The senator reiterated three important points in the proposed bill: the definition, which provides who are covered by the bill and the acts constituting terrorism; measures to protect human rights; and safeguards against possible abuse of the bill by the administration to harass critics of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.

Very unpopular

Meanwhile, lawyer Neri Colmenares, spokespersons of the Counsels for the Defense of Civil Liberties (CODAL), told Bulatlat in an interview that the anti-terror bill remains to be “very unpopular” among the people.

Because of this, he said, the government is wont to grab every opportunity to make the bill acceptable to the general public.

“The government is missing the point. The bill is being opposed by rights advocates because this will worsen the already worsening human rights situation in the country,” he said.

Giving life to the bill would mean “legitimization of abuses,” adding it will be used particularly to target the legal opposition. “The government doesn’t need a bill to exterminate armed groups because it is already trying to do so…The proposed bill is clearly directed at the legal opposition,” he said.

“In reality, it has been passed,” the lawyer said, citing the Calibrated Pre-emptive Response, Proclamation 1017, and Executive Order 464. “And it is never about reform,” Colmenares said, but the legalization of actual acts of violence already taking place.

Detained Anakpawis (Toiling Masses) Rep. Crispin Beltran said Malacañang is manifesting signs of being a dictatorship. It has courted the ire of international human rights organizations, including the Amnesty International, he added.

“(The government) hopes to turn the Philippines into another El Salvador, Argentina or Nicaragua and reverse the human rights situation to as far back as four decades ago, during the time of Martial Law, through such a bill,” Beltran said.

The bill contains provisions allowing government to detain suspects for 15 days without bail and allows it to place arrested persons in isolation.

Biggest terror threat

On the other hand, University of the Philippines professor Harry Roque said that there being no internationally-accepted definition of terrorism is not a trivial matter when the right of the citizens to be informed of their crime is concerned,.

In a separate interview with Bulatlat, Roque, professor of International Public Law, said, “If there is no internationally-accepted definition of what it sought to be penalized you will really never know what is being prohibited. It is very important that the international community should come up with a definition before we penalized this act.”

Meanwhile, he said, there are domestic and international laws that cover “terror acts” such as the Revised Penal Code for local remedies and the crimes against humanity or war crimes for acts considered as international crimes.

He reiterated that the right to due process is likewise violated. “The right to due process provides the accused with the right to be informed of the nature of charges against him/her. Unless there is sufficient definition of what it is the person is accused of, s/he could be acquitted of the charges filed against him/her.”

Roque also questioned the basis for providing for a different set of penalties for government officials convicted of terrorism in the version passed by the House of Representatives.

The House bill imposes imprisonment ranging from 6 to 12 years and a fine ranging from P50,000 ($978.18 at an exchange rate of $1=P51.115) to P5 million ($97,818.64) for convicted government officials, while for others, the penalty is a fine of P10 million ($195,627.28) and life imprisonment.

“We follow the principle of equal protection of the law. Providing for a different set of penalties for convicted government officials is a violation of this principle,” he said.

But more importantly, he said, “Her acts constituting dictatorial powers will fuel acts of terrorism (because they) are running out of constitutional options.”

“She’s driving the people to commit extra-constitutional or unconstitutional means…her continued reign is the biggest threat to the international fight against terrorism.” Bulatlat

 Save as PDF