[T]he law is a living thing. It made us free and it keeps us free.
Sometimes it gets twisted around by people for their own purposes.
Sometimes it makes mistakes, sometimes big mistakes.
But in the end, the law prevails for the just.
Sometimes, it takes a while.

from the movie, The Majestic


Early this morning, the President of the Republic, over a live televised address to the nation, declared a State of Emergency, invoking her powers as Commander-in-Chief, thereby calling out all the armed forces “to suppress lawless violence, invasion and rebellion,” as clearly set forth in the Constitution.

Following months of political uncertainty, the forces opposed to her administration sought for the perfect opportunity to rise up once again in an attempt to effect her immediate ouster. The attempt would have been successful, I think, had it not been for the vigilance of her intelligence personnel, who, it seems, have gotten into the habit of tapping telephone lines and reading through personal correspondences.

Already, the days leading up to the declaration were rife with coup rumors and political defections. All these came to a head early this morning, on the 20th Anniversary of the EDSA People Power Revolution in 1986, when militant forces began to mass in front of the EDSA Shrine only hours after several high-ranking military officials were relieved of duty following the discovery of a well-orchestrated plot to overthrow the government.

The military and police forces acted swiftly, dispersing the assembly with nightsticks and water cannons. Several of the rallyists were promptly arrested, among whom included a prominent columnist and a sociology professor. They were charged with inciting to sedition.

Whether the President was justified in declaring this State of Emergency, and whether the mechanisms which have been set in motion were warranted under the circumstances will perhaps be the subject of much social and legal debate in the coming days. The wording of the declaration itself is open to much speculation and interpretation. Some have commented that, listening to the President's declaration, a feeling of déjà vu came over them, as though they were transported back to September 21, 1972, when the dictator declared martial law. Others have wondered why Section 17, Art. XII of the Constitution— the provision which allows “the State” to take over and direct the operations of “public utilities and other business affected with public interest”— was invoked, when certainly, such power was unnecessary for the immediate restoration of order in the Metropolis. Some in the media have said that this State of Emergency is merely being used by the President as a pretext to, among other purposes, silence the press and discipline media outfits perceived to be against her plan of governance. Her Secretary of National Defense has already declared that the government will soon issue guidelines to be followed by all media practitioners, with any violation met with swift legal action.

* * *

I will not, at this point, add my personal commentary or opinion on the actions taken by the President today. I think more qualified and credible legal minds will take care of this as the days progress. I will, however, share some insights which came to me as I was watching the evening news, listening to statements of police officers warning unruly demonstrators that those who chose to defy the military dispersals would be arrested without warrant and detained indefinitely without charge. The statement, of course, is not only misleading, but carelessly and incorrectly made. To this, a friend and colleague of mine earlier commented how many of our citizens simply are not aware of their Constitutionally protected rights. To this, I replied: not only are they unaware, but I suspect, they are also very unappreciative, or even apathetic.

Watching the news this evening, I was again reminded of one of Jim Carrey's more recent movies, one which made me appreciate a bit more this Constitution which seems to have been over-invoked by people who do not seem to understand its essence.

The movie that came to mind was The Majestic, written by Michael Sloane and directed by Frank Darabond. The movie tells of a Hollywood writer, Peter Appleton, who, after having been pursued by the United States Congress on suspicions of being a communist, loses his memory and finds himself in Lawson, California, a small town still recovering from deaths suffered during the Second World War. Peter is mistaken for Luke Trimble, a soldier awarded the Medal of Honor posthumously, whom many believed to have been killed in the war. Not knowing his identity, Peter takes on Luke's life and gives the melancholic town a renewed sense of hope. This hope, however, is shattered when Peter is discovered by the U.S. Congress and served a subpoena to appear before the Committee on Un-American Affairs.

Peter is given a package by Adele, Luke's fiancée, before boarding a train back to Los Angeles and to the Congressional Hearing. On the train, Peter opens and finds a copy of the Constitution of the United States. Tucked between its pages is the last letter written by Luke to Adele before his death:

During the Congressional Hearing, Peter is advised by his attorney to read a statement effectively admitting his communist leanings, and as a sign of his repentance, offers names of other erstwhile communists which the Committee could also investigate. Peter, however, hesitates and ultimately falters. He folds the statement, and instead says:

The Committee Chairman begins to bang his gavel to silence Peter. “Mr. Appleton you are skating on the very thin edge of contempt.”

Peter responds, “That’s the first thing I’ve heard hear today that I could completely agree with.” Peter's lawyer then announces that he is invoking the Fifth Amendment, his right against self-incrimination. Peter, however, pushes him aside. “The fifth Amendment is out of the question. But there is another amendment I’d like to invoke. I wonder if anyone here is familiar with it. . .” Peter then begins to read from the copy of the Constitution Adele gave him.

Peter continues, “That’s the first amendment, Mr. Chairman. It’s everything we’re about. If only we’d live up to it; it’s the most important part of the contract every citizen has with this country. . . And even though the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence are just pieces of paper with signatures on them, they're the only contracts we have that are definitely not subject to renegotiation. Not by you Mr. Chairman, not by you Mr. Clyde, not by anyone, ever. Too many people have paid for this contact in blood.” Peter then holds up the Medal of Honor given posthumously to Luke. He continues, “People like Luke Trimble and all the sons of Lawson, California.” Peter pauses, and says, thoughtfully, “When you get right down to it that’s all I really have to say to this committee,” and he just stands up and leaves.

* * *

I remember coming out of the movie house (I even remember it to be at the Alabang Town Center), somber and chastened, thinking: if I was called upon to go to war, to defend this way of life, to die for the ideals enshrined in our Constitution, would I? The honest answer, of course, is that I would not. I would not because I did not pay for this contract, these eighteen Articles, with my own freedom and my own blood. It was not my Constitution.

Watching the protesters battle the riot police on television, braving water cannons and nightsticks, I wondered whether they were fighting for their Constitution. Whether they were on the wrong side or the right one, I felt a quiet admiration for their persistence, if only to say that somehow, when bullies rise up, some of us have to come forward to beat them back down, whatever the cost.

Indeed, it’s a simple idea, but I suppose it is one worth giving everything for.