The second took place during the Oakwood Mutiny on July 27, 2003, where she issued Proclamation No. 427, in which she stated in part: “WELL, THEREFORE, I, GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, BY VIRTUE OF THE POWERS CONFERRED UPON ME BY LAW, HEREBY CONFIRM THE EXISTENCE OF A REAL AND CONTINUING REBELLION AND UNDERTAKE TO DECLARE A STATE OF REBELLION.” In light of the above, I issue General Ordinance No. 4 pursuant to Article VII of Article 18 of the Constitution, which requires the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police to immediately implement the necessary measures and measures to suppress and suppress the rebellion, taking into account constitutional rights. This time, however, the Supreme Court, which sensed the president`s sinister strategy, had assumed a more proactive role in keeping with the symbolic function of judicial review, “speaking in clear and distinctive language.” for the guidance of judges of the lower courts, the doctrines of control and authority that should be observed” with regard to the protection and preservation of fundamental constitutional rights. (Eastern Broadcasting Corporation v. In, G.R. No. L-59329 19 July 1985). The Supreme Court therefore ruled in SANLAKAS and Partido ng Manggagawa v.
Executive Secretary, et al., G.R. No. 159085, 3. February 2004, that “in order to prevent similar issues from resurfacing, we take this opportunity to finally end the validity of the declaration of a state of rebellion in the exercise of the President`s power of appeal, regardless of the questionability of petitions”. In the Sanlakas case, the Supreme Court ruled that the 1987 Constitution does not explicitly prohibit the President from declaring a state of rebellion and that the proclamation of the armed forces by declaring a state of rebellion is a complete necessity. At most, it gives the nation notification that such a state exists and that the armed forces may be called upon to prevent or suppress it. Finally, the Supreme Court, faithful to its mandate to examine only the legal consequences of the declaration, held that such a declaration was devoid of any legal significance and that it was considered not to have been drafted from a legal point of view. Therefore, the press, like the eyes, ears, nose, voice and conscience of the people, will always invite people to quarrel and anger. This will always be the role of the press as the fourth power of our democratic institution. In fact, the constitutional guarantee of the free press can only have its true meaning if it is used by a press that asks questions and not just reports, makes the demands instead of simply accepting things, and is criticized rather than simply compliant. The declaration of a state of emergency is not a mere characterization of the existence of a state of emergency that adds nothing to the president`s powers, as claimed by the president`s loyal cohorts, such as their new chief legal adviser Eduardo Antonio Nachura, their attorney general Raul Gonzalez and chief of staff Michael Defensor.
You should know that the declaration of a state of emergency has significance in jurisprudence and history and has concrete legal implications. You don`t just declare a state of emergency in a vacuum. A declaration of a state of emergency can suspend some normal functions of government, can help alert citizens to change their normal behavior, can order government agencies to take emergency action, or worse, it can be used as a justification to suspend civil liberties. 8pm Always remember, make an effort to formulate your answers in a way that answers questions. Never beat around the bush. Go straight ahead with your answer. Avoid quotes if you`re not absolutely sure. The shorter the answers, the more direct they are, the better. Avoid displaying flowery expressions complicated by legal verbosity. All you need are reasonable, direct and reasonable answers that answer the questions. 2.
The flourishing secret of passing the bar exam is this: Present correct answers that the examiners take note of. Good answers based on logical thinking, written in readable English and, most importantly, justified by the appropriate legal authority. “NOW, I Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, x x x by virtue of the powers conferred upon me by Article 18, Article 7 of the Philippine Constitution x x x x, hereby directs the Armed Forces of the Philippines to maintain law and order in the Philippines, to prevent or suppress all forms of lawless violence and any act of insurrection or rebellion, and to impose obedience to all laws and decrees, orders and regulations issued by me personally or on my instructions; and as provided for in article 17, article 12, of the Constitution, a national emergency is declared. Similar to Proclamation No.