The Anti-Terrorism Bill: A Patently Fascist Measure

By the Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (BAYAN)
Posted by Bulatlat

Welcome to the dark ages.

On February 8, voting 16-2, the Senate passed on final reading the Human Security Act of 2007, more commonly known as the Anti-Terrorism Bill (ATB). A day after, the bicameral conference committee of both chambers of Congress adopted the Senate version in toto. Immediately, the Senate ratified the bicameral report while the House of Representatives failed to muster a quorum to approve the bill. The failure of the House pushed the approval of the ATB to June 4. 

June would prove too long for Mrs. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, the main proponent of the terror measure. Even as Congress adjourned, Arroyo issued Proclamation 1235 calling for special session of Congress to approve the ATB. The special session is scheduled on February 19 and 20. Election season notwithstanding, the Macapagal-Arroyo regime is hell-bent on signing the ATB into law as soon as possible.

Contrary to statements by opposition senators who voted in favor of the bill, the Senate version is not at all toothless. Many provisions violate rights guaranteed by the   Philippine Constitution and even by international humanitarian law conventions.

1. Dangerously vague definition

The definition of terrorism remains vague and overbroad.  Sec 3 of the Anti-Terror bill states:”…sowing and creating a condition of widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the populace in order to coerce the government to give in to an unlawful demand.”  

With this kind of definition, Arroyo can use the law as an instrument to quell legitimate dissent. Critical political exercise may be deemed as an act coercing the government to give in to an unlawful demand. The ouster of Arroyo, for example, is and will always be interpreted as “unlawful.”

The bill also does not qualify what constitutes a “condition of widespread and extraordinary fear and panic.”

Moreover, Sec. 17 of the proposed bill allows for the proscription of organizations as terrorists on the mere application by the Department of Justice before any Regional Trial Court (RTC). All it takes is for Justice Sec. Raul Gonzalez to file a case before any RTC and an organization, association or group of persons may be declared as a terrorist and thus outlawed.

Judging from the recent pronouncements and practice of the regime, the first casualties of the proposed bill would be members of revolutionary armed movements, like the Communist Party of the Philippines-New People’s Army-National Democratic Front (CPP-NPA-NDF) and the Moro International Liberation Front (MILF). This would be contrary to established Philippine jurisprudence such as the Hernandez Doctrine which states that all acts in pursuit of one’s political beliefs are absorbed in one crime of rebellion and cannot be divided into several common crimes.

Next to be likely tagged as terrorists are groups which state agents have already labeled as “front organizations.” These include legal and legitimate people’s organizations, which are already facing various forms of harassment under the present system.

It cannot be denied that according to international law and resolutions, international humanitarian law and conventions, the commentaries of numerous legal scholars as well as judicial doctrine pertaining to the matter, acts in pursuit of one’s political beliefs are considered legitimate, have legal recognition and cannot be regarded, much less penalized, as terrorism.

2. Infringement of rights

Suspects of terrorism will be denied due process and presumption of innocence.  One may be deprived of the right to travel and the right to communicate on the mere suspicion of terrorism.

Sec. 26 states: “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.”  

Under Sec. 19, in the event of actual or imminent terrorist attack, suspects may be detained for 48 hours without warrant. Municipal, city, provincial or regional human rights commission officials are authorized to order the detention of suspected terrorists beyond 48 hours. This is 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.”  

Further, Sec. 7 legalizes surveillance of terror suspects. Authorities may intercept and record all communications of suspected terrorists and their alleged conspirators. Opposition Senators claim to have inserted certain provisions which can prevent abuses of this power but these may prove ineffective given the track record of the state when it comes to wiretapping and eavesdropping. We only have the “Hello, Garci” scandal to remind us of how wiretapping has been abused in the past.

Under Sec 27, bank deposits, accounts and records of suspected terrorists and their alleged conspirators may be examined by authorities. The key concept here is that even suspects can be subjected to bank examinations. All pertinent information involving a suspected account, including transactions with other accounts, can be opened up.

3. Anti-Terrorism Council

Sec. 53 provides for the creation of the Anti-Terrorism Council. The members of the Council are the Executive Secretary; Secretary of Justice; Secretary of Foreign Affairs; Secretary of National Defense; Secretary of the Interior and Local Government; Secretary of Finance; and the National Security Adviser. The National Intelligence Coordinating Agency (NICA) shall serve as its secretariat.

The Council’s functions include directing the speedy investigation and prosecution of all persons accused or detained for the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism; freezing bank accounts, funds of suspected terrorists; and establishing and maintaining a database on terrorism.    

Most of the members of the Anti-Terrorism Council are already part of the notorious cabinet cluster on security. As members of the Cabinet Oversight Committee for Internal Security (COC-IS), Eduardo Ermita, Raul Gonzalez, Norberto Gonzales are the masterminds of repressive policies and measures such as the Oplan Bantay Laya, Presidential Proclamation No. 1017, calibrated preemptive response and Executive Order No. 464. The three are now joined by newly appointed defense secretary Hermogenes Ebdane, a retired general linked to the “Hello, Garci” scandal.

Indeed, the most notorious implementers of human rights violations will be given additional powers via the Anti-Terrorism Council.

4. Peace talks

The enactment of the ATB will result in the collapse of peace negotiations between the Arroyo administration and the NDF, MILF and the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF). 

Despite not being tagged yet as terrorists, the MILF and MNLF have in the past been linked by the government to the Abu Sayyaf and Jamaah Islamiya, especially when the government tried to gain leverage in peace negotiations.

The same squeeze play is being used against the NDF and its chief political consultant. The Philippine government lobbied for the inclusion in European terrorist lists of the NPA and Jose Maria Sison. This has become a stumbling block to peace negotiations under the Arroyo regime. With the passage of an anti-terror law, the Philippines would use the local terrorist listing to further pressure the NDF to capitulate.

5. State terrorism

The anti-terror law will nourish the monster that is state terrorism.

Arroyo is itching to sign it into law to intensify and complement the existing all-out war policy against the Filipino people.

Within the context of Bush regime’s global war of terror, Arroyo’s own “anti-terror” campaign is itself a worse form of terrorism. The law contemplates a state of fascist rule experienced during martial law. 

No amount of safety nets can make the ATB less malevolent. In the hands of a regime with a poor human rights record, the terror measure can and will be easily abused to serve the campaign of repression of the regime. Taken in the broader context of the crisis of the Arroyo presidency, the terror measure is both a move to get continued US support for the Arroyo administration and a move to suppress the most effective critics of the administration. Bulatlat

BACK TO TOP ■  PRINTER-FRIENDLY VERSION  ■   COMMENT

© 2006 Bulatlat ■  Alipato Media Center

Permission is granted to reprint or redistribute this article, provided its author/s and Bulatlat are properly credited and notified.