This story
was taken from Bulatlat, the Philippines's alternative weekly
newsmagazine (www.bulatlat.com, www.bulatlat.net, www.bulatlat.org).
Vol. VII, No. 2, Feb. 11-17, 2007
Senate Approved Anti-Terror Bill Not Watered Down
CODAL wishes to
correct members of the Senate who contend that their version of the
anti-terrorism bill is watered down. In this instance, the authors of the House
version could not outdo Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile in crafting a bill intended to
terrorize legitimate dissenters. The claim by opposition Senators that they
managed to water down the bill, to justify their approval of the same, is an
illusory and untruthful statement. CODAL commends Sen. Jamby Madrigal and Sen.
Mar Roxas, the only two senators who voted against the bill for maintaining
their principled position despite the absence of support even from pretend human
rights advocates like Sen. Joker Arroyo. The Senate Bill is
draconian because it contain the following provisions that are not found in the
House version, and in fact, have never been found in Philippine legal history:
I.
Under Sec. 26, it allows for
House Arrest despite the posting of bail, prohibition of the right to travel and
the right to communicate with others Sec. 26
Restriction on the Right to Travel—In cases where evidence of guilt is not
strong, and the person charged is …granted... bail, the court shall
…limit the right of travel of the accused to within the municipality or city
where he resides. He or she may also be placed under house arrest
by order of the court… While under house arrest, he or she may not use
telephones, cell phones, emails, computers, the internet or other means of
communications with people outside his residence until otherwise ordered by
the court. Considering that the
evidence of guilt is not strong, Section 26 violates the suspects constitutional
right to travel guaranteed under Section 6, Art. III of the Constitution when it
prohibited the travel of a suspect outside his place of residence absent a court
order. It also violates Sec. 13, Art. III which grants bail as a right to “ALL
persons, when evidence of guilt is not strong” when it allows the house arrest
of that person despite posting bail. Worse, it prohibits that ‘suspect’ from
communicating through “cell phones, emails, computers, the internet with
people outside his residence” a form of incommunicado detention outlawed
under Sec. 12 (2) Art. III of the Constitution. This provision virtually
punishes a mere suspect even if that suspect has not been convicted—a draconian
provision that tramples on the constitutional presumption of innocence and the
right to due process enshrined under Sec. 1 and 14 (2) Art. III of the
Constitution. This not only surpasses the House version, but any law passed even
by Pres. Ferdinand Marcos during martial law. Sen. Enrile, with the support of
opposition senators, certainly outdid himself in crafting this law.
II.
Provides for Indefinite
Detention upon orders of an official who is not part of the judiciary A deeper scrutiny of
Section 19 of the Senate Bill shows that indefinite detention is allowed upon
the mere approval of a mere municipal official, among others: Sec. 19—In the
event of an actual or imminent terrorist attack, suspects may not be detained
for more than three days without the written approval of a municipal, city,
provincial or regional official of a human rights commission or judge of the
municipal. . .
Section 19 actually
states that a suspect may be detained for more than three days provided a
municipal officer, inter alia, of an amorphous ‘commission on human
rights’ approves. An ‘official’ who does not have the judicial authority to
order the arrest of a person, is empowered by the Senate to order his detention
for more than three days, a blatant violation of many provisions under Article
III of the Constitution. Worse, that suspect, who is not even judicially
charged as an accused, may be detained for more than three days, a clear
violation of the Sec. 18, Article VII of the Constitution which provides that
“During the suspension of the privilege of the writ, any person thus arrested or
detained shall be judicially charged within three days, otherwise he shall be
released.” Demand Rejection
of ATB During the Campaign Period The Senate bill
contains more repressive provisions on surveillance, opening and freezing of
accounts, and other threats on civil liberties which may be used by the
executive to persecute dissenters. The above provisions are not only
constitutionally infirm but are even violative international human rights law
and the principles of international criminal law, which makes the Senate
version worse than the House bill, or any other law in Philippine legal history.
Attacks against civilians by the likes of Al Qaeda. JI and the Abu Sayyaf are
condemnable and must be dealt with decisively. However, the current anti-terror
bill will not curtail attacks from these groups and may even inspire more
attacks once abused by the executive and the military. The bill, even as it
will not strike fear on the ‘terrorists,’ will certainly be used to terrorize
the opposition. Pres. Arroyo has shown her penchant to misuse laws against her
detractors as shown by our experience under EO 464, the CPR policy and
Proclamation 1017. The credibility of
the Senate and almost all senators on human rights issues are now tainted if
not completely destroyed. CODAL asks members of the legal profession and human
rights advocates to launch a campaign for the rejection of the resulting bill
once it is again by a lame duck House of Representatives in June. The people
must require their district representatives during this election to declare that
they will vote no on the anti-terror bill once it is presented in the House for
ratification. This is one rare instance when the people must assert a clear
position on a national issue from local politicians in a local election. Since
the Senate failed to protect the people from this draconian anti-terror bill, it
is now up to the people themselves to directly act to force the rejection of the
bill. Posted by Bulatlat
Reference Person: Atty. Neri Javier
Colmenares © 2007 Bulatlat
■
Alipato Publications Permission is granted to reprint or redistribute this article, provided its author/s and Bulatlat are properly credited and notified.
but More Draconian Than the House Version
District representatives asked to declare no vote during the election
Counsels for the Defense of Liberties (CODAL)
Date: February 9, 2007