But other governments around the world do not have to be helpless bystanders to the erosion of Philippine democracy. The law will automatically go into effect on July 9, unless Duterte blocks it. Before that crucial date, governments must pressure Duterte to reject the anti-terrorism law itself. When it comes into force on July 9, a constitutional trial will await legislation from the country`s most influential lawyers` organization. At this point, other governments must monitor and support these legal challenges to ensure they receive a legitimate hearing. As the Philippines moves closer and closer to the rule of law, world leaders working on the pandemic must raise their voices and remain vigilant to save Philippine democracy. A new crime, incitement to terrorism, is particularly problematic, rights defenders say. The text states that incitement to others by ”speeches, writings, proclamations, emblems, banners and other representations that serve the same purpose” could result in a sentence of 12 years in prison. Think of Egypt, which passed an anti-terrorism law in 2015 that allows police to detain suspects without a warrant for eight days and criminalize incitement to terrorism ”by any means.” After peaceful protests erupted in April 2016, Egyptian security forces arrested 382 people for incitement, posting fake news on social media and promoting terrorist crimes. Police also cracked down on criticism of President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi during the 2018 election season.
At least thirty-six prominent activists and journalists have been arrested and prosecuted for peacefully criticizing Egypt`s anti-terrorism law. Some of the accused were associated with opposition parties and movements. Egypt is now the third worst prison guard for journalists (linked to Saudi Arabia), according to the Committee to Protect Journalists. With the exception of one journalist detained in Egypt in 2019, all have been charged with terrorism. Human Rights Watch notes that ”the government of Sisi.. attempted to criminalize peaceful dissent, often by branding dissidents as terrorists and punishing them with long prison terms. The government says it needs the anti-terrorism law to fight the uprisings. Most countries have anti-terrorism laws. The Philippines is no exception Greenpeace`s Southeast Asia office has been pushing for the repeal of the 2020 anti-terrorism law because of its ”comprehensive definition of terrorism,” which it says could be misused to crack down on dissent. [71] The Duterte government`s poor human rights record has heightened fears about the new anti-terrorism law. The anti-terrorism law is the latest in a series of power grabs passed under the guise of national security amid the coronavirus pandemic, posing a serious threat to Philippine democracy. The new law, which replaces the 2007 Human Security Act, criminalizes a new ambiguous offence: incitement to terrorism ”through speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems, banners or other representations …
without participating directly in the terrorism commission.” Section 29 empowers law enforcement agencies to arrest and detain any person suspected of a terrorist offence without a warrant and for fourteen to twenty-four days, including persons charged with incitement. In the Philippines, there are many competing struggles for the rights to self-determination and international terrorist networks. For years, the Philippine government has prosecuted suspected terrorists without an anti-terrorism law. The absence of an explicit violation of punishment for acts of terrorism has led to a blurred distinction between punishing terrorists and punishing secessionists. In response to the public outcry that the Philippine government is violating human rights by unfairly punishing secessionists, the United Nations conducted an investigation. This investigation led to the Philippine government being placed on the United Nations human rights watch list. Philippine lawmakers passed the Human Security Act of 2007 (”HSA”) shortly after. This law codified acts punishable as crimes of terrorism. Since the passage of the HSA, five prominent interest groups have called on the Supreme Court of the Philippines to strike down the anti-terrorism law as unconstitutional because it is too vague and unfairly interferes with the rights of individuals.
This commentary analyses the legality of the HSA. ”Terrorism is not defeated by terrorizing people and stifling their rights. The answer to non-State terrorism is not State terrorism. Lawyer Colmenares said protesters and anti-lockdown violators were ”afraid” that more power in the hands of police and President Duterte were ”triple or quadruple” arrests. The Anti-Terrorism Act 2020 repeals the Human Security Act 2007 and amends some of the provisions and definitions of terrorism. [42] Senator Panfilo Lacson, one of the main authors of the Anti-terrorism Act, 2020, said the Human Security Act, 2007 was a ”dead letter law” because it was ”severely underutilized” because it resulted in only one convicted criminal and only one prescribed organization, Abu Sayyaf. [43] Fearing ”deadly consequences,” human rights groups in the Philippines expressed dismay after the Supreme Court upheld most of the provisions of the anti-terrorism law that they say are detrimental to the country`s democracy because they threaten human rights. Esperon says the Philippines` detention period is ”one of the most limited” in the region, putting it on an equal footing with Australia and well below Singapore`s two-year detention period for terrorism suspects without a warrant. Hermogenes Esperon, national security adviser and vice chairman of the Counterterrorism Council, said the government would respect any decision of the court. Under its provisions, the law punishes anyone who officials say incites terrorism with ”speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems, banners and other representations.” Nine judges said it was unconstitutional for the Counter-Terrorism Council to designate individuals and groups as terrorists on the basis of requests from other countries or international organizations such as ASEAN or the EU.
The applicants described him as a flagrant violation of due process because he deprived an accused of the opportunity to be heard in the Philippines before being classified as a terrorist. It also declared unconstitutional a provision allowing a presidential-appointed counterterrorism council to accept requests from entities, including international organizations, to designate a person as a terrorist. After the failed coup in 2016, Turkish authorities used the bills to arrest journalists and critics en masse. In 2016, Turkey arrested 136 journalists, 135 of whom were accused of terrorism. And 2019 was the first year since 2016 that Turkey was not the worst prison guard for journalists in the world, but only because it shut down more than a hundred media outlets to disconnect them from the platform instead. .