In an interview on SMNI, Sen. Lacson answered questions on the proposed Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020:
* ATB compliant with the 1987 Constitution [0:17]
* powers of the Anti-Terrorism Council [7:13]
* upholding of human rights [13:48]
* need for a legal backbone vs the threat of terrorism [14:56]
QUOTES and NOTES:
Constitutionality of the Anti-Terrorism Bill:
“Unang una, pinaka-highlight nito, ito umaayon sa ating Saligang Batas. Mali ang mga lumalabas na balita na ito ay lumalabag sa Bill of Rights, Art III sa ating Saligang Batas, at unconstitutional ang provision. Mali yan.”
“Kailangan natin yan. 9th tayo sa Global Terrorism Index sa buong mundo na negatively impacted ng terrorism. Sa SE Asia tayo ang nangunguna. Napakahina ng umiiral na batas na 2007 HSA naging dead-letter law.”
“May kasabihan, water cannot be above its source. Ang source nito ang Saligang Batas, so ang tubig na dadaloy dito di pwede mas mataas pa.”
“Ako umaasa mapipirmahan kasi kailangang kailangan natin ito. Ang katulong naman namin nagbalangkas nito di lang security cluster, ang NSA, NICA, DND, DILG, kundi dumulog pa rin tayo sa pamahalaan ng Australia.”
“Maganda ang balangkas ng kanilang batas. Sa US, nagkonsulta tayo. Sa EU, nagkonsulta tayo. Ito ang mga strong democracies. Papayagan ba nila tayo na tinulungan tayo magbalangkas nito, papayagan kaya nila tayo na o kayo sa PH mag-violate kayo ng HR or civil rights? Sila ang puna ng puna eh.”
Due Process and Other Safeguards in the Anti-Terrorism Bill:
“Maski anong terrorist organization, basta naideklara na proscribed group or organization, madedeklarang terrorist organization. Ang US, website ng US State Department, ang CPP-NPA designated na ito as terrorist organization noon pang 2002. Sa atin naka-pending sa Manila RTC. Pero dahil pag napirmahan ang bagong batas na magre-repeal sa HSA in-elevate natin ang level ng korte para sa pag-proscribe. Dati RTC; sa ATB, CA na magpo-proscribe.”
“Maliwanag sa definition sa panukalang batas, ang parang parameters na inilagay namin dito ang nature and context kailangan ma-establish ang intent purpose ng act. Kasi 5 ang nakapaloob. Pero ano ang intent and purpose mo sa paggawa ng mga pinagbabawal sa panukalang batas? Kung di papasok sa intent and purpose and the very nature and context ng sinagawa mong krimen hindi siya papasok.”
“May proviso pa rito, basta hindi included ang advocacy, protest, dissent, industrial strikes, hindi kasama. Maliwanag yan naka-qualify. Ang panuntunan talaga Bill of Rights. Ang lumabas sa Bill of Rights, madedeklarang unconstitutional ito.”
Powers of the Anti-Terrorism Council:
“Ang ATC, nariyan na yan noong 2007 pa, hindi ito created under ATB. Ang nagpasok niyan sponsor noon si Sen JPE. Ang papel lang ng ATC, administrative kasi executive ito, di ito mag-exercise ng tinatawag na judicial at quasi-judicial powers, hindi sila pwede mag-exercise noon kasi administrative ito. Sinasabi nila ito isang disinformation na pwede mag-utos ang ATC na mang-aresto. Maling mali yan kasi nakasaad dito di naman natin pwede i-amend ang Rule 113 ng Sec 5 ng revised Rules of Court. Ang pwede lang magbago noon SC. Di pwede kasuhan ng legislation kasi Rules of Court. Rule 113 ito ang warrantless arrest, ang citizen’s arrest. Pag kitang kita mo about to commit, actually committing or just committed at nakita ng pulis o citizen o civilian, pwede arestuhin yan kasi kagaganap ng krimen at meron siyang probable cause based on personal knowledge na ang aarestuhin nagsagawa ng krimen o magsasagawa ng krimen. Naroon pa ito, di pa binago yan.”
“Ang source of controversy dahil Sec 29, maski si Justice Carpio sabi niya pwede i-challenge on constitutional grounds. Explain namin ito, sinulatan ko ang IBP kasi ito ang kanilang observation.”
“Sinasabi roon na ‘authorized in writing’ ng ATC, ito ang deputies kasi may nagde-deputize. Ang complextity ng krimen ng terrorism napakalawak at kailangan diyan especially trained to handle custodial investigation. Ang sinasabi nating written authorization ng ATC, ito i-issue sa mga made-deputize na member ng NBI, PNP, AFP. Sila ang magkakaroon siguro by way of a memorandum order, sila magko-compose ng tawagin na nating counter-terrorism group. Kung ordinaryong pulis makahuli ng terrorism suspect base sa Rule 113, wala silang expertise to interrogate or investigate. So agad-agad ang deputized dahil may training ito ang iba pumunta abroad para mag-training paano mag-handle ng custodial investigation, so papasok sa eksena yan. Yan ang may written authorization.”
“Absurd or illogical mag-issue ng written authorization ang ATC e saklaw na nga yan ng warrantless arrest. Immediate in nature pag warrantless arrest nasas lugar. Maghihintay ka pa ba ng written authorization sa ATC? Di na kailangan kasi nasa batas na pwede umaresto pag saklaw ng Rule 113 warrantless arrest.”
“(Ang ATC), monitoring, policy making. Maski ang pag-freeze ng account … hindi pwede mag-freeze ng account ang ATC. Sila lang magsusulat sa AMLC. Ang AMLC kasi may batas diyan ang RA 10168 terrorist financing. Sila ang pwede mag-freeze ng account immediately pero di naman magtatapos doon. Ang may-ari ng account na na-freeze pwede dumulog sa CA para question-in. At walang papel ang ATC kundi mag-request sa AMLC.”
“Umiiral pa rin ang Bank Secrecy Act pero ito kasi malawak ang financing. Sa Marawi ang pumasok na pondo na hindi na-check kasi mahina ang ating batas napakalaki. Bilyon ang pumasok diyan na magpondo sa Marawi siege dahil international ito. Kasi ISIS-affiliated. Alam mo ba ng ISIS nakacontrol ng oil wells nang nagkagulo sa Iraq, ang dami niang pera. Sila ngayon kung gusto mag-estabish ng caliphate at napili nila ang Marawi, doon sila sana magtatayo ng caliphate, under control, lalawak ito palawak sa Mindanao at pwede makarating sa Visayas at Luzon at buong bansa.”
Public Discourse Encouraged:
“Ine-encourage namin ang public discourse, huwag naman sana masobrahan ang disinformation kasi marami sa ating kababayan naliligaw, na-fake news.”
*****
MOVEMENT FOR LAW AND JUSTICE
Statement of Support for Anti-Terrorism Bill
Let us agree that terrorism threatens our national security; that it is a global, organized, well-funded army of fully-armed killers, marauders, rapists and looters; wantonly destructive, merciless, with no other objective but to overthrow governments, kill dissenters and dissent, seize properties, take over and rule. It’s total chaos and madness from thereon.
Let us also agree that we need to do something to fight it. One way to do it is through a strong, vibrant, forceful law. Not later, now. And we have such a bill, passed by our lawmakers, through the initiative of Sen. Panfilo Lacson, a known and feared crime-fighter, and this bill is intended precisely to do that. Opportunely, it is now up for approval of the President. We can’t afford to miss this golden opportunity; if we lose this chance, we’d probably not have another Anti-Terrorism bill of this kind for a long time to come.
Some sectors have raised questions about the constitutionality of some of its provisions. Some are well-meaning; others are not. These constitutional challenges may have a basis in fact and in law; also maybe not. The undeniable fact is that those who say the bill is unconstitutional are as many as those who say it is constitutional. In the final analysis, it is and will be the Supreme Court that will finally decide on it.
Let us not allow these challenges to hinder approval of a bill that we all agree we need NOW ! the timing is just right : a strong Anti-terrorism law, a strong President. We cannot afford another 9/11 World Trade Center attack or another Marawi. We cannot be complacent, shrug our shoulders and say “Maybe later” or “It will not happen to us” “Let’s wait for better times.”” We can’t trust the police”, “not in Duterte’s time” when terrorism and terrorists are probably lurking, waiting to attack. Let’s fight terrorism NOW !
[Staff] Thank you for your support for the Anti-Terrorism BIll!