Sotto, Lacson sure anti-terror bill will stand test of constitutionality; solons, groups call for review

By VANNE ELAINE P. TERRAZOLA, CHARISSA M. LUCI-ATIENZA, AARON B. RECUENCO, CHRISTINA I. HERMOSO, and LESLIE ANN G. AQUINO

Senate President Vicente Sotto III and Sen. Panfilo Lacson, two of the proponents of the anti-terrorism bill, are confident that the measure will stand the test of constitutionality when it is challenged before the Supreme Court (SC), even as some lawmakers and various sectors are calling for a review of the bill’s “vague and amorphous” provisions.

"Iyon ang pinakamagandang gawin nila para masupalpal sila at malaman nila na tama ang mga nakalagay doon (That's the best thing for them to do, for them to be smacked on the face once they realize that everything written there is correct)," Sotto said, adding that they consulted justices and exjustices in crafting the bill.

Sen. Panfilo Lacson agreed that oppositors may question the antiterrorism bill, but he maintained that it will not be violating the Constitution.

"Wala kaming nakikitang violation ng Constitution dahil lahat na position dito nakapaloob at di lalagpas sa Article 3 ng Constitution, Bill of Rights (We don't see any violation of the Constitution because all of the positions taken here are within Article 3 of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights)," Lacson said in a separate DWIZ radio interview later.

Sotto and Lacson are the authors of Senate Bill No. 1083, whose provisions were adopted by the House of Representatives and passed on final reading.

Both insisted that the proposed law contains enough safeguards to prevent its abuse and protect human rights.

"Magsitigil nga sila, puro sila paninira eh (They should shut up, they're all just defaming)," Sotto said about the bill's critics.

Lacson said he cannot blame the critics for their fears due to the "numerous excesses" of some law enforcers during the war on drugs, and their implementation of quarantine measures amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Department of Justice on Saturday said it will start reviewing the provisions of the controversial bill. Vague, amorphous provisions Albay 1st district Rep. Edcel Lagman called on both the Senate and the House of Representatives to take a second look at the "vague and amorphous" provisions of the bill.

Among the provisions being questioned by Lagman are the 24-day warrantless arrest, a six-month ransacking of bank accounts, 90-day surveillance and wire-tapping, and vague provisions allowing law enforcers, the Anti-Terrorism Council (ATC), and the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) to perpetrate abusive interpretations of the law and unlawful apprehensions.

PBA party-list Rep. Jericho Nograles, who sponsored the controversial measure in the plenary, said the concerns raised against the possible abuse of authorities under HB 6875 "are all valid."

"Aaminin ko na hindi ito perfect. Lahat ng mga batas na naisulat o lahat ng mga panukulang batas na naipasa hindi naman yan perfect. (I admit that this is not perfect. All laws enacted or all proposed measures that were passed are not perfect)," he said.

He assured that all concerns and criticisms raised against the bill will not fall on deaf ears and will be addressed in the implementing rules and regulations (IRR).

Crash course

The Philippine National Police (PNP) will launch a massive information campaign among its men once the Anti-Terrorism Bill is enacted into law to allay the fears of the public that some of the provisions are prone to abuses and human rights violations.

PNP spokesman Brig. Gen. Bernard Banac said the PNP Human Rights Affairs Office (HRAO) has already been tapped to prepare the instruction materials for the education of all policemen, particularly those assigned in the field, about the Anti-Terrorism Bill of 2020.

“We will be conducting information campaign so that our personnel will be made aware of the provisions of the proposed law. Our PNP HRAO was already tasked to prepare the entire police institution on this,” said Banac.

Calls to junk the Anti-Terrorism Bill have been snowballing especially in social media as various sectors and even celebrities fear that some of its alleged vague provisions could be used to stifle freedom of expression and suppress dissents which are acceptable in a democracy.

But Banac said that the bill has been meticulously studied by lawmakers and other legal experts in order to protect human rights while running after terrorists operating in the country.

“What the government wants is a balance between human rights and peace and order. We assure the public that this will not be used for abuses,” said Banac.

Church groups oppose

Caritas Philippines, the social action arm of the Catholic Church, has expressed concern over the new antiterrorism bill, saying it is “unjust and unlawful.”

“We cannot let this happen. This is not only intolerable, this is inhuman, unjust, and unlawful. The bill can further reinforce tyranny and totalitarianism,” warned Caritas Philippines national director Kidapawan Bishop Jose Colin Bagaforo.

The anti-terror bill, Bagaforo added, can be used to “suppress free speech and harass those who express dissent.”

The Philippine Ecumenical Peace Platform (PEPP), an ecumenical peace organization, said the anti-terror bill can “further exacerbate red-tagging and human rights violations in the country.”

In addition, the group said, it will also affect the peace negotiations between the government and the communist rebels.

PEPP co-chairperson Cagayan de Oro Archbishop Antonio Ledesma, SJ, said, “At times like these, the anti-terrorism bill will not serve to end the conflicts of our land. The Philippine Ecumenical Peace Platform appeals to President Duterte to hear the voices of Filipinos who bear the promise of peace in their hearts and veto this bill when it comes to him for action.”

The Philippine Council of Evangelical Churches (PCEC) also appealed to President Duterte to veto the anti-terrorism bill.

In a pastoral statement, PCEC said while they recognize the necessity of legislative measures to protect the nation from terrorism, they firmly believe that the bill "imperils" the rights of Filipinos and sense of dignity.

"As this Act understandably involves the heaviest and most stringent penalties affecting individual persons and organizations, it should have undergone an extensive process of deliberation," said PCEC National Director Bishop Noel Pantoja.

"Causing us great apprehensions, too, are the vague definitions of terrorism, and the extended period of warrantless detention, which opens the way to serious abuses of a person’s rights and dignity," he added.

"We therefore make this humble and urgent appeal to our President Duterte to veto the bill," Pantoja said.