Kiko fears ATA gives authorities leeway to enforce might
Sen. Kiko Pangilinan claimed Monday that the Anti-Terrorism Act gives authorities leeway to enforce their might.
Pangilinan said the implementing rules and regulations (IRR) of the Anti-Terrorism Act provides two provisions that seek to temper the impact of the law on the rights of the people ‘’but the broad definitions remain, giving authorities the leeway to enforce its might.’’
He expressed hopes that the Supreme Court would soon start its hearing on the many petitions questioning the constitutionality of the Act and the practicality of implementing the law.
Last Friday night, the Anti-Terror Council (ATC) published the IRR of the law which emphasizes that speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems, and banners, among others, could be considered as forms of inciting to commit terrorism.
Pangilinan said two features were added in the IRR stating that designated terrorists can seek to delist themselves after a process, and that law enforcement will need to submit to the anti-terror council a sworn statement about the terror suspect before warrantless arrest and prolonged detention.
However, he said, the IRR maintained the broad definition of terror act that could overwhelm the provisions in the IRR, he pointed out.
‘’Warrantless arrests are still permitted even without a written authorization provided that a case can be filed against the suspects within 36 hours,” Pangilinan said.
“And, if agents can submit a sworn statement and secure a written authority before the lapse of 36 hours, a suspect can still be detained for a maximum of 24 days,” he said. “Unfortunately, the overarching provisions are kept in the law that could always overrule these so-called windows in the IRR,” he added.
Pangilinan reiterated that “the law may be used as a weapon – not only against the real terrorists, but against individuals and groups with legitimate concerns and criticisms against the government.”
‘’We will continue to defend people's welfare, safety, and rights,” Pangilinan said.
“As the IRR cannot go beyond what the law provides, we are not surprised that it maintains the broad definition of terror acts,” he said. ‘’We are hoping that the High Tribunal exercises its power to strike provisions of law that go against our constitutional order,” he added.