BY JHIO JAN NAVARRO
THE ANTI-terror bill, the vilification of dissenters and the multi-billion intelligence fund. From where I stand, all these appears to be inter-weaving threads that form the noose bound to asphyxiate democracy in the Philippines to its demise.
On Feb. 26, 2020 the Senate approved on third and final reading Senate Bill (SB) 1083 or the Anti-Terror Act of 2020. The SB purports to “uphold the basic rights and fundamental liberties of the people enshrined in the Constitution.”
However, that it excludes provisions, (e.g. Section 50, which provides for the compensation of P500,000 per day of detention of individuals acquitted of terrorism charges) which are supposed to safeguard human rights and deter abuse of authority detailed on the repealed Human Security Act (HSA) of 2007, I find much ironic.
The Anti-Terror Act is rife with loopholes. The most gaping I find is its vague definition of what constitute terrorism. For instance, it states that it is terrorism when a person “engages in acts intended to cause death or serious bodily injury to any person, or endangers a person’s life.” I am no expert but aren’t these also grounds for cases like serious physical injuries, murder and/or homicide which while heinous are not tantamount to terrorism?
Moreover, the bill stipulates that sheer membership to an organization identified and/or tagged as terrorist group constitute terrorism and is consequently punishable by up to 12 years of incarceration. This provision is very unsettling in light of the societal milieu pervaded by the political plague of harassment through red-tagging. Dissenters in this regime seem to find no respite from vilification.
While the President claims to be open to criticism, human rights advocates, outspoken clergymen, restive peasants, journalists, and student activists are being continually tagged as terrorist rebels by virtue of being critical of the policies of the regime.
With this backdrop, SB 1083 can be a very potent anti-democracy weapon, as is Martial Law when dictator Ferdinand Marcos wielded it. The nebulous definition of terrorism can be easily dispensed to stifle dissent and calls for reforms as anyone, when state forces will, could easily be suspected or worst accused of participating in, conspiring for or inciting terrorism.
I couldn’t agree more when the National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers (NUPL) contended that “[SB 1083] criminalizes acts which have, traditionally, been considered legitimate exercise of free speech, freedom of expression, the right of peaceful assembly, and freedom of association.” And, that “if enacted, the new anti-terrorism bill will become the most potent weapon the government can use to stifle dissent.”
Matters gets worse, however, as SB 1083 authorizes state forces to commence a maximum of 90 days surveillance (which includes wire-tapping and interception of private correspondences among others) of suspected terrorists, who are also susceptible to warrantless arrest and detention that could last for 14 to 24 days, as shall be determined by authorities.
All this becomes even more disturbing when related to the multi-billion intelligence fund of the Office of the President. As can be remembered, the Office of the President has appropriated for itself a whopping P4.5 billion for classified and intelligence funds from the 2020 national budget. With this sizeable amount put into action, it is a very likely scenario that an Orwellian Big Brother is monitoring people ’s every move and transaction. Perhaps, even as you read this article, someone’s watching over your shoulders.
With SB 1083 giving leeway for circumscribing the data privacy act with its surveillance provision coupled with the vague delineation of terrorism and widespread red-tagging, the people’s money earned through blood and sweat supposedly intended for developmental projects might just end up as instrument in robbing them off their democratic rights. Citizens might be put behind bars by mere suspicion or malicious accusations without the benefit of compensation if proven innocent.
In George Orwell’s dystopian novel, 1984, it is clearly demonstrated that the weaponization of the laws and the presence on an omniscient Big Brother is characteristic of a dictatorial and totalitarian regime. Thus, it is imperative that we should always be weary of this sort of intricate state maneuvers. (jhionav14@gmail.com/PN)
