Our law enforcers deserve our congratulations and support for the major headway against terrorism over the weekend – dealing major blows to the Dawlah Islamiyah (DI) on one hand, and to the New People’s Army (NPA) on the other.
Salahuddin Hassan, the leader of DI in Mindanao, was reportedly killed in Maguindanao following a brief firefight. His wife, who was also killed in the operation, was reportedly the DI’s finance officer in Mindanao.
Meanwhile, Jorge Madlos (a.k.a. Ka Oris) was killed in an encounter with the Army’s 4th Infantry Division in Bukidnon last Saturday.
But the achievements also underscore the importance of trust, without which local residents would not have provided our forces with the information they needed.
The people have, in their own little way, shown they will not tolerate terrorism. I have been and I will continue to be one with them in this regard.
President Sittie Aliah Lumbao, Sittie NB Pasandalan, to the members, officers, and partners of the Association of Lady Shari’ah Counselors-At-Law of the Philippines Inc (ALSCAP) who made this event possible, good morning to all.
Violent extremism is complex by nature, occurs in all societies and is not bound by religion, race, or social class. While it is mostly grounded in the name of ideologies, beliefs, and faiths, the drivers of extremism are evolving. There remains no universal explanation and hence, no universal response to this dilemma across the community of nations.
One thing is certain: How the government reacts to the presence of violent extremism determines the extent and magnitude of its spread in our country. In theory, extremism instantly refers to unrestrained fear, danger, and coercion. Yet again, there is no better way of characterizing so than witnessing the acts firsthand, within our borders.
Something is very wrong with Lt. Gen. Parlade’s mindset. On its face, his statement clearly implying that a journalist “was aiding the terrorists” is careless and insensitive. I do not know how else any literate person can interpret that.
That said, I couldn’t care less what else comes out of his mouth, nor do I have anything to do with his quarrel with Ms. Tetch Torres-Tupas. My primary concern is the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 which I and my staff, as well as my fellow senators worked extra hard to afford the state an effective legal tool against terrorism while ensuring that the Bill of Rights is protected, especially that the law is now facing some serious challenges before the Supreme Court.
If Lt. Gen. Parlade wants to help enlighten the magistrates as he claims, he can do it better by not talking about terrorism.
It is called resource denial operations and rightly so, in order to tighten the noose on the financial and logistical needs of the CPP-NPA.
That being said, the non-traditional left-hand/right-hand approach must still be applied by welcoming back to the fold their members, making sure that they will be treated justly and ensuring their personal safety – the same way the earlier surrenderees who appeared before our Senate red-tagging hearings a few weeks ago are being treated.
Having the momentum with the series of successful operations against the CPP-NPA who are now officially a “designated terrorist group” by virtue of the authority vested by the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 upon the Anti-Terrorism Council, I doubt if the security sector will recommend the resumption of centralized peace talks to the President, more so after they validated the information that after all, peace talks are just part and parcel of their long-drawn strategy to consolidate their forces and stop the momentum gained by the security forces.
“As far as we are concerned, a dead NPA rebel or a dead soldier is only as bad and tragic as a dead Filipino. For we see no difference at all except probably the cause that they fought and died for.” – Sen. Ping Lacson, at the start of the third Senate committee hearing on alleged red-tagging.
Mapapawi na ang takot ng ilang sektor at agam-agam ng mga awtoridad sa pagpapatupad ng Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 ngayong lumabas na ang Implementing Rules and Regulations nito.
Ayon kay Senador Panfilo Lacson na pangunahing nagsulong at nag-sponsor ng naturang batas noong ito ay nasa Senado pa lamang, maliwanag sa 48-pahina ng IRR ng Anti-Terror Law na tumatalima ito sa Bill of Rights sa ilalim ng 1987 Constitution.
“As the principal sponsor of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 in the Senate, I hope that the release of the law’s IRR will now enlighten our law enforcement officers as well as Armed Forces of the Philippines personnel, so they will be properly guided in performing their all-important mission of protecting our citizens from the indiscriminate and merciless acts of terrorism that can only be perpetrated by people with the ugliest and most senseless ideologies,” paliwanag ni Lacson.
The release of the implementing rules and regulations (IRR) for the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 should enlighten not just our security forces but also the law’s critics and doubters, Sen. Panfilo M. Lacson said.
Lacson, who sponsored the measure in the Senate, noted the 48-page IRR places great emphasis on adherence to the Bill of Rights in the 1987 Constitution.
“As the principal sponsor of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 in the Senate, I hope that the release of the law’s IRR will now enlighten our law enforcement officers as well as Armed Forces of the Philippines personnel, so they will be properly guided in performing their all-important mission of protecting our citizens from the indiscriminate and merciless acts of terrorism that can only be perpetrated by people with the ugliest and most senseless ideologies,” Lacson said.
Posibleng ang pinaghihinalaang Indonesian suicide bomber na naaresto sa Sulu ang maging pangunang halimbawa o “test case” ng pagpapatupad ng Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020, partikular na sa provision sa “inchoate offenses.”
Ayon kay Senador Panfilo Lacson, ang mga nakuhang pampasabog at gamit sa pagpapasabog sa suspek na si Nana Isirani (a.k.a Rezky Fantasya Rullie o Cici) ay indikasyong naghahanda ito para sa isang pag-atake.
“This is one example of an inchoate offense made punishable under the new Anti-Terrorism Law. By including inchoate offenses as punishable acts under the new measure, we are criminalizing the foregoing acts of the arrested suspects which include planning, preparation and facilitation of terrorism and possession of objects with knowledge or intent that these are to be used in the preparation for the commission of terrorism,” paliwanag ni Lacson, sponsor sa nabanggit na batas sa Senado, sa kanyang pagsasalita sa Philippine Army Multi-Sector Advisory Board Summit.
Si Rullie, kasama ang dalawa pang babaeng pinaniniwalaang mga asawa ng mga galamay ng Abu Sayyaf, ay naaresto sa Sulu noong Oktubre 10. Nakuha sa kanila ang mga nabanggit na gamit ng pampasabog na nakaipit sa vest.
A suspected Indonesian suicide bomber who was arrested in Sulu over the weekend looms as a potential test case for the newly signed Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 – particularly its provision penalizing “inchoate offenses.”
Sen. Panfilo M. Lacson noted Tuesday that the bombs and other items seized from Nana Isirani (a.k.a. Rezky Fantasya Rullie or Cici) indicated she was preparing to take part in a terrorist attack.
Rullie was arrested with two other women believed to be wives of Abu Sayyaf members in Jolo, Sulu last Oct. 10. Authorities confiscated items including an improvised explosive device disguised as a vest, container pipes, and a nine-volt battery.
“This is one example of an inchoate offense made punishable under the new Anti-Terrorism Law. By including inchoate offenses as punishable acts under the new measure, we are criminalizing the foregoing acts of the arrested suspects which include planning, preparation and facilitation of terrorism and possession of objects with knowledge or intent that these are to be used in the preparation for the commission of terrorism,” Lacson, who sponsored the anti-terrorism measure in the Senate, said in his speech before the Philippine Army Multi-Sector Advisory Board Summit.
My distinguished colleague and chairperson of the Philippine Army MSAB Governance Committee, Sen. Manny Pacquiao; Philippine Army Commanding General Lt. Gen Cirilito Sobejana; Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) Assistant Secretary Alexander Macario; Davao de Oro Governor Tyron Uy; Vice Commander of the Philippine Army Reynaldo Aquino; members of the Philippine Army Multi-Sector Advisory Board; men and women of the Hukbong Katihan ng Pilipinas, a pleasant morning to all.
Stating his strong position on the issue before the community of nations, many of whom are leaders of countries that continue to grapple with the threats of terrorism, made it more significant.
Indeed, terrorism is a threat that knows no timing nor borders as shown in recent bombings in our own turf. This led us to pass the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 that contains the needed legal backbone to let our security forces implement the law with efficacy and confidence, even proactively – as well as the needed safeguards to curb potential abuse and violation of the 1987 Constitution.
Now that the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 is in effect, the Filipino people are assured of a law that allows the Philippines to mount the needed strong response against the threat of terrorism.
As the one who painstakingly sponsored the measure in the Senate, I will not allow anyone to pervert the legislative intent of the law, thus my commitment to go the extra mile in guarding against possible abuse in its implementation.
It is the responsibility of all Filipinos to see to it the law is implemented properly – meaning, it is meant to go after terrorists and not anyone else. Thus, the efforts of some groups to similarly keep watch against abuses despite the safeguards already in place are very much welcome, so long as they avail of the proper venues and follow safety protocols.
That said, we cannot afford to have disinformation campaigns aimed to make the public reject the Anti-Terrorism Law. Terrorism knows no timing or borders. I hope the day will not come that critics of the law – especially those behind the disinformation drives – will not be at the receiving end of terrorist attacks.
To the Inquirer: Please allow us to set the record straight regarding some points raised by former Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio in his Inquirer column, where he said Sen. Panfilo M. Lacson, along with President Duterte, are “sadly mistaken” with regard to the Communist Party of the Philippines-New People’s Army (CPP-NPA) as terrorists.
And unlike their Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001, our law does not allow one-party consent in the conduct of electronic or technical surveillance.
While our Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 is replete with safeguards to ensure that human rights of suspected terrorists are observed and protected, what the US Congress passed as their version of an Anti-Terrorism law is much stronger, even cruel to some extent because their policy makers and citizenry give the highest premium to the security of their country and the protection of US citizens stationed anywhere in the world.
Obviously, the President was referring to the designation of the CPP-NPA as a terrorist group by the Anti-Terrorism Council in late 2017 as authorized by Sec. 11 of Republic Act 10168, the Terrorist Financing Prevention and Suppression Act of 2012, following the standards set by the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373. It paved the way for the filing of a proscription case by the DOJ, which is now pending before a Manila Regional Trial Court.
Among the provisions of the newly signed Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 is a restatement of Sec. 11 under RA 10168 – we simply added the mechanism for the freezing of assets by the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC).
Thus, there is nothing illegal in the action by the Chief Executive to proclaim that the CPP-NPA is a designated terrorist organization after the Anti-Terrorism Council (ATC) has ruled on the matter.
What I simply clarified when asked to comment on the declaration made by the President is the difference between designationand proscription. Designation is administrative and can be exercised by the Executive Branch through the ATC, while proscription is judicial which only the RTC (under the now-repealed Human Security Act of 2007) and the Court of Appeals (under the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020) has the power to decide.
In the case of proscription, the burden of proof lies with the Department of Justice. Even membership of a proscribed terrorist organization undergoes the same due process of law – meaning the Court of Appeals will decide who may be identified as members and subsequently arrested.
Unfortunately, designation and proscription have been used interchangeably – and conveniently at that – by critics of the Anti-Terrorism Law to advance their purpose of asserting that mere designation may result in arrest and detention, thus giving the ATC judicial powers under RA 11479 – which is wrong, if not malicious.
If in “declaring” a group, organization or association as a terrorist organization, the President is referring to its proscription, there is a judicial process involved – meaning full court intervention via the Court of Appeals, complete with due notice and hearing.
Under the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020, only the Court of Appeals can order the proscription – not the Anti-Terrorism Council, nor the President. Further, the burden of proof lies with the Department of Justice. Even membership in a proscribed terrorist group goes through the same due process which the DOJ has to prove.
On the other hand, if the President is referring to the designation of a terrorist individual, group and organization by the ATC, it does not involve arrest and detention but a mere signal for the ATC to request the Anti-Money Laundering Council to issue a freeze order of the accounts and assets of the designated terrorist person or group.
That said, designation for the purpose of freezing the accounts and assets is not exempt from judicial scrutiny since the said designated individual or group can still file a petition with the CA to appeal such freezing of their accounts. Designation follows the guidelines and standards set by the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373. It is not absolute or discretionary on the part of the ATC.
Therefore, the “declaration” is a personal opinion of the President, not official. The trial of the proscription case against the CPP-NPA is still pending before the Manila RTC. With the passage of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020, the trial will be transferred to a division of the Court of Appeals to be authorized by the Supreme Court.
As long as the terrorists can achieve their intent and purpose of inflicting maximum damage to life and property in order to sow fear and intimidate the general public, they will strike at any opportunity.
In an interview on DZBB/GMA News TV, Sen. Lacson answered questions on the Anti-Terrorism Law: * active role of the Commission on Human Rights in the Anti-Terror Law [10:31] * encouraging the filing of petitions on the Anti-Terrorism Law to boost public discussion [14:48]
In an interview on DWIZ, Sen. Lacson answered questions on:
* Anti-Terror Bill to be questioned before the Supreme Court [10:01]
* goals of Senate inquiry into Jolo incident [34:24]
* PH warning vs China over military exercises [40:34]
* special session for Bayanihan 2 [42:39]
I abhor violations of the legislative process, and have called out members of Congress for such acts – such as when they inserted their pork barrel in the National Budget bill after its approval on third and final reading or ratification of the bicameral conference committee report, and before the bill was enrolled.
Why, then, would I make such a stealthy insertion to the Anti-Terrorism Bill as Robles implies?
Republic Act 11479, sponsored in the Senate by Sen. Panfilo M. Lacson, is An Act to Prevent, Prohibit and Penalize Terrorism, Thereby Repealing Republic Act 9372, Otherwise Known as the Human Security Act of 2007. It gives the Philippines a strong legal backbone against the threat of terrorism.
Much credit goes to President Rodrigo Duterte. With all the pressure coming from different directions against the signing of the Anti-Terrorism Bill into law, at the end of the day, it is his strong political will that mattered most.
I cannot imagine this measure being signed under another administration. If only for this, I take my hat off to the President.
In an interview on PTV-4’s Laging Handa public briefing, Sen. Lacson answered questions on:
* Why the Anti-Terrorism Bill is urgent [21:12]
* DOH leadership woes in dealing with COVID-19 threat [23:15]
* National ID’s value amid pandemic [24:56]
* Implementing the GMRC Law [28:03]
In a phone patch interview on DZBB and GMA News TV, Sen. Lacson notes the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 that was passed in the Senate will lead to a more proactive fight against terrorism, while containing safeguards to prevent possible abuses.
At the Kapihan sa Senado forum, Sen. Lacson answered questions on:
– Passage of the proposed Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020
– Senate’s planned petition before the Supreme Court regarding VFA abrogation
– Congress’ possible actions regarding ABS-CBN’s franchise
In an interview with media in Lingayen, Pangasinan, Sen. Lacson answered questions on:
– VP Robredo’s claim that the war vs drugs is a ‘massive failure’
– Filipinos affected by tension in the Middle East
– pork in the 2020 budget
– PNP physical fitness policy
In an interview on DWIZ Sen. Lacson answered questions on:
– ‘early’ signing of the 2020 budget in January 2020
– reinstatement of cops acquitted in Maguindanao massacre case
– NPA hit list and anti-terror bill
– assessment of 2019 and expectations in 2020
“To further aid our law enforcement authorities in their obligation to protect the Filipino people, there is a need to provide an alternative option to the rigorous and time-consuming process of securing a court order that will still respect and comply with the right to privacy.”
Thank you, Mr. President. Distinguished colleagues, I have the honor to report on the Senate floor Senate Bill No. 1083 entitled “An Act Amending Certain Provisions of Republic Act No. 9372,” otherwise Known as “An Act to Secure the State and Protect Our People from Terrorism,” as embodied in Committee Report No. 9 in substitution of Senate Bill Numbers 6, 21, and 30.
The amendment to the Human Security Act of 2007 is among the unfinished business of the 17th Congress. Almost eight months ago, I stood here to sponsor the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2019. Unfortunately, time was not on our side to deliberate on the said measure. Since then, the Filipino people have already been confronted by a number of terrorist attacks. As we speak, terrorist groups are probably planning their next attacks.
Mr. President, we have seen a mutation in the way terrorist groups perpetrate their evil acts since the passage of the Human Security Act. We have seen the phenomenon of terrorism become more complex and malevolent. We have seen how the ISIS’ tactics have changed as the terror group continues to lose ground in Iraq and Syria, how their members and sympathizers are taking the fight here in Southeast Asia.
At the hearing of the Senate Committee on Public Order and Dangerous Drugs, Sen. Lacson stressed the need for proactive measures to prevent the recruitment of students, especially minors, to the New People’s Army by its legal fronts.
“Yung point ko lang, magkaroon tayo ng proactive move para matigilan ang ultimate objective ng nagre-recruit na isali sa NPA. Pag naroon at armado na, nasa point of no return kasi pwede makasagupa ng sundalo at pulis.”
“This is (an) internal security and law enforcement problem. Balik tayo sa battle for hearts and minds.”
Bilang bahagi ng kanyang krusada para sa kapayapaan at katahimikan ng bansa laban sa karahasan, muling isinulong ni Senador Panfilo Lacson ang panukalang naglalayong pigilin ang nagbabantang pagkalat ng terorismo sa bansa.
Sa Senate Bill 21 na inihain ni Lacson, ninanais nitong amyendahan ang Republic Act 9372 o ang Human Security Act of 2007 upang mas mabigyan ng lakas ang mga mahihinang probisyon na maaring gamitin ng mga teroristang nagbabalak maghasik ng karahasan sa bansa.
“This bill aims to give the government an effective legal framework that would enable it to have a criminal justice response to terrorism. This measure seeks to provide our law enforcement with enough tools to conduct investigations that would enable to them to prevent terrorist attacks before they happen, or in case they are unable to do so, at least bring the perpetrators to justice,” paliwanag ni Lacson sa kanyang panukala.
To combat the continued global threat of terrorism, Sen. Panfilo M. Lacson has filed a bill that gives the Philippine government more tools to protect the public from this menace.
Senate Bill 21 plugs the loopholes in Republic Act 9372 (the Human Security Act of 2007) so Philippine authorities can prevent terrorist attacks or bring the perpetrators to justice.
“This bill aims to give the government an effective legal framework that would enable it to have a criminal justice response to terrorism. This measure seeks to provide our law enforcement with enough tools to conduct investigations that would enable to them to prevent terrorist attacks before they happen, or in case they are unable to do so, at least bring the perpetrators to justice,” Lacson said in his bill.
In both formal and informal occasions, I often stress that this is the point in my life where I certainly have more yesterdays than tomorrows. I tell you, as I gaze into my ‘yesterdays,’ I cannot help but realize how much has really changed in every aspect of our lives.
Let me share with you — in the late 1950s, when I was a young elementary student in a sleepy town of Imus, Cavite, I had a vivid memory of a lone policeman we simply referred to as “Kabo.”
He was a highly esteemed and respected man assigned to keep peace and order in our almost obscure barangay called Barrio Bayanluma then.
From The Manila Times: “The first line of defense against violent extremism, I believe, is education; creating awareness and cultivating our young people’s critical thinking and resilience will equip them with skills they need to detect and reject violent extremism and make informed decisions and contest extremist ideologies,” (Lacson) said.
Matatapos na ang kalituhang dinaranas ng publiko sa pagtawag sa ranggo ng mga kapulisan at sundalo dahil ganap nang nilagdaan ng Pangulong Rodrigo Duterte ang batas na nagtatama sa mga ito.
Ang Republic Act 11200 na para sa PNP rank classification ay kabilang sa mga pinakahuling batas na nilagdaan ng Pangulo na una nang itinulak at inisponsor ni Senador at dating PNP Chief Panfilo Lacson sa Senado.
Sa ilalim ng naturang batas, klinaro na ang mga ranggo ng PNP sa mga katugmang katungkulan ng mga ito.
“This measure eliminates confusion on how our law enforcers must be addressed, and brings our policemen closer to the populace. More importantly, this allows for better coordination between the PNP and other law enforcement units in countering terrorism and other threats to national security,” paliwanag ni Lacson.
Filipinos stand to benefit twofold from a new law authored by Sen. Panfilo M. Lacson that provides for rank classification in the Philippine National Police.
President Rodrigo Duterte signed Republic Act 11200, which standardizes the way PNP officers are called, into law last Feb. 8.
“This measure eliminates confusion on how our law enforcers must be addressed, and brings our policemen closer to the populace. More importantly, this allows for better coordination between the PNP and other law enforcement units in countering terrorism and other threats to national security,” said Lacson, who headed the PNP from 1999 to 2001.
At the outset, let me state here and now with certainty that a vote for the immediate passage of this measure is a vote for the immediate lifting of Martial Law in Mindanao.
Mr. President, fellow members of this august chamber, I have the honor to report on the Senate floor Senate Bill No. 2204 entitled, “An Act Amending Certain Provisions of Republic Act No. 9372, Otherwise Known As “An Act To Secure the State and Protect our People from Terrorism,” as embodied in Committee Report No. 638 in substitution of Senate Bill Numbers 1134, 1396, 1715 and 1956.
Dahil posibleng nagagamit na rin ang mga social media platforms sa paghahasik ng terorismo, pinag-aaralan ng Senado kung mapapabilang na ang mga ito sa mga babantayan ng pamahalaan.
Sa pagdinig ng Senate Committee on Public Order and Illegal Drugs sa panukalang mas pinatapang na Anti-Terror Law, isiniwalat ni Senador Panfilo Lacson, chairman ng naturang komite, na inaaral nila kung tututukan ang “socmed” accounts na ginagamit para palaganapin ang terorismo.
“We must be clear. The state must take immediate action in the exercise of its police powers to address the threat of terrorism,” paliwanag ni Lacson.
Nguni’t tiniyak ng mambabatas na kung matutuloy ito, hindi nito babanggain ang kalayaan ng pamamahayag sa ilalim ng ating Saligang Batas.
“This is in the context of the state dealing with terrorism, and as such it needs immediate action in the exercise of its police powers to abate terrorism,” ani Lacson.
Harsh penalties may await not just those who directly commit terrorist acts, but also those who abuse social media and money transfer services to further terrorist ends.
Sen. Panfilo M. Lacson said Tuesday they are studying the inputs on the issues, which were raised at a Senate hearing on anti-terrorism legislation.
“We must be clear. The state must take immediate action in the exercise of its police powers to address the threat of terrorism,” said Lacson, who chairs the Senate Committee on Public Order and Dangerous Drugs that headed the hearing.
But he stressed they will make sure such provisions do not violate the Constitutional rights to freedom of speech and freedom of expression.
“This is in the context of the state dealing with terrorism, and as such it needs immediate action in the exercise of its police powers to abate terrorism,” Lacson said.
In an interview on DWIZ, Sen. Lacson answered questions on:
– situation of detained Sen. de Lima
– options for new Customs Commissioner Guerrero
– PNPA sex scandal as a ‘test case’ for the Anti-Hazing Law of 2018
– proposed Anti-Terrorism Act of 2018
– Sen. Honasan being eyed to head DICT
Posibleng maipasa ang mas pinalakas at mas makapangyarihang Anti-Terror Law ng Pilipinas bago matapos ang kasalukuyang taon.
Niraratsada na kasi ng Senate Committee on Public Order and Illegal Drugs sa pamumuno ni Senador Panfilo Lacson ang mga panukalang naglalayong palakasin pa ang mga nilalaman ng kasalukuyang batas laban sa terorismo, ang Human Security Act of 2007.
Sa mga panukalang dinidinig ng komite ni Lacson, mas binibigyan ng karapatan ang mga awtoridad na pag-aralan ang kilos ng mga pinaghihinalaang kalaban ng estado kasabay ng pangangalaga sa mga karapatang pantao ng mga ito.
Amid the continuing threat of terrorism, there is no time to waste in passing a stronger, balanced, and useful measure to stop it, Sen. Panfilo M. Lacson said.
Lacson said he is working to fast-track such a measure, which gives authorities more flexibility while upholding human rights, before Congress goes on Christmas break.
“There is no time to waste. Our present anti-terrorism law, the Human Security Act, is already 11 years old, yet no person or organization has ever been prosecuted under it. From 2007 to 2018, the law’s only ‘accomplishment’ was the proscription of the Abu Sayyaf as a terrorist group,” Lacson said.
“We understand the predicament of law enforcers. All they seek is a little flexibility. But we will also make sure respect for human rights will be primordial,” he added.