Ang tama ay IPAGLABAN. Ang mali ay LABANAN.
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:
Continue reading “#PINGterview: Kailangang Kailangan Natin ang Batas vs Malaking Banta ng Terorismo”
Tatlong maiiksi subali’t klarong pagsasalarawan ang naging tugon ni Senador Panfilo Lacson, sponsor ng Anti-Terrorism Bill sa Senado, sa maling akala na naging dahilan ng pagkabahala ng Integrated Bar of the Philippines sa ilang nilalaman ng naturang panukala.
Ang Anti-Terrorism Bill ay mabilis, mabisa at naaayon sa Saligang Batas, maiksing tugon ni Lacson sa pahayag ng nabanggit na grupo ng mga abogado.
“The Anti-Terrorism Bill speaks clear of our swift, effective, and constitutional policy against these acts of terror and against no one else but its perpetrators,” ayon kay Lacson sa kanyang sulat kay IBP President Domingo Egon Q. Cayosa.
Related: Lacson Rectifies IBP Misconceptions: Anti-Terrorism Bill Swift, Effective, Constitutional
Continue reading “Ping sa IBP: Anti-Terror Bill Matulin, Mabisa, Naaayon sa Saligang Batas”
Sen. Panfilo M. Lacson on Tuesday rectified the misconceptions of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines about the proposed Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020, as he maintained the measure aims to combat terrorism in a “swift, effective and constitutional” manner.
In a letter-reply to IBP president Domingo Egon Q. Cayosa, Lacson addressed the IBP’s concerns about parts of the bill, including the Anti-Terrorism Council (ATC).
“The Anti-Terrorism Bill speaks clear of our swift, effective, and constitutional policy against these acts of terror and against no one else but its perpetrators,” he said.
Related: Ping sa IBP: Anti-Terror Bill Matulin, Mabisa, Naaayon sa Saligang Batas
Continue reading “Lacson Rectifies IBP Misconceptions: Anti-Terrorism Bill Swift, Effective, Constitutional”
I will be as eagle-eyed and vigilant and more in guarding against abuses in the implementation of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 because I will regard any abuse as a bigger challenge, since I am going all in on this.
“Taya pati pamato na ako rito,” not just because I was the principal sponsor of the measure who painstakingly defended its constitutionality and strict compliance to the Bill of Rights with the help of most of my colleagues who interpellated and proposed their amendments to further enhance the safeguards which I accommodated, as long as we would not come up with another dead-letter law like its predecessor, the Human Security Act of 2007.
Having said that, Section 29, which is now the focus of so many challenges on its constitutionality, is merely a restatement of the same provision in Republic Act 9732 which was originally proposed by a legal eagle in the person of Sen. Franklin Drilon, accepted by an equally great legal mind in Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile, then principal sponsor, and voted favorably upon by other legal luminaries in the previous Senate such as the late Senators Aquilino Pimentel Jr., Miriam Defensor-Santiago, and Senators Richard Gordon and Pia Cayetano, to name a few.
Not only that: the same Section 29 underwent further scrutiny in the ensuing bicameral conference with the help of the more eminent members of the House panel, namely: the late Rep. Simeon Datumanong, former DOJ secretary; Reps. Douglas Cagas, Louie Villafuerte, Antonio Cuenco, Edcel Lagman, and Teddy Boy Locsin Jr., now DFA secretary, among others.
With so many illustrious names in the law profession going through the same provision – “having been duly authorized in writing by the ATC, having taken custody of…” how could a layman and perpetual law student like me doubt the constitutionality of the said Sec 29?
The only difference is that the ATB which I sponsored in the Senate has more added safeguards like the immediate notification in writing or the nearest judge where the warrantless arrest was made in compliance with Rule 113, Sec 5 of the Rules of Court, the CHR and the ATC itself which are not present under RA 9732.
Need I say more?
*****
Kung naging mapanuri na siya noong tinatalakay pa lamang ito sa kanyang komite sa Senado, mas maigting na pagbabantay ang gagawin ni Senador Panfilo Lacson oras na maging batas na ang Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020.
Tiniyak ito ni Lacson bilang tugon sa mga nagpapahayag ng pagkabahala at pagkatakot sa magiging uri ng pagpapatupad ng mga awtoridad oras na ganap nang maging batas ang panukala.
Ayon kay Lacson, hindi biro ang pinagdaaanan sa Senado ng naturang panukala para lamang matiyak ang paglagay ng safeguards, kaya hindi niya papayagan na masalaula ang implementasyon nito.
“The Anti-Terrorism Bill is the wrong tree to bark up. I vow to join those who are concerned, genuinely or otherwise, about the proposed law’s implementation to be as vigilant in monitoring each and every wrongful implementation by our security forces, even to the point of joining them in street protests, just like what I did before during the time of former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo,” mariing pahayag ni Lacson.
Related: Lacson Ready to Join Street Protests if Anti-Terrorism Measure Abused
Continue reading “Pag Inabuso ang Anti-Terrorism Law, Ping Sasama sa Martsa”