While analysts are busy interpreting the socio-political implications of the landmark Martial Law decision, I take on the simple task of reflecting, as a citizen, on how we can make sense of this proclamation and the broader paradigm that made it happen.
Many young Filipinos, including myself, who believe in human rights and healthy dissent, have suddenly been confronted by a public language that vilifies those who hold these values dear.
Suddenly, defending human rights have become synonymous with defending terrorists. Suddenly, questioning the propriety of proclaiming Martial Law has become synonymous with being unpatriotic.
How have we reached this point? In probing through events and trends, I have come to realize that the challenges we face can be seen as tensions between ideas.
General vs. Exception
If there is one thing that has become prominent in the past year, it is seeing the exception, the unusual, and the extraordinary become the general, common, and to some extent, the accepted norm. One clear example of this phenomenon is the sudden shift of public perception about the place of human rights in our institutions.
It seems that overnight, it moved from a central tenet of our democracy to some alien and western idea that impedes the attainment of public security. This tension between the exception and the rule is also present in the continued exercise of martial law and more so, in the use of brute force in our own version of a drug war.
In an article by Randy David which inspired this first point of reflection, he pointed out that what political theorists are worried about is not so much of the abuse of martial law powers as the normalization of a state emergency without a formal declaration of the need for special powers. Here, he further states that the executive invokes public safety to justify adopting a “paradigm of security as the normal technique of government.”
If we allow this exception to become the rule, this momentum would eventually pave the way to a sustained erosion of our civil liberties.
Past vs. Present
In some degree, what I’ve observed is also a clash between a yearning for that imagined sense of order and discipline in the past and the instance of a tolerant and liberal society of the present.
Many have thrown criticism about the out-datedness of our current drug policy and how it seems to resurrect the spirit of our authoritarian past. They have cited failed experiences of other nations where the employment of brute force only exacerbated the social evil.
As an alternative, progressive leaders have been vocal in emphasizing the need to look at drugs as a health rather than a criminal problem even citing examples of successful modern nations. But this again was faced with ridicule coming from the “paradigm of security.”
As another manifestation of this tension, Martial Rule – a feared extraordinary power reserved for the most extreme of cases – has suddenly found its comfortable place in our present lives. Suddenly, the past horrors of martial rule became images of smiling civilians and courteous soldiers.
Though we should at least acknowledge this as a testament to our anti-martial law Constitution, we should remain highly vigilant for what separates tyranny and freedom is the silent waiver of the governed.
Us vs. Them
Labels and colored camps have become a common ingredient in our public discourse in the past year. But what is dangerous is the sweeping categorization of people based on political opinions. There is a loss of nuance in our debates and people now seem to deal in absolutes. If you are against the President, you are automatically a dilawan. If you are for human rights, you are an anti-Duterte. If you are against the Martial Law, you are against our own troops. And there is an army of trolls to make this a point.
This sort of polarization is dangerous to the health of our democratic institutions. When dissent is labeled as a threat to the security of the Republic and opposition is labeled as the cohort of evil, then we are at the brink of a downward spiral. We should find common grounds and converse in the spirit of citizenship. This is one way of breaking the wall of a society where what is only valid is what we want to hear.
Fake vs. Truth
Fake news hunting has become a habit for some truth warriors online but producing it has become a livelihood for others. The proliferation of fake news has poisoned our health and further polarized our views.
Even on the advent of the Marawi Siege, fake news was propped by no less than the Secretary of Justice himself earning him a complaint and a hash tag trending #fakenewsking. Lurking in social media, an army of faceless trolls and propaganda accounts continue to spew fake news targeting leaders who oppose the declaration of Martial Law with the intent of undermining their credibility and political capital.
If unabated, we can no longer decipher truth from propaganda. And once we accept propaganda as truth, then we blind ourselves to power. A society, which accepts the prophets of the powerful as the messenger of absolute truth has condemned itself to slavery.
The Three V’s
As citizens, let us not overwhelm ourselves. What we can do to calm these tensions of our time is to be vigilant, to verify, and to value.
In the presence of heightened security, let us cooperate with authorities but also remain highly vigilant. It is important that we let the powerful know that we are accounting. This entails a deeper appreciation of the liberties we are defending as well as the remedies to enforce it.
In the sea of fake news, verify. Before sharing anything online or offline, it is wise to verify if the information is reliable and accurate. It helps by also reminding our own spheres of influence to do the same. Let us not contribute to the poison. Call out and take down false news.
Lastly, facts and information can only make sense through the lens of our personal values. It is important to always recheck what do we value as a public good. Let us remember that a society’s true measure is found in how it treats its outcasts, unwanted and despised.
Hearing about an extra-judicial killing in our neighborhood remains just another news item if we do not value the idea of justice for all. Abuses of people in power remains an accepted norm if we do not value our freedom.
We all want the best for our Republic. We might differ in what values that must take precedent but we are all Filipinos in the end. We are born out of blood and struggle. We are hospitable, resilient, big-hearted, generous and freedom-loving.
Millennial Lawyer 