Cleverly-crafted and open to abuse.
These are what critics in Negros Oriental claim are the dangers lurking behind the proposed Anti-Terrorism Bill, which has passed third and final reading at the House of Representatives.
This Bill, which President Duterte has tagged as urgent, was backed by 55 proponents in the House of Representatives, who say it will strengthen the country’s defenses against violent extremism.
But Negros Oriental 1st District Rep. Josy Sy-Limkaichong said the amendments to the ATB are “violative of the people’s right to due process and liberty”.
Senate President Vicente Sotto III had earlier clarified that the new Anti-Terror Bill is not just an amendment to the existing one, but an entirely new law.
“What this means is that this bill empowers the law enforcers to arrest and detain anyone they feel can be tagged as terrorist – even without a warrant of arrest,” Congressman Limkaichong lamented.
“When signed by the President, this law would indisputably be open to abuse, given the state of our law enforcement and the justice system,” said Limkaichong, who represents the northern towns from Manjuyod to Canlaon here in Negros Oriental.
The authorship of the bill has already been denied by Muntinlupa Rep. Ruffy Biazon, Vilma Santos-Recto of Batangas, and Loren Legarda of Antique.
Meanwhile, a law professor explained that the proposed Anti-Terrorism Council can now designate an individual as a suspected terrorist, and then use this to justify the application in court for a wiretapping order.
“The Anti-Terrorist Act gives this power to the Anti-Terrorist Council – which is purely an executive council,” said Golda Benjamin, law professor of the SU College of Law.
“Is our Constitution dead? Why are they taking away the power of the courts?,” she added.
Benjamin, who is also senior researcher for Southeast Asia, and representative for the Business & Human Rights Resource Center, said that in existing laws, only the following can make terrorism designations: the UN Security Council, foreign jurisdictions based on their laws, or our courts.
Lawyer Benjamin warned that if authorized by the purely-executive Anti-Terrorism Council, any law enforcement agent or military personnel can take custody of even a suspected terrorist – without a judicial warrant.
“If the ATC designates you as a terrorist, does this mean that automatically you are a suspected terrorist? Where’s the presumption of innocence?,” she said.
Benjamin also cited as problematic the power of the ATC to identify, integrate, and synchronize all government and non-government initiatives and resources to prevent radicalization and violent extremism.
“Does this mean that the ATC will now have the power to order businesses and NGOs to disclose their fund sources, and also order their private entities to contribute to anti-terrorism programs?,” she asked.
Benjamin cited how the “over-broad and vague purpose” of the pending Anti-Terrorism bill differs from the current Human Security Act (2007).
“It opens up the door to designate just about anyone as terrorist,” she said. (Irma Faith Pal)
Discussion about this post