RETIRED Supreme Court senior associate Justice Antonio Carpio and former associate justice and Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales yesterday filed the 11th petition against Republic Act 11479 or the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020.
The petition, which seeks to strike down the new law, was filed electronically by the former justices together with professors from the UP College of Law namely Jay Batongbacal, Dan Gatmaytan, Theodore Te, Anthony Charlemagne Yu, and Victoria Loanzon.
The Supreme Court was closed yesterday as it was still undergoing disinfection procedures.
Also joining the petition are former Magdalo party-list Rep. Francisco Ashley Acedillo and UP Student Council councilor Thierone James Santos.
The petitioners asked the SC to nullify the entire law and to hold oral arguments on the case.
While the case is being heard, they said, the SC should issue a temporary restraining order and/or a writ of preliminary injunction to prevent its implementation.
The law that was signed by President Duterte on July 3 took effect on July 18. The implementing rules and regulations have yet to be drafted.
“The ATA heavily burdens protected speech by the vagueness and overbreadth that permeate its text, creating a chilling effect that suppresses the expressive freedom in violation of Article III, Section 4 of the Constitution,” the petitioners said.
They also questioned the creation of the Anti-Terrorism Council (ATC) whose members are officials from the Executive Branch, saying it violates the separation of powers as well as the Bill of Rights.
“The creation of the ATC — with its integral power to order the warrantless arrest of `suspected’ terrorists — is invalid as it infringes the basic principle of separation of powers and while emulating the President’s commander-in-chief powers vests the ATC with powers that far exceed those constitutionally-granted to the President,” part of the 86-page petition said.
“The Anti-Terrorism Law’s provision allowing for the `designation’ of terrorists, particularly Sections 3 (b), 3 (K), 3 (M), 10,11, 12, 25, 26, 27, 29,30, 34 35, 36, 45, 46 and 49, are unconstitutional as they unduly infringe upon the constitutional right to due process, bail, presumption of innocence, prohibition against bill of attainder and ex post facto law and against incommunicado detention,” they added.
The petitioners said Section 35, which authorizes the Anti-Money Laundering Council to look into the bank accounts of suspected terrorists even without a court order, violates the rights to privacy and unreasonable searches which are guaranteed under the Constitution.
‘EXTENSIVE INTERFERENCE’
The petition also said that due to the law’s vagueness and overbreadth, Carpio may be “prosecuted for inciting to terrorism” as he is a staunch advocate of the country’s territorial claim against China in the South China Sea and has been vocal in his criticism of the Duterte administration’s policy on the issue
“His impassioned activism may fall under “extensive interference” with critical infrastructure” which is among the definition of terror in Section 4 of the said law,” the petition said.
It explained that critical infrastructure can include the diplomatic machinery of the State.
As to the former Ombudsman, the petition said Carpio-Morales is also in danger of being tagged a terrorist under the same provision of RA 11479 as she has filed a complaint before the International Criminal Court against Chinese President Xi Jinping and other Chinese officials in connection with Chinese activities in the West Philippine Sea that had caused billions of pesos in damage to the marine environment.
“She is likewise in danger of being accused of terrorist acts or support thereof, such as extensive interference into critical infrastructure that it meant to destabilize fundamental political structures under Section 4 (C) of the said law,” it added.
The West Philippine Sea refers to the eastern parts of the South China Sea, which are included in Philippines’ exclusive economic zone. The designation was made by the previous administration. China claims most of the South China Sea while the Philippines claims parts of it, like Brunei, Malaysia, Taiwan, and Vietnam.
As to the UP professors, they said they might also be accused of inciting to terrorism since they conduct classes that require discussions about the history, roots, and motivations of past and present societal movements, including the Communist Party of the Philippines and past rebellions as well as such issues as the West Philippine Sea and extrajudicial killings.
“The vagueness of the statute allows law enforcement officials to make the law as they enforce it and the lack of parameters makes the Anti-Terrorism Act a loose cannon that threatens a wide spectrum of protected liberties,” the petitioners said.
They also assailed the “overbroad discretionary powers” to wiretap private communications based on mere suspicion, which they added also constitutes a violation of the right against unreasonable searches.
BETTER TO WAIT FOR IRR
Interior Secretary Eduardo Año said the implementation of the anti-terrorism law can wait if there is no major terror threat.
Año said the law can be implemented now even without the implementing rules and regulations (IRR) which he said “is not requirement for the implementation of the law.”
“There is already jurisprudence on that… After 15 days of official publication, the law is already effective,” he said.
But, he said, “we have to wait for the IRR” to avoid questions about enforcing the new law without the rules.
“So para maiwasan mo yung ganun, antayan mo na lang yung IRR kasi open to questions. (So to avoid that, let’s wait for the IRR because its open to questions). But there is no restriction in implementing the law because the law is already effective and what we will do is to fast track the crafting of the IRR as soon as possible),” he said.
Nevertheless, Año said the law can be invoked by law enforcers if there is a serious terrorist threat, reiterating a statement he made on Saturday.
“Kung meron kasing talagang terrorist threat we have to apply the law, kung nakabitin o nakabingit yung buhay ng ating mga mamamayan we have to implement the law. (If there is terrorist threat, we have to apply the law. If people’s lives are at stake, we have to implement the law),” he said.
“Kung wala namang malalaking terrorist threat, we can wait for the IRR. (If there is no serious terrorist threat, we can wait for the IRR),” Año said.
Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana said, “We could wait for the IRR but if there is a terrorist action now we are going to use it.”
Lorenzana said the defense and military establishments have not monitored activities of foreign terrorists in Mindanao for sometime now. As of last year, security officials said at least 40 foreign terrorists are Mindanao.
He said authorities are focusing on local terrorist groups like the Abu Sayyaf, the Bangsamoro Islamic Liberation Fighters, and the Daulah Islamiyah.
The BIFF is composed of around 200 men operating mainly in Central Mindanao, where the Daulah Islamiyah is also known to operate. The Abu Sayyaf’s stronghold is Sulu and Basilan. — With Victor Reyes
