Malacanang clarified on Monday that there is a huge difference between the martial law during the regime of late dictator Ferdinand Marcos and that of the administration of President Rodrigo Duterte.

Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque made the statement as the country marked the 48th anniversary when Marcos placed the whole Philippines under martial rule.

"All I can say is that there's a big difference on the context now," he said.

Roque noted that under Marcos' martial law, the two other branches of government - the legislative and judiciary - were shut down.

"Now, the President has no such power and the declaration of martial law can be questioned in Congress, can be questioned in the court because we have already learned from our bitter experience of martial law in the 1970s," he stressed.

Some quarters, including human rights group Karapatan, slammed President Rodrigo Duterte for what they call as "de facto martial law" in the country.

"In the middle of the worsening public health and socio-economic crisis, Duterte and his cabal have altogether discarded the people's welfare in favor of exploiting the pandemic to further establish what can only be described as a de facto martial law," Karapatan said.

It cited the illegal arrest of human rights defenders under the current government.

Previously, Duterte placed the whole of Mindanao under martial law following the attack of a terrorist group in Marawi City. Celerina Monte/DMS