english,
Opinion: Back to Tyranny with the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020
Photo Credits: Joshua Sales
It was just a day after the 34th EDSA People Power Revolution Anniversary and it seems the country has forgotten what the holiday was all about. We are once again treading the path that leads to tyranny.
With a 19-2 vote, the senate approved Senate Bill No. 1083 or the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 on its third and final reading last February 26. This repeals the Human Security Act of 2007 replacing its provisions with stronger ones.
Senate President Vicente Sotto assures us that this bill cannot be utilized by anyone to “harass and silence” activists and government critics as it only aims to “bring peace of mind and heart among Filipinos that they are safe from the menace of terrorists.” However, these words seem empty when we analyze the key provisions in the bill. Rather, it appears as if the generally pro-administration senate is trying to push for a hidden sinister agenda that leads to tyranny trampling upon human rights along the way.
With the Anti-Subversion Law of 1981, Former President Ferdinand Marcos was able to arrest his critics through red tagging. Exactly the same could happen at present with this bill. It gives terrorism a dangerously broad definition saying that certain criminal acts “done to provoke or influence by intimidation the government or any of its international organization” can be considered terrorist acts. Kabataan representative Sarah Elago raised this issue saying that given these broad definition, “simple workers' strike, street parties, or flash mobs can be considered as terrorism." The government could easily coin this term in referring to harmless mass movements that criticize them and demand action. The scare of having this label could also cool down the will of Filipinos to voice themselves out.
This is especially prospective given the current state of politics in the Philippines. Issues like the arrest of Sen. Leila De Lima, the impeachment of former Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno, the threat of cancelling ABS-CBN’s franchise, and the sedition cases of Vice President Leni Robredo and other members of the opposition are just a few that prove that the current administration truly wills to silence their critics.
Well, one might argue that the “terrorist” label has no bearing since guiltless suspects cannot be convicted at court. However, the Anti-Terrorism Act makes it legal for suspected terrorists to be detained for up to 14 days. On top of that, the provision that grants Php 500, 000 per day of wrongful detention from the Human Security Act of 2007 has been removed. It’s as if the government does not care about the person they falsely accuse. By not giving compensation, they do not recognize the damages of groundless incarceration on innocent citizens.
Senators may say that these provisions still respect human rights. After all, the bill does not take away one’s Miranda rights and other fundamental rights. Additionally, the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) will be informed whenever there is a case of a warrantless arrest. However, the question still stands – why does this detainment period need to last two whole weeks?
I understand that it is better to put suspects under custody to maintain a peaceful environment while authorities clear up suspicions but this is too much. Without convictions decided through due process, a person should be presumed not guilty and, therefore, have the fundamental right to freedom.
Without due process, the government could be barking up the wrong tree or it may be using this 14-day detainment period to imprison and abuse their radical and subversive critics, who they can conveniently label as terrorists.
Aside from the right to liberty, the right to data privacy is also endangered by this bill. Once ratified, it will allow law enforcers to conduct surveillance on identified or suspected terrorists. This includes wiretapping, overhearing, and secretly reading private messages and conversations on various forms of media through the assistance of telecommunications service providers (TSPs) and Internet service providers (ISPs).
This is excessive intrusion especially given that anyone, especially government critics, can easily be labelled as a terrorist as mentioned earlier. How hard would it be for the government to cherry pick the information that will incriminate their enemies if this is the case? What’s stopping them from collecting other useful information that they can use to harm or threaten their vocal critics?
Sen. Franklin Drilon argues that the permit to conduct surveillance will not be easy to obtain since stakes to get authorization are higher as it must be from the Court of Appeals rather than the Regional Trial Courts (RTC). Despite this, having higher courts grant this authorization does not guarantee that personal and sensitive information will be received by good and responsible eyes and ears.
On top of everything, the bill does not address the core reasons why terrorism is rampant in the country. Undiscussed religious and cultural differences and ignored concerns of the marginalized sectors of the country remain crucial variables the government leaves out in the battle against extremism, separatism, and rampant rebellion.
In conclusion, the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 does indeed bring peace of mind and heart but only to the ruling and upper class who can rest assured that the masses are too afraid to speak themselves once the bill becomes a law. For the vulnerable groups, however, it incites fear rather than hampering it. It creates a state that threatens lives contrary to the peaceful one it says it hopes to build.
I have no doubt that this bill is just pretending to fight terrorism to hide the totalitarianism the government wants to achieve. Our country has witnessed this phenomenon before when the former president Marcos declared Martial Law on the pretense of waging war against the communist movement to cover up his tyranny and dictatorship.
How come have we not yet awakened to the reality of where this path will lead us if it has happened to us before? Shall we wake up to a country of tyranny one day? //by Lester Amurao
Sources:
0 comments: