Carpio seeks review of anti-terror law

FORMER Supreme Court Justice Antonio Carpio on Wednesday claimed that the Anti-Terrorism bill (ATB) contained several unconstitutional provisions and its passage would bring the country to a situation worse than martial law.

“With the Anti-Terrorism Act, as part of the law of the land, it is as if the Philippines is permanently under a situation worse than martial law,” Carpio said during a webinar hosted by the Management Association of the Philippines.

Carpio cited Section 29 of the proposed law, which allows the detention of suspected persons for up to 24 days before being brought before a judge. He explained that this was worse than during the Martial Law, when a person arrested for rebellion must be charged in court within three days, otherwise he should be released.

The former justice said the ATB “demolishes” the “inviolable fundamental right” against unreasonable arrests. He explained that the ATB violates two fortresses provided under the Constitution to guarantee this right: “Only a judge can issue warrants of arrest and that a warrant of arrest must issue only upon probable cause.”

He said Section 2 of the ATB allows the detention of a suspect without judicial warrant of arrest while Section 29 allows the Anti-Terrorism Council (ATC), a purely executive body composed of cabinet secretaries, to issue warrants of arrest.

“This is obviously unconstitutional since the present Constitution allows only a judge to issue a warrant of arrest and under the Anti-Terrorism Act, an executive body composed of cabinet secretaries, are now allowed to issue orders of warrants of arrest,” he said.

Carpio added that the ATC is authorized to order arrests without probable cause and even if an individual has not yet committed any act of terrorism.

With the ATB’s wide definition of terrorism, even a rally may be tagged as a terroristic act as it can be interpreted as causing “widespread fear” of spreading the coronavirus.

The bill, Carpio said, could have a “devastating effect” on the freedom of expression as it punishes incitement to terrorism through speech, whether written, verbal or visual that incites others to commit terrorism.

He lamented the fast-tracking of the passage of the bill, saying that it could have been refined by Congress to remove unconstitutional provisions. He said the only remedy now would be to lobby Congress to make amendments or to question it before the Supreme Court once it has been enacted into law.

Support

Also on Wednesday, Interior Secretary Eduardo Año said the antiterror bill had the backing of 43 governors and more than 700 mayors.

The Union of Local Authorities of the Philippines and 13 Regional Peace and Order Councils also supported the bill.

President Rodrigo Duterte was thoroughly studying the bill, Año said.

“Let’s give this anti-terrorism bill a chance,” he added.

Año assured the public that the paramount aim of the bill was to curb terrorism.

The National Intelligence Coordinating

Agency (NICA) also defended the anti-terror bill against its critics.

NICA Director General Alex Paul Monteagudo said the country needed a stronger anti-terror law.

National Security Adviser Hermogenes Esperon said the bill had to be signed because the Philippines was one of several countries most affected by terrorism.

“Perhaps, a more practical way to look at the issue is to consider the human cost of terrorism. The truth is violent extremism often ends in blood, consider the perspective of the safety and well-being of our soldiers, my heart always goes out to them because I walked in their boots, so to say,” Esperon, a former military chief, said.