"Here is the presidential legal counsel’s response to the bishops."
"Here is the presidential legal counsel’s response to the bishops."
The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines and other NGOs and human rights groups have denounced the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA). They have also petitioned the Supreme Court to declare the law unconstitutional.
You cannot blame the bishops, human rights groups and the NGOs. With the ATA plus lockdown inspired by the coronavirus, President Duterte doesn’t need to declare martial law. Martial law is subject to review and renewal by Congress. Actions under ATA and lockdowns are all executive decisions.
The CBCP’s pastoral letter drew a sharp rebuke from Presidential Legal Counsel Salvador Panelo. In the interest of balance and fairness, I am publishing in full Panelo’s statement, although it sounds pedantic at times:
“The letter of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) published today, July 19, appears to have violated the doctrine of the separation of Church and State as mandated by the Constitution in Section 6, Article thereof: ‘[t]he separation of church and state shall be inviolable.’
Even if it is not deemed to be a violation thereof, we note that it parrots the detractors favored false narrative that it is violative of the Constitution; that it allows warrantless arrest and wiretapping of suspected terrorists; that it sends a chilling effect on those exercising their freedom of speech; that there is a pattern of intimidation being undertaken by the government citing the case against Senator De Lima and the ‘shutdown’ of ABS- CBN, and that the people oppose it.
The CBCP expressly supports the petitions questioning the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 (ATA), as it describes the country in a ‘bleak political landscape.’ It asks: ‘Will the highest level of our Judiciary assert its independence, or will they, too, succumb to political pressure?’ Such advocacy, coupled with its call to its faithful followers to prayer, effectively exerts religious influence or pressure on Supreme Court to decide against a national law designed to combat the global crime of terrorism and to secure the safety of the Filipino people.
Other similar petitions were filed against the ATA by BAYAN Secretary General Renato Reyes, Jr., Movement Against Tyranny Convenor Mother Mary John Mananzan and Karapatan Secretary General Cristina Palabay, together with former UP President Francisco Nemenzo, former UP Chancellor Michael Tan, as well as former DSWD Secretary Judy Taguiwalo.
All petitions should be dismissed for utter lack of merit on procedural and substantive grounds.
It appears that all petitioners have adopted a favorite phrase—"chilling effect"—in describing the law's provisions when implemented.
The ATA, however, cannot be any clearer. The definition of the crime of terrorism is as clear as the sunlight, the same being precise that leaves no room for misinterpretation. It abounds with safeguards protective of the basic liberties of those arrested and detained , as well as deterrents against possible abuses by law enforcement agents.
The law has been passed weeks ago and there have been no signs of any ‘chilling effect’ on those who wish to publicly air their grievances against the government. In fact, the voices of dissent are in wild reckless abandon.
Various groups and the silent majority of the citizenry who have witnessed the destruction of lives and properties wrought by terrorism have welcomed the instrument's passage into law.
We agree with the CBCP that ‘it is one thing to be actually involved in a crime and another thing to be merely suspected or accused of committing a crime.’ The ATA, as well as our laws, recognizes this. The examples cited by it, such as the outcomes in the cases of Senator De Lima, ABS-CBN, and a media personality, among others, are products of Philippine democratic and legal processes.
The CBCP only has to trust our judicial system given that adopting an opposite mindset only undermines the legal institutions.
The CBCP likens us to ‘the proverbial frog swimming in a pot of slowly boiling water.’ For its education, we have been in a far worse situation for years due to the favorable treatment which people in power or of influence have been receiving from past governments. The present dispensation has taken us out of this environment through the President's political will in enforcing the law equally to all, bar none, including those managed in the past to be immune therefrom or untouchable.”
biznewsasia@gmail.com
