Project Essay I would like to Share

This is a project that will only be granted with a grade of 60 because I'll be submitting it past the due date. I can't understand myself why I still spent a deal of time to finish this off when I know that it souldn't be graded anymore according to its content, but according to the date passed instead. Oh anyway, since I know this wouldn't be read anymore by my professor, I might as well just post this as a blog entry, ENJOY!

People who claimed to be supporters of real democracy are once again crying foul for yet another action made by the Arroyo administration that hindered them to practice their "rights", the Proclamation 1017.

Is the proclamation constitutional? Many of the vocal specialists in the field of law seem to have the same answer -- 'NO'. They said that there had been inconsistencies in the full text of the proclamation, its title tenuously connected with the body. I read in one article that the proclamation supposed to have violated one rule in statutory construction of laws. Therefore, I'm afraid I may not be qualified enough to declare the questioned act of Her Excellency as constitutional or otherwise.

But maybe, we should try going over to that part of our constitution where it was stated that the president, as the commander-in-chief of the AFP, may call out his/her armed forces to suppress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion. Using this as my basis, I can say that, somehow, that Proclamation 1017 can be considered justifiable. There is indeed a clear and present danger too apparent not to be acted upon. The opposition found another good time and place for the execution of their power-grabbing modus operand, which is the celebration of the People Power 1. These people were trying too hard to destabilize the government, employing even actions that involve the use of unnecessary force and violence. So I think it was her job to issue the Proclamation 1017 to ensure that the civilian's safety will be protected. The media argued that the government took away their freedom of expression, but I guess it's ok to take away some rights from some people if these rights were being abused anyway. What I'm trying to say is, we complain too much because we've been restricted from doing the things we consider to be within the scope of our rights, not realizing that we are also capable of abusing those rights.

Some people even said that the proclamation 1017 is already like Martial Law. If what they are saying is true, I can conclude now that the martial law proclaimed by Marcos wasn't that bad after all. I'm so disgusted by the manner some power-hungry individuals lure the simple-minded Filipinos into believing that in a democratic country, you can do anything you want just because you have the rights. It's saddening to know that we tend to forget about the responsibilities that go with the rights. I am also saddened by the fact that we have the wrong ideas about the true meaning of freedom and democracy. I detest the fact that human principles can be bought in a country hampered by poverty, and its okay for the people to be regarded as commodities by the reigning oligarchs.

If the sole question would only be whether the Proclamation 1017 is constitutional, I'll just say no with eyes closed and believe in my mind that with the kind of people we have here, it should be.