Roque: 'No draconian provisions' in Anti-Terror Bill inspired by US, UK laws
MANILA, Philippines (Updated 9:35 a.m.) — Malacañang on Tuesday defended the chief executive’s call to the House of Representatives to fast-track the passage of a bill seeking to toughen up country’s anti-terrorism policies, a move feared to make the human rights situation in the Philippines worse.
Presidential spokesperson Harry Roque, who in 2007 said the current Human Security Act "would legitimize the role of the Philippine president as chief executioner", said the Philippines has the loosest anti-terrorism law in the world.
Roque, a former human rights lawyer, also said there is no “draconian” — or excessively harsh — provision in the proposed measure that would broaden the definition of terrorism, allow longer detentions without charge and give members of the executive branch power to designate individuals and groups as terrorists.
“Wala naman pong draconian na provision dyan. Lahat po ng provisions dyan binase natin sa batas ng iba’t-ibang bansa na mas epektibo ang kanilang pagtrato sa terorista,” Roque said, saying the bill was patterned after anti-terrorism laws of Australia, United Kingdom and the United States.
(There is no draconian provision there. All of the provisions were based from the laws of other nations that have more effective ways of dealing with terrorists.)
Rights issues in US and UK
In its 2020 World Report on the United States, Human Rights Watch noted that "the US continues to indefinitely detain 31 men without charge at Guantanamo Bay, all of whom have been imprisoned for well over a decade, some since 2002."
It adds that seven men are facing terrorism-related charges "before Guantanamo’s military commissions, which do not meet international fair trial standards and have been plagued by procedural problems and years of delays."
Amnesty International, meanwhile, notes in its 2019 report that:
A decade after dozens of detainees were held in a CIA-operated secret detention programme – authorized from 2001 to 2009 – during which systematic human rights violations were committed, including enforced disappearance and torture, no person suspected of criminal responsibility had been brought to justice for these crimes and the limited investigations conducted were closed with no charges brought against anyone.
HRW also noted that, in the United Kingdom in 2019, "a new counterterrorism law entered into force, including measures that criminalize viewing online content, overseas travel and support to terrorism and could result in human rights violations."
"In July (of 2019), the government refused to establish a judicial inquiry into UK complicity in the CIA-led torture and secret detention. At time of writing, no one in the UK had been charged with a crime in connection with the abuses," it also said.
In its 2019 report on the UK, Amnesty International said that the new anti-terrorism law penalized "expressing an opinion or belief supportive of a proscribed organization, if reckless as to whether that encourages another person to support them; publishing images of articles or clothing in a way which suggests you are a member or supporter of a proscribed organization and the mere viewing of “terrorist related” material on the internet."
It said that "counter-terrorism laws continued to restrict rights [and] full accountability for torture allegations against UK intelligence agencies and armed forces remained unrealized" in the UK that year.
“Wag nating kalimutan hindi tayo istranghero sa terorismo (Let us not forget that we are no strangers to terrorism) ,” Roque said, citing the 2017 Marawi siege and attacks by the Abu Sayyaf.
READ: ‘Anti-terror’ bill defines terrorism vaguely but has clear and specific dangers
Human rights lawyers have expressed alarm over what they said are unconstitutional provisions in the proposed legislation that seek to punish act “which are in no way terrorism” and “weaken protections against abuse and misuse.”
They warned it could be used against critics and members of the opposition because of the broadness and vagueness of definition of terrorism.
In a letter sent to House Speaker Alan Peter Cayetano on Monday, President Rodrigo Duterte called for the immediate passage of House Bill 6875, which seeks to replace the Human Security Act.
Bills certified as urgent can be passed on second and third reading on the same day.
Social media users criticized the government for prioritizing the passage of a “repressive” bill at the time when the country is combating the coronavirus pandemic.
The lower chamber earlier adopted the Senate version of the bill.
Human rights lawyers and organizations urged the public to fervently reject the passage of the anti-terrorism bill.
“Reject the Anti-Terrorism Bill as well as the HSA of 2007, in favor of stronger democratic, pro-people laws, and to stand with us against state terrorism, especially the kind we have seen and suffered under the Duterte administration,” Concerned Lawyers for Civil Liberties said Tuesday. — Gaea Katreena Cabico
- Latest
- Trending
