length.

I'm posting here, a blog entry by one of my legal gods, Prof. Teddy Te:

In the 80's, the last line of a poem by Dylan Thomas captured the essence of struggle against a dictatorship:

"Do not go gently into the night,
rage, rage against the dying of the light."

It helped that student leaders like Lean Alejandro used to use this a lot.

In my comments section, a student going by the name "people powered" asked "Sir...what can students do??? Tried attending a rally, pero nakita ko lang na napalo yung kasama namin."

My answer, which I am reproducing in full,on this page:

"A LOT!!! Go join another rally, even if you get hit, truncheoned, water cannoned. Read, research, analyze, form an opinion, stand up for what is RIGHT and not
just what is POPULAR or SAFE.

In view of today's sad news about the death of freedom of the press with the closure of The Tribune, the words of Ditto Sarmiento, the late former Editor of the Collegian, translating and paraphrasing a jewish saying ring true: "kung hindi ikaw, sino? kung hindi ngayon, kailan pa?" If not you, who else? If not
now, when else?

I don't read the Tribune--its a pro-Erap rag--but that is no longer the issue anymore. Other news organizations that I read will be next. And if they follow, without me raising my voice, then I will be as guilty as Gloria of killing freedom of the press. (An aside: my law firm even sued the Tribune for libel for a client; I regret this. I have asked for permission from my partners to withdraw as counsel for that client.)

As students, there is a lot you can do. You have the distinct advantage of having access to the very instrument that a dictator like Gloria Arroyo craves--knowledge of the law's legitimizing effect. Understanding the law and how it legitimizes
dictatorships like Gloria's is the most potent instrument a law student or even a non-law student has because it will help others understand just how powerful they are; instead of a resigned shrug of the shoulder and a hopeless sigh, use your privileged position as law student to help people oppressed by Gloria's emergency rule find their voices and find hope.

Sic Gloria transit mundi. Gloria too will pass.

But not without a fight and not without the help of everyone who has a conscience and a backbone and is willing to take a stand."

If EDSA taught us anything, it is that freedom does come with a cost. It is the cost of preserving that freedom. Each time we exercise a freedom, we should be reminded that others who have gone before us paid the cost for that freedom--martyrs like Lean Alejandro, Chino Roces, Hermon Lagman, Ditto Sarmiento, Eman Lacaba, Pepe Diokno, Tanny Tanada and many others who have allowed us to be free.

Now that freedom is threatened by one who will stop at nothing to ensure that she remains in power. What is the cost of the freedom we enjoy? If it is raising your voice to say, "no", then so be it. If it is raising your fist in defiance, so be it. If it is joining a rally to show that you stand for freedoms, so be it.

"Do not go gently into the night, rage, rage against the dying of the light."

Indeed.

After going to Makati and having lunch with Glads and Ches, I was able to watch the news coverage on the President's Proclamation.

Earlier, en route to Makati, we had passed by Edsa Shrine and actually saw the rally. It seemed like a small crowd--far smaller than previous Edsa gatherings. However, as we all now, that things had escalated drastically and eventually ended in violence.

I watched, in my small TV, as members of the police bludgeon rallyists

My God.

My reaction reminded me of Francois Mauriac's words when faced by Nazi brutality, "It is not always the events we have been directly involved in that affect us the most."

So I sat there, shaking--literally shaking as a rallyist (I'm assuming he was a rallyist), is yanked by the shirt by a police officer, thrown onto the pavement and is hit by a policeman's truncheon, not once, not twice but three times. The man was hit, despite the fact that he was writhing in the floor in pain, despite the fact that he had lifted his arms to shield himself, despite the fact that he was defenseless and weaponless despite the fact that he posed no threat to the policemen. The policeman left the man prone on the sidewalk. The man is motionless. Onlookers flock to him and try to see if he is alright. The man is conscious, however, he clutches his head, he is obviously in pain.   

I bit my lip, I cry a little. And I scream, in the stillness of my dorm room, "Shit, putang ina! You can't do that!"

Granted, it is possible that the first blow came from militant rallyist. It is possible that peaceful dispersal methods were employed by the police, in accordance with BP 880. It is possible that maximum tolerance was initially observed by the police. However, the duty to observe maximum restrain does not cease after the first blow has been struck.

The fact that the first blow could have been made by the rallyist does not give the state unbridled license to restrain violent rallyist in any manner they choose to. Bastas Pambansa Blg. 880 imposes a standard of restraint upon the state and its agents (in this instance, the police). Batas Pambansa Blg. 880 requires that the military, police and other peace keeping authorities observe MAXIMUM TOLERANCE in dispersal of a public assembly. As such, once a rallyist poses no danger to a police man, the same policeman has ABSOLUTELY NO RIGHT to keep on hitting that person. Regardless of the fact that the wrong was initially committed by the rallyist, an official/agent/employee of the state has no right to pummel the person back, except if such official/agent/employee is in danger of sustaining personal injury from the rallyist.  

Section 3 (c) of Batas Pambansa Blg. 880 defines "Maximum tolerance" as the highest degree of restraint that the military, police and other peace keeping authorities shall observe during a public assembly or in the dispersal of the same.

In my book, hitting a defenseless man does not constitute the highest degree of restraint during the dispersal of a public assembly. Police (ideally) are specially trained in measures to peaceably disperse crowds such as this. This added training adds credence to the claim that the dispersal today at EDSA-SANTOLAN was not in accordance to the duty the BP880 imposes upon peace officers.  

For those of you thinking, but this is merely a manifestation of the president's calibrated pre-emptive response and as such valid, you are wrong. A president with no legislative authority has no right to amend the maximum restrain rule in BP880, The CPR does not exist in our statute books or appear in any decision of the Supreme Court. This is of paramount importance because in a civil law country such as ours, laws must be written in the books and passed by a body with proper legislative authority to have legal effect. As such, calibrated pre-emptive response cannot prosper in this jurisdiction.

Now, several hours after the fact, the crowds are thinning. The people gathered in Ayala have been dispersed. Life has gone on. People have almost forgotten the events of today. The people feel numb, apathetic. The people's political skin has become leathered and calloused and weary as a result of too many parliaments in the streets (EDSA REVOLUTIONS) that have failed to achieve anything.

I admit, I have to some extent shared this opinion in the past. However, now, I refuse to close my eyes or shield my eyes.

A quote from Elie Wiesel: "The opposite of love is not hate, it's indifference. The opposite of art is not ugliness, it's indifference. The opposite of faith is not heresy, it's indifference. And the opposite of life is not death, it's indifference."

When we say that there is no hope, that nothing could be done, that we'll just have to accept thing the way things are, this is when the battle is lost. This is when, hope is truly lost.  

Life can never be perfect. There is no single country that has a perfect, ideal system of government or with perfect government officials.

Reality will always be merely asymptotic to the ideal.

The fact that EDSA II failed does not mean that it is time to give up. This just means, we'll have to try and try again until we learn how to make things better.

Quoting Cheksa: "But if we don't even dare, then we might as well ask if the Filipino is worth dying for."

To people who say, there is no other alternative but GMA, we can't remove her. What will happen to us?

To this I reply, "Why not?"

I just want an alternative to this government, where it seems that our most fundamental rights may be waived with a proclamation, where rights are safeguarded to protect us from government abridgement yet is blatantly violated by the head of the government. 

In all honesty, I do not know what we can do to make things better. But I do know one thing, we cannot just let this pass without incident. We cannot just forget what happened. We cannot become indifferent and stop caring.  

TANG INA! This is NOT maximum tolerance.

They have no fucking jurisdiction. Putang ina.

This is so wrong. Tang ina talaga.

Sunday Bloody Sunday - U2 - From the Album 'War'

I can't believe the news today
I can't close my eyes and make it go away.
How long, how long must we sing this song?
How long, how long?
'Cos tonight
We can be as one, tonight.

Broken bottles under children's feet
Bodies strewn across the dead-end street.
But I won't heed the battle call
It puts my back up, puts my back up against the wall.

Sunday, bloody Sunday.
Sunday, bloody Sunday.
Sunday, bloody Sunday.
Sunday, bloody Sunday.
Oh, let's go.

And the battle's just begun
There's many lost, but tell me who has won?
The trenches dug within our hearts
And mothers, children, brothers, sisters
Torn apart.

Sunday, bloody Sunday.
Sunday, bloody Sunday.

How long, how long must we sing this song?
How long, how long?
'Cos tonight
We can be as one, tonight.
Sunday, bloody Sunday.
Sunday, bloody Sunday.

Wipe the tears from your eyes
Wipe your tears away.
I'll wipe your tears away.
I'll wipe your tears away.
I'll wipe your bloodshot eyes.
Sunday, bloody Sunday.
Sunday, bloody Sunday.

And it's true we are immune
When fact is fiction and TV reality.
And today the millions cry
We eat and drink while tomorrow they die.

The real battle just begun
To claim the victory Jesus won
On...

Sunday, bloody Sunday
Sunday, bloody Sunday..

*not to be interpreted in the technical meaning of rebellion in the Revised Penal Code. I am not guilty of a felony.