The curfew

Joe Pallugna

THE declaration of martial law in Mindanao has brought back rumors early on that curfew might be imposed by the martial law administrator.

Can this be done?

Straight to the point, the answer is yes.

Curfews are restrictions on the freedom of movements of people or of the freedom of abode and travel that are guaranteed by the Philippine Constitution. These guaranteed freedoms, however, can be restricted under certain circumstances.

One of those circumstances is the police power of the state. That is the power of the state to regulate persons and properties for purposes of public welfare. And a curfew can be imposed under police power.

The imposition of a curfew, in the present historical, political and economic perspective is very limited.

Historically, curfews have been imposed even if no martial law is declared or even if there was no rebellion or sedition. In the aftermath of a typhoon, to prevent looting or to preserve social order, curfews were imposed in specific localities.

Also, in times of huge fires, earthquakes and long droughts, curfews were imposed. Even curfews among minors are commonly imposed by local government units to control the undesired behaviors of juveniles at night.

Politically, however, curfews are shunned both by the government and by the people. The reasons are obvious. The Marcos martial law experience has left a bad taste in the mouth of everyone.

The people are wary of the political intentions of an administration and the conditions of imposing a curfew nationwide are very specific and very limited. More importantly, the capability to impose a wideanging curfew and imprison all violators is virtually impossible in a country of over a hundred million people.

Reliefs in the courts are also available for any citizen to question the legality of any nation-wide curfew imposition. And the Supreme Court can strike down any curfew imposition as abuse of executive functions.

Economically, a curfew, even in a particular locality, a city or a municipality or province is very destructive.

That is why Cagayan de Oro City mayor Oscar Moreno and Misamis Oriental governor Bambi Emano are very cautious in imposing a curfew amid the Maute seige in Marawi City.

The negative impact on the economy is certainly so huge.

The movement of people, the transport of basic commodities like rice and groceries and vegetables and gasoline or fuel, of medical equipment and services and all other items of economic relevance cannot be restricted to a few limited hours each day without causing shortages that eventually cause hoarding, price increases and sure chaos.

Even a limited daily curfew of like 10 pm to 5 am impacts very badly on the economy. Those are the hours that goods are transported from one province to another, from farms to markets, and from piers to warehouses.

And the reasons for a curfew are always national security and safety. These concerns can be addressed by the military and the police through employment of all resources of the government through checkpoints, intelligence gathering, warrantless searches and arrests during martial law, legitimate searches through warrants from the courts and through the cooperation of ordinary citizens in reporting suspicious criminal activities in their barangays.

Indeed, Mayor Moreno, Gov. Emano and all the other local chief executives in Mindanao are correct in not imposing a curfew in their localities. Even the supposed lockdown in Iligan City was limited to a few hours once.

In this modern world where social media and text messaging are prevalent, the imposition of a curfew has become obsolete and impractical. What can be achieved by a curfew can be achieved by other more effective means.

What can be economically damaged by a curfew imposition cannot be recovered or justified by the ends intended to be obtained.

So the next time rumors of a curfew imposition spread around, I really believe that they are just exactly that–plain rumors and nothing serious.

E-mail: joepallugna@gmail.com