2 February 2021
When they have a dispute, they come to me and I decide between one person and another, and I make known to them the statutes and instructions of God. (Exodus 18:16)
As oral arguments on the Anti-Terrorism Law of 2020 begin in the Supreme Court, we pray that sound judgment founded on our nation’s values and Constitutional protections of democracy, civil liberties, and the respect for human life and rights will guide the court. We firmly believe that the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 is a repressive law fashioned around an ambiguous definition of “terrorism.” Not only will the Anti-Terrorism Council be emboldened with broad powers that impinge on those reserved for other branches and offices of government, but implementation of this law will be ripe for militarism and abuses of human rights. With concern for democracy and the protection of human life, we pray that the Supreme Court will be able to discern the dangers and pitfalls of this legislation. We urge them to uphold democracy and civil liberties, by striking down the repressive and ambiguous law.
The perverse and rampant pursuit of red-tagging witch-hunts in recent months demonstrate clearly the pernicious character of unchecked labelling of persons. Coupled with a severe weakening of protections of civil liberties under the Anti-Terrorism Law of 2020, democratic space, freedom of speech and association, and other human rights will be under threat. Even more, the very lives and liberty of those who express dissent or stand to assert the rights of the people will be placed in peril. Those in power have already demonstrated their desire for overreach and broad discretion in going after so-called “enemies of the state” or “terrorism.” Their folly in attacking church people, artists, members of the academe, development workers, and even former government officials lays bare great danger in undermining the checks-and-balances and due process under the law. The Supreme Court is especially placed to judge these dangers and assure that civil liberties are safeguarded and democratic rights upheld.
As Church leaders, we will continue to speak out for the welfare of the people. The valiant and competent lawyers serving as our counsels will unmask and set straight the grave dangers of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 in today’s oral arguments.
As Church leaders, we vehemently oppose the law on the following grounds:
1. An overly broad and amorphous usage of the term terrorism, which will surely be utilized by state forces for attacks on dissent and curtailment of human rights and civil liberties.
2. A weakening of the judicial system and the constitutionally enshrined function to check-and-balance the actions of other branches of government, including state forces under the administrative branch.
3. Allowances for surveillance, wire-tapping, and invasion of privacy without any evidence of any alleged suspect’s wrongdoing.4. Arrests and holding of persons without warrants or charges, duly and speedily processed through the courts.
5. A removal of financial penalties to be awarded to persons detained under false pretense, thus increasing the likelihood of gross impunity to be committed by state forces.
Poised to be misused and abused by militarists who wish to “lord it over” the Filipino people, obliterate opposition and quell even the most legitimate dissent, the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 will cause a further unraveling of democratic space and public discourse. We urge the Justices of the Supreme Court to weigh and measure wisely to stand of the side of democracy, civil liberties, and human life. We urge the Supreme Court to strike down this law fraught with ominous features that reek of the dark days of the Marcos martial law. #
Signed:
Most Rev. Broderick S. Pabillo, D.D., Apostolic Administrator, Archdiocese of Manila
Bishop Reuel Norman Marigza, General Secretary, National Council of Churches in the Philippines
Br. Armin A. Luistro, FSC, Provincial Superior, De La Salle Brothers in East Asia
The Most Revd Rhee Timbang, Obispo Maximo, Iglesia Filipina Independiente
Sr. Ma. Lisa Ruedas, DC, Justice, Peace and Integrity of Creation, Daughters of Charity
Bishop Emergencio Padillo, Middle Luzon Jurisdiction, United Church of Christ in the Philippines
Greetings in the name of Our Lord Jesus Christ! I have watched the proceedings and the Peoples Lawyers and definitely gave their best in the Oral Arguments. Everyone is good and brilliant. Even the Honorable Justices are very good and posted good questions as well. Am not a lawyer just have had some experiences in some cases of.human rights abuses and using the Law and Their power (rich and greedy businessmen and abusive Court authorities) to use and oppressed People’s rights. HON. JUSTICE LEONEN pointed our or perhaps commented that it’s even better to discuss the cases even asked if these hrvs cases have been filed and tried in lower courts. This happened to Us though our efforts weren’t enough at least we filed a complaint or there’s a filed complaint, Atty. Molo and Atty. Ursua said yes. Justice Leonen even pointed out an example the IPs I think that is the case that the Justices may study or other cases, my apologies, I am just sharing what I learned from lawyer’s too. You may discard my comments had you find it irrelevant. Just some of our notable experiences in Batangas. Thank you very much! May GOD ALMIGHTY CREATOR be with us ALWAYS, Amen!