Compulsory Military and Civil Service and the 1987 Philippine Constitution

Compulsory Military and Civil Service and the 1987 Philippine Constitution

It has been said that one of the most vital concepts any lawyer should understand and articulate is the constitutionality of compulsory military and civil service. Once invoked, any man with common intelligence is quick to cast doubt on its wisdom and build opposition against it. Thus it is vital for lawyers to let the people fully understand the reasons behind its constitutionality.

Section 4, Article 2 of the 1987 Constitution provides: “The Prime Duty of the Government is to serve and protect the people. The Government may call upon the people to defend the State and, in the fulfilment thereof, all citizens may be required, under conditions provided by law, to render personal military or civil service.”

Though the constitution itself has articulated that this power to compel such actions, it is important to understand the rich US and Philippine jurisprudence that further articulate this matter.

Draft vs. Volunteer System

Before we go further into this topic, it is essential to understand the reasons seen by our constitutional framers on the. The 1935 provision[1] on compulsory military service came into fruition from the recognition of the inadequacy of a volunteer system both in terms of military effectiveness and in terms of quality between rich and the poor[2]. The report of the committee on national defence said that: “the volunteer system is undemocratic, because the cannon fodder, with very few exceptions, consists of proletarians. Added further “sons of the wealthy can evade the sacred duty of defending their country, though it is they who enjoy the advantages obtained through the services rendered and blood spilled by men to whom fortune has been unkind.” Flowing from these points, it can be understood that a draft as opposed to a volunteer system, is more just since it calls each able-bodied citizen regardless of wealth, education, at the very least, to protect the state.

American Jurisprudence

In the Selective Draft Case[3] of the United States which challenge the military draft by virtue of the Thirteenth Amendment[4], the US Supreme Court held that: “We are unable to conceive upon what theory the exaction by government from the citizen of the performance of his supreme and noble duty of contributing to the defence of the rights and honour of the state, as the result of war declared by the great representative body of the people, can be said to be the imposition of involuntary service.” It can be deduced from the court’s decision that the people themselves through their representatives have declared the state of war and thus as a consequence, require the people to meet its demands in the form of military or civil service.

In the case of Jacobson vs. Massachusetts.[5] , the Supreme Court said that, without violating the Constitution; a person may be compelled by force, if need be, against his will, against his pecuniary interests, and even against his religious or political convictions, to take his place in the ranks of the army of his country, and risk the chances of being shot down in its defence

Philippine Jurisprudence

In People vs. Lagman[6], the accused was prosecuted for failure to register for military service under the national defence act. He assailed the validity of the said act. The Supreme Court said that the duty of the government to defend the state cannot be performed except through an army. To leave the organization of an army to the will of the citizens would be to make this duty of the Government excusable should there be no sufficient men who volunteer to enlist therein. Added further, the Supreme Court also pointed out that the right of the Government to require compulsory military services is a consequence of its duty to defend the state and is reciprocal with its duty to defend the life, liberty, and property of the citizen.

Conclusion

This topic touches one of the most sacred duties of every citizen and it is the intention of this sharing to shed a humble light on the wisdom behind this noble and sacred duty. In the event that government calls us to defend the state, it is incumbent upon us, as citizens of the state to rid ourselves of our personal attachments, private interests and selfish desires for a cause larger than any one of us. That is the defence of the state which nurtures our very life, liberty and property.

---

[1] Article 2, Section 2: The defense of the State is a prime duty of government, and in the fulfillment of this duty all citizens may be required by law to render personal military or civil service.

[2] Bernas, The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines: A Commentary, p.67, 2009 Ed.

[3] 245 U.S. 366, 390 (1918)

[4] Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

[5] 197 U.S., 11; 25 Sup. Ct. Rep., 385

[6] 66 Phil. 13 (1938)