Gabriela brings to SC 19th legal challenge vs anti-terrorism law
MANILA, Philippines — Progressive women’s group Gabriela on Friday brought to the Supreme Court the 19th legal challenge against the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020.
Gabriela joined the growing number of petitioners asking the tribunal to restrain the government from implementing, and to strike down as null and void, the entirety of Republic Act 11479.
The group said that the new anti-terrorism law “would render all 36 years of Gabriela working for the rights and interests of marginalized women as an act of terrorism.”
They warned that this will not stop with just their group: “The terror will undoubtedly spread, the chilling effect magnified a hundred thousand times over, to every woman, every citizen, who does and shall still find the voice to assert her right and dignity as a woman, to speak truth to power because it will become a necessity for her survival.”
Gabriela labelled as terrorist or communist front
"If not declared void at the onset, the continued effectivity of RA 11479 will legalize the illegal and baseless acts of public respondents that caused and continue to cause injury to Petitioners,” they said.
Gabriela pointed out that the determination of the nature and context of acts that fall under terrorism is left to the discretion of law implementers. “With the foregoing dissection of the law’s definition, it becomes clear that terrorism, as defined under Section 4 of RA 11479, is a crime of attributed intent and purpose. It exists solely in the minds of the implementers of the law,” they said.
Due to the broad and vague definition of terrorism, “any form of support to organizations unfairly tagged as terrorists is now criminalized as providing material support to terrorists.”
They also argued that the vagueness of the definition of terrorism is beyond saving of an Implementing Rules and Regulations—currently being drafted by the justice department.
“Hence, one’s acts may constitute terrorism when the law’s implementers adjudge them to be so. One does not know what acts constitute disobedience of the law. One does not know when and why she or he had become a terrorist,” they said.
“Until it is too late,” Gabriela added.
This thus gives the Anti-Terrorism Council, where Cabinet members with history of red-tagging sit, “unbridled discretion” in enforcing the law.
Gabriela implored the court to take notice that it has long suffered from “harassment, red-tagging, vilification and case filing” but state agents, including those from the National Task Force-End Local Communism Armed Conflict.
RELATED: 'We are a humanitarian organization,' Oxfam stresses after AFP labels them terrorist front
“According to the NTF-ELCAC, Petitioner Gabriela is a terrorist or communist-terrorist group or a front thereof,” they said. These very people will sit as the Anti-Terrorism Council that can authorize law enforcers to detain a person up to 24 days without judicial charge.
“Petitioners are terrorized because the continued implementation of the law will only further endanger their life, liberty, security and property,” they also said.
President Rodrigo Duterte signed the Anti-Terrorism Law on July 3 despite opposition from rights groups and civil society groups that it could be used to stifle human rights.
A petition against the law has been filed at the Supreme Court and other groups are preparing pleadings of their own.
Follow this page for updates. Photo courtesy of The STAR/Michael Varcas
National Security Adviser Hermogenes Esperon moves to block access to several websites, including news sites of alternative news orrganizations Bulatlat.com and Pinoyweekly.org.
In his letter to the National Telecommunications Commission, he only says the websites are "affiliated to and are supporting these terrorists and terrorist organizations."
No other basis to back up his allegation was cited in the letter.
Citing the designation of the CPP-NPA-NDF as terrorists, NSA Hermogenes Esperon moves to block access to several sites.
— Kristine Patag (@kristinepatag) June 22, 2022
In Esperon's letter to the NTC, he included news sites @bulatlat and @pinoyweekly; sites of other progressive groups RMP and Save our Schools. @PhilstarNews pic.twitter.com/nAzMITJFsS
The Commission on Human Rights says it "partly welcomes" the Supreme Court decision that some parts of the controversial Anti-terrorism Law are unconstitutional.
CHR spokesperson Jacqueline de Guia says the commission remains hopeful that the remaining contentious provisions of the law will be clarified by the high cour in the full text of the decision.
"At the same time, our commitment remains in guarding against possible human rights violations arising from the implementation of the anti-terror law. We steadfastly remind the government that countering terrorism and protecting human rights are not competing values but are, in fact, mutual and complementary," De Guia says in a statement.
The Supreme Court has deliberated and voted on the controversial Anti-Terrorism Act but the decision will be released "at the soonest time possible."
"However, considering that there were numerous issues resolved in the case, as well as the fact that each Justice had to vote on each issue, there is a need to accurately confirm and tally the vote of each Justice in order to ensure the correct resolution of the Court per issue," SC spokesperson Brian Hosaka says.
The Anti-Terrorism Council designates the National Democratic Front of the Philippines, the panel that negotiates for communist rebels during peace talks a terrorist organization.
Previous designation of the Communist Party of the Philippines and New People's Army led to the designation of supposed members of the CPP's Central Committee. Among those designated as terorrists were peace consultants.
Designation gives the Anti-Terrorism Council the authority to investigate and freeze the accounts of designated persons.
The Anti-Terrorism Council has designated 29 people, including alleged members of the Communist Party of the Philippines-New People's Army, as terrorists in two resolutions.
Designation allows the Anti-Money Laundering Council to freeze the assets of those on the list.
- Latest
- Trending
