Category: Uncategorized


TRIVIA 0045: MASSACRE OF MUSLIMS UNDER MARTIAL LAW

History beyond Bud Dajo obscured

By: Antonio Montalvan II

@inquirerdotnet

Philippine Daily Inquirer

12:58 AM September 26th, 2016

IT WAS the Maguindanao Moro filmmaker Teng Mangansakan who alerted me to a forgotten past. Last August, Teng revisited the place that had become rather obscure in the Mindanao mind. It is called Malisbong, but few would want to remember the name, let alone inconvenience themselves with a Google map for a search. Even the remaining living survivors would rather blur their memories of a ghastly carnage that only men who don’t believe in human dignity can carry out without mercy.

The Malisbong Massacre, also known as the Tacbil Mosque Massacre, left 1,776 Moro men aged 11 to 70 dead in the coastal hamlet of the same name in the town of Palembang, Sultan Kudarat. They were killed inside the mosque, where 3,000 women and children were also being detained, some of them even raped. On that horrifying day of Sept. 24, 1974—that is, two years to the day after then President Ferdinand Marcos announced that martial law had been imposed on the entire Philippine archipelago, or exactly 42 two years ago last Saturday—elements of the Philippine Army razed to the ground 300 houses.

Malisbong was an overture to what was to become a long thunder of massacres against the Moro people that at one instant had reached almost genocidal magnitude, such that it caught the attention of Islamic countries and helped shape what later emerged as the flamboyant Imelda diplomacy during the dictatorship years—a kind of diplomacy that was more fashion niceties than mediation.

The film “Forbidden Memory,” based on the Malisbong Massacre and directed by Teng Mangansakan, was screened as a finalist in the 12th Cinema One Originals film festival. Recalling Malisbong, a statement by a student of mine bothered me no end—“martial law is taught in neutral terms.”

The murder of 1,776 men can never be neutral; 1,776 deaths committed to the memory of survivors as the most abysmal nightmare of their lives can never be neutral. So were the other deaths caused by the Marcos dictatorship. There is only good and evil; any in-between is pseudo.

Mohagher Iqbal, the “magus” of the Bangsamoro, a learned person of great wisdom, writing as Salah Jubair in “Bangsamoro, A Nation Under Endless Tyranny,” adroitly enumerates the list of Moro massacres committed by proxies of the authoritarian barbarism under the aegis of Ferdinand Marcos.

In a prelude to martial law, a Kinaray-a settler, Feliciano Luces, known by the alias Commander Toothpick, led an attack on an isolated Moro village in 1970. The victims’ ears were cut off, nipples slashed, eyes plucked out, and cross markings left on their mutilated bodies. That was the start of the so-called Ilaga Wars (Ilaga for rat, the “voracious creature infesting crops,” Jubair writes, but which others had deciphered as “Ilonggo Land Grabbers Association”).

Of the Moro massacres, the patriot Joe Burgos’ Pahayagang Malaya reported: “The list is long, but it can be compressed into one single horrifying theme—a near absolute lawlessness armed and protected by government officials and the military in remote corners of Mindanao to look for and kill Muslim rebels, and whoever they believe to be their sympathizers.”

The rampage took place in various places:

Alamada (North Cotabato), Dec. 3, 1970, 13 killed; Midsayap (North Cotabato), Dec. 16, 1970, 18 killed; Alamada, Jan. 17, 1971, 73 killed, 36 houses burned; Carmen (North Cotabato), April 6, 1971 and June 19, 1971, 88 killed, 42 wounded; Wa-o (Lanao del Sur), Aug. 5, 1971, 36 killed; Buldon (Maguindanao), Aug. 9, 1971, 60 killed; Magsaysay (Lanao del Norte), Oct. 24, 1971, 66 killed. I have to cut short the list for want of space.

Archival research at the National Library and at the UST Miguel de Benavides Library can be an excruciating ordeal: There just was hardly any national news on these massacres; Mindanao was boondocks to Manila then. (It still is?) Everything was filtered; the name Ilaga hardly surfaced because its existence was deliberately denied. There was only one source of news—Moro congressmen like Salipada Pendatun.

A pattern was observable in the old periodicals—each time a team was sent to Mindanao, the only source was Carlos Cajelo who was behind the Ilaga. Marcos later appointed Cajelo as deputy defense minister for civil relations. Marcos knew everything about the Ilaga Wars—he even invited Toothpick to Malacañang and hailed him a hero.

There were many more massacres, but there are scant data about them for research. One, the Bingcul Village Massacre of 1977, had government forces raiding and burning houses, killing 42 Moro villagers. In most cases, the Ilaga fighters not only conspired with the government’s Philippine Constabulary (later integrated into the civilian police force that was renamed Integrated National Police, the forerunner of today’s Philippine National Police), they were also supported by seven thug settler-mayors who each were backed by an army of private goons.

Filtering the news out of Mindanao during the martial law period was made difficult by the “blitzkrieg” Marcos launched against media the day after declaring martial law in 1972: Nationwide, the “casualties” were eight major English newspapers, 18 vernacular newspapers, 60 community newspapers, 66 television channels, 312 radio stations. By the time the Mindanao wars raged, a news blackout was almost in effect.

There was more to Mindanao than just the 1906 Battle of Bud Dajo where a thousand Moros were slain in America’s pursuit of colonial hegemony. A massacre is a massacre; whether committed by colonials or by a Filipino dictator like Marcos, an accounting is demanded.

Justice is color-blind. Neutrality is only for cowards who aspire by mere idiocy.

CASE 2016-0057: RE: LETTER OF COURT OF APPEALS JUSTICE VICENTE S.E. VELOSO FOR ENTITLEMENT TO LONGEVITY PAY FOR HIS SERVICES AS COMMISSION MEMBER III OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION (A.M. NO. 12-8-07-CA); RE: COMPUTATION OF LONGEVITY PAY OF COURT OF APPEALS JUSTICE ANGELITA A. GACUTAN (A.M. NO. 12-9-5-SC)RE: REQUEST OF COURT OF APPEALS JUSTICE REMEDIOS A. SALAZARFERNANDO THAT HER SERVICES AS MTC JUDGE AND AS COMELEC COMMISSIONER BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF HER JUDICIAL SERVICE AND INCLUDED IN THE COMPUTATION/ADJUSTMENT OF HER LONGEVITY PAY. (A.M. NO. 13-02-07-SC) (26  JULY 2016, LEONARDO-DE CASTRO J.) (SUBJECT/S: LONGEVITY PAY)


DISPOSITIVE:

 

“WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Court resolves to GRANT the Motion for Reconsideration of CA Justice Gacutan and MODIFY the Resolution dated June 16, 2015 in A.M. Nos. 12-8-07-CA, 12-9-5-SC, and 13w02·07-SC, insofar as to GRANT CA Justice Gacutan’s request that her services as NLRC Commissioner be included in the computation of her longevity pay, but reckoned only from August 26, 2006, when Republic Act No. 9347 took effect.

 

SO ORDERED.”

 

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

 

WHAT IS MEANT BY CONTEMPORANEOUS CONSTRUCTION?

 

IT IS THE INTERPRETATION OR CONSTRUCTION PLACED UPON THE STATUTE BY AN EXECUTIVE OR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER CALLED UPON TO EXECUTE OR ADMINISTER THE STATUTE.

 

IT INCLUDES THE CONSTRUCTION BY THE SECRETARY OF JUSTICE IN HIS CAPACITY AS THE CHIEF LEGAL ADVISER OF THE GOVERNMENT.

 

CERTAIN LAWS  GRANT TO CERTAIN OFFICIALS OF THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT THE RANK AND SALARY OF A MEMBER OF THE JUDICIARY. MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY ENJOY LONGEVITY PAY. DO THOSE CERTAIN OFFICIALS ALSO ENJOY LONGEVITY PAY?

 

YES.

 

THIS WAS THE INTERPRETATION OF THE JUSTICE SECRETARY.

 

THE RULE IS THAT COURTS SHOULD RESPECT THE CONTEMPORANEOUS CONSTRUCTION PLACED UPON A STATUTE BY THE EXECUTIVE OFFICERS WHOSE DUTY IS TO ENFORCE IT, AND UNLESS SUCH INTERPRETATION IS CLEARLY ERRONEOUS WILL ORDINARILY BE CONTROLLED THEREBY.

 

IN THE CASE OF JUDGES, WHAT LAW DEFINES LONGEVITY AS PART OF SALARY?

 

SECTION 42 OF BATAS PAMBANSA BLG. 129 CLEARLY STATES THAT THE LONGEVITY PAY IS “ADDED” TO THE BASIC MONTHLY SALARY AND FORMS PART OF THE “TOTAL SALARY” OF A JUDGE OR JUSTICE.

 

THUS, THE SALARY OF THE MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY REFERS TO THEIR RESPECTIVE BASIC PAY PLUS THE. LONGEVITY PAY TO WHICH THEY MAY BE ENTITLED BY VIRTUE OF THEIR CONTINUOUS, EFFICIENT, AND MERITORIOUS SERVICE IN THE JUDICIARY.

 

WHY WOULD LONGEVITY PAY BE ALSO PART OF SALARY IN THE CASE OF THOSE IN THE EXECUTIVE WHICH BY LAW ARE GIVEN THE EQUIVALENT RANK AND SALARY OF THOSE IN THE JUDICIARY?

 

BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT CONGRESS INTENDED IT. THE PERTINENT LAWS GRANTING THESE OFFICERS IN THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT THE SAME RANKS AS THOSE IN THE JUDICIARY DO NOT DISTINGUISH SALARY WITH LONGEVITY PAY AND SALARY WITHOUT LONGEVITY PAY.


TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW.

 

SCD-2016-0057-VELOSO

 

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “jabbulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “jabbulao and forum shopping”.

 

 

CASE 2016-0056: Re: VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DISBARMENT OF AMA LAND, INC. (REPRESENTED BY JOSEPH B. USITA) AGAINST COURT OF APPEALS ASSOCIATE JUSTICES HON. DANTON Q. BUESER, HON. SESINANDO E. VILLON AND HON. RICARDO G. ROSARIO. (OCA IPI No. 12-204-CA-J, 26 JULY 2016, BERSAMIN, J.) (INDIRECT CONTEMPT) (BRIEF TITLE: RE DISBARMENT OF AMA LAND INC AGAINST CA JUSTICES)


DISPOSITIVE:

 

“WHEREFORE, the Court:

 

(1) ABSOLVES and PURGES Felizardo R. Colambo, Alberto L. Buenviaje and Garry de Vera of any act of contempt of court:

 

(2) DECLARES and PRONOUNCES Joseph B. Usita, Darwin V. Dominguez and Arnel F. Hibo GUILTY of INDIRECT CONTEMPT for degrading the judicial office of respondent Associate Justices of the Court of Appeals, and for obstructing and impeding the due performance of their work for the Judiciary, and, ACCORDINGLY, metes on each of Usita, Dominguez and Hibo a fine of F20,000.00, the same to be paid within 10 days from notice of this resolution.

 

AMA Land, Inc., Joseph B. Usita, Darwin V. Dominguez and Arne! F. Hibo are WARNED that a repetition of the same or similar acts shall be dealt with more severely in the future.

 

SO ORDERED.”


SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

 

HOW WOULD THE POWER TO PUNISH FOR CONTEMPT BE USED?

 

MUST BE USED SPARINGLY, WITH CAUTION, RESTRAINT, JUDICIOUSNESS, DELIBERATION, AND IN DUE REGARD TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAW AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL.

 

CAN THE CORPORATION AND ITS OFFICERS AND AGENTS BE HELD LIABLE FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT?

 

YES. FOR DISOBEYING JUDGMENTS, DECREES, OR ORDERS OF A COURT OR FOR COMMITTING ANY IMPROPER CONDUCT TENDING, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, TO IMPEDE, OBSTRUCT, OR DEGRADE THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE.

 

WHAT ARE SOME PRECEDENTS TO SERVE AS GUIDES IN DETERMINING THE PROPER AMOUNT OF FINE?

 

In Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party v. Commission on Elections, 14 the Court meted on the CO MEL EC Chairman and four COMELEC Commissioners a fine of P20,000.00 each for various actions, including issuing three resolutions that were outside of the jurisdiction of the COMELEC, for degrading the dignity of the Court, for brazen disobedience to the lawful directives of the Court, and for delaying the ultimate resolution of the many incidents of the party-list case to the prejudice of the litigants and of the country. It is notable that the Court prescribed a fine of PS,000.00 each on the two remaining Commissioners whose actions were deemed less serious in degree.

 

In Heirs of Trinidad de Leon Vda. de Roxas v. Court of Appeals,15 we imposed a fine of Pl0,000.00 on the corporate officer who had caused the preparation and filing of the unwarranted complaint for reconveyance, damages and quieting of title in the trial court, an act that tended to impede the orderly administration of justice.

 

In Lee v. Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 85,16 the corporate officers who had acted for the corporation to frustrate the execution of the immutable judgment rendered against the corporation by a resort to various moves merited the maximum fine of F30,000.00 for each of them.

 

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW.

 

SCD-2016-0056-AMA LAND

 

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “jabbulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “jabbulao and forum shopping”.