The Liga Independencia Pilipinas Inc. (LIPI) sees no reason why the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 or Republic Act No. 11479 should be repealed, following the third day of oral arguments on the law at the Supreme Court on Tuesday.
Jose Antonio “Ka Pep” Goitia, LIPI Secretary General, on Wednesday noted the third day of the arguments started with the interpellation of Chief Justice Diosdado Peralta on the first three enumerations in Section 4 (the definition of terrorism) which the petitioners’ lawyer Chel Diokno referred to as vague in its context.
The new law’s definition of terrorism was compared to the preceding law, the Human Security Act, of which Diokno states that the new law is absent of predicate crimes, Goitia said.
“CJ Peralta opines that the first three enumerations, all of which starts with ‘engages in acts intended to cause’ are preparatory acts meaning actions which may or may not lead to the commission of a concrete crime, while predicate crimes (such as kidnapping, rebellion, murder) stated in the old law should first be committed before a person could be liable for terrorism,” he said.
“If one follows the argument of Atty. Diokno, then using the stages of felony under the revised penal code as a rule, criminal responsibility will begin from attempted felony,” Goitia added.
To simplify, he said: “When an offender gathers all requisites to execute a crime, this is called a preparatory act. If he chooses to act upon all requisites he gathered (with a guilty intention) and such attempt was unsuccessful then it is called as an attempt of a crime. I saw this perfect example of a preparatory act.”
“You plan on shooting the guy who’s sleeping with your wife. You first go to the local bar, get drunk, and talk to your bar friends about your plan, trying to round up one or two of them to help you. This is conspiracy, a preparatory act. Then, you and your cohorts go to a neighbor’s house and raid the gun safe while he is away at work, another preparatory act,” Goitia said.
“The target gets home, and you and your friends cut loose, shooting 50 rounds at the target, without making contact with anything. You shot at him but missed. This is an attempted murder,” he added.
Goitia said CJ Peralta “also gave examples like the above.” There are existing crimes that are punished even if the acts are still preparatory and therefore, they have not reached the attempted stage, he added.
“Merely proposing to commit rebellion is a crime. If the proposal is accepted then it becomes a conspiracy, because a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons. Conspiracy to commit sedition, inciting rebellion and coup d’état are crimes and are considered preparatory acts,” the LIPI chief said.
“So, if the new law also provides preparatory acts, are these void? We go back to context, as Atty. Diokno believes Section 4 is vague,” Goitia said.
He noted that Section 5, The threat to Commit Terrorism; Section 6, Planning, Training, Preparing and Facilitating the Commission of Terrorism; Section 7, Conspiracy to Commit Terrorism; Section 8, Proposal to Commit Terrorism and Section 9, Inciting to Commit Terrorism “are provisions that are covered by paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of Section 4. This destroys the vagueness theory of Atty. Diokno.”
“We do not see any reason Republic Act No. 11479 should be repealed,” he added.
The contention of the petitioners, Goitia asserted, is that the law will be left in the hands of government agencies who may become irresponsible in its implementation is “absurd.”
“The law has enough provisions that will penalize government officials if they, in any form subvert, the provisions of the ATA. Section 15 provides a penalty for public officials. Section 24 prohibits unauthorized or malicious interceptions and/or recordings the penalty of which is ten years in imprisonment,” he said.
“The rights of a person under custodial detention are outlined in Section 30. Section 33 prohibits torture or coercion in investigations and interrogations. Further to this, Section 50 states the Supreme Cour3 shall designate certain branches of the Regional Trial Courts as anti-terror courts whose jurisdiction is exclusively limited to try violations of the provisions of the act,” Goitia added.
Section 50, he noted, creates a Joint Congressional Oversight Committee that shall have the authority to summon law enforcement or military officers and members of the ATC to appear and require them to answer questions and submit written reports of the acts they have done in the implementation of the Act.
“It is perplexing why the petitioners must argue on the merits of the law when everybody sees this to be a comprehensive Act that will protect the security and safety of our people,” Goitia said.