News Release
February 10, 2007
SENATE APPROVED ANTI-TERROR BILL: NOT
WATERED DOWN
BUT MORE DRACONIAN THAN THE HOUSE VERSION: District
Representatives asked to Declare No Vote During the Election
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 suspecte 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.
Reference Person: Atty. Neri Javier Colmenares
|