Peralta on requisites to declare martial law

This is the case of Lagman v. Pimentel (G.R. No. 235935).

These are consolidated petitions, filed under the third paragraph, Section 18 of Article VII of the Constitution, assailing the constitutionality of the extension of the proclamation of martial law and suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in the entire Mindanao for one year from January 1 to December 31, 2018. Petitioners in G.R. No. 235935 alternatively, but not mandatorily, invoke the Court's expanded jurisdiction under Section 1 of Article VIII of the Constitution. Petitioners in G.R. Nos. 235935, 236061 and 236155 pray for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and/or writ of preliminary injunction to enjoin respondents from implementing the one-year extension.

WHAT IS PJ? Project Jurisprudence is a blog which aims to provide content on Philippine laws, jurisprudence, government and politics.

BLOG:
FB:
TW:
YT:
YT 2:

IMPORTANT NOTE! PJ does NOT own this audio lecture. All credit is due to the uploader (SOPHIA LEGIS) of the audio. This is a part of a day-long lecture. Here's a list of sources:

law,legal,legal education,study of law,law school,bar exam,bar examination,lawyer,law student,juris doctor,Philippines,Filipino,Pinoy,review,audio reviewer,Lagman v. Pimentel,G.R. No. 235935,martial law,martial law extension,duterte's martial law,