Malacañang on Tuesday received a copy of the anti-terrorism bill which is now up for President Rodrigo Duterte’s signature, presidential spokesman Harry Roque said in a text message.
In a virtual press conference earlier in the day, Roque said Duterte has 30 days to act on the legislation, or else it will lapse into law.
“We have a 30-day period to review, either to veto or to sign the bill. Otherwise, if the President does not act on it, it will become law,” he said.
Roque acknowledged the growing opposition to the new law, saying it is the President’s decision if the measure would be beneficial to the people’s protection or not.
“That will undergo a process. The provisions will be reviewed and if there is anything unconstitutional, the President will be advised if he should veto it or not,” Roque said.
READ: ’Terror bill’ critics terrorized
Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra said Duterte is likely to wait for his department to review the measure, adding his department aims to submit its comments on the bill in 15 days.
Roque, meanwhile, assured critics and detractors that the measure will have safeguards against human rights abuses.
“There are safeguards. First, it is necessary to have a judicial declaration to be classified as a terrorist group,” he said in a mix of English and Filipino.
He also said law enforcement authorities that abuse the proposed law could face imprisonment of up to 10 years.
Last week, Roque said Duterte will thoroughly review the anti-terrorism bill to ensure that it complies with the 1987 Constitution.
He said Duterte is in no rush to sign the measure meant to add more teeth to the country’s law against terrorism.
Roque also said the anti-terrorism bill would not curtail freedom of speech.
Under the bill, persons who shall threaten to commit terrorism and those who will propose any terroristic acts or incite others to commit terrorism shall suffer imprisonment of 12 years.
Suspected persons can be detained for up to 24 days without a warrant of arrest, compared to only three days under the Human Security Act the bill is designed to replace.
A 60-day surveillance on suspected terrorists can also be conducted by the police or the military, with an allowable 30-day extension.
Video conferencing for the accused and witnesses will also be allowed under the measure.
READ: House okays anti-terror bill
The Commission on Human Rights will be notified in case of the detention of a suspected terrorist.
The opposition and progressive groups condemned the passage of the measure in the Congress, describing it as an attack on freedom of speech or an avenue for red-tagging.
Catholic church leaders feared that the new anti-terrorism bill threaten the very values of freedom, respect, justice and compassion.
Under the Human Security Act, law enforcers can be fined for wrongfully detaining a person tagged as a terror suspect.
Lawmakers removed such safeguards in the new legislation and authorized surveillance and wire-tapping of any individual on mere suspicion of being an alleged terrorist, even without any evidence of wrongdoing.
The University of the Philippines-Diliman urged the President to veto the bill, saying its provisions contravened the democratic spirit of the 1987 Constitution.
“We note in particular the threat it poses to the freedom of expression, freedom of association, the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, the right against unlawful arrest and arbitrary detention, our right against unlawful searches and seizures, due process of law, privacy of communications and correspondence, the right to information, and the right not to be subject to an ex-post facto law or bill of attainder,” UP Diliman said.
UP Diliman also expressed concern over the broad but vague and expansive definition of “terrorism,” which could cover all forms of dissent, including lawful protests and criticism.
The Jesuits and the De La Salle Brothers of the Philippines issued a joint statement opposing the anti-terrorism bill, saying it added to people’s anxiety and fears during a pandemic.
READ: Rody certifies anti-terrorism bill as urgent
“Many of the provisions under this bill are couched in language that is sweeping and equivocal as to be easily subject to misinterpretation and abuse. Worrisome are the expanded and vague definitions of a ‘terrorist’; the powers given to the Anti-Terror Council to designate a group as a ‘terrorist group’; the weakening of the protection of one’s privacy and the safeguards against arrests and detention without warrants. Instead of being a measure to protect our people, in the wrong hands, this bill can be used to oppress our people,” the statement read.
Guevarra said they will address the concerns of those opposing the anti-terrorism bill in the crafting of the implementing rules and regulations to prevent abuse of the law or misapplication of its provisions.
Guevarra also said that even if he becomes a member of the Anti-Terrorism Council (ATC) that the law would create, this would not affect the independence of the DOJ’s National Prosecution Service (NPS) in hearing terrorism-related complaints.
The ATC, he said, is essentially a policy making body, while the NPS determines the existence or non-existence of probable cause based on evidence presented before it.
Philippine National Police chief Gen. Archie Gamboa, on the other hand, said the bill has safeguards to prevent abuse and to protect the rights of the people.
“I don’t suppose that the legislature, the branch of government who takes care of formulating the law will craft it without safety nets. I think these have safety nets and the public is there to watch,” Gamboa said without identifying these safeguards.
He added that the passage of the bill is not tantamount to martial law and that critics can question the measure before the courts.
Meanwhile, Gamboa said the eight protesters in a rally against the proposed measure at the University of the Philippines-Cebu were arrested due to disobedience to authority.
“It seemed they really try the tolerance of police to some extent. They are going too far, which is tantamount to disobedience that’s why we caused the arrest,” Gamboa said.
While people have the right to assemble to protest, Gamboa said the situation is different now as the country battles the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.
He urged the public to air their sentiments and through various means aside from holding mass gatherings.
On Monday, the protesters were ordered released without bail by a Cebu court.
In the House, Assistant Minority Leader and ACT Teachers Rep. France Castro derided what she described as the hasty transmittal of the bill to the Palace.
Castro in a statement also urged President Duterte to heed the people’s call to junk the bill and veto it.
“The hasty transmittal of House and Senate Leaders prevents more representatives to withdraw their affirmative vote on the anti-terrorism bill amid public clamor against the said bill,” Castro said.
Also on Tuesday, Senator Christopher Go reminded the public to use social media responsibly and called on the DOJ and the National Bureau of Investigation to crack down on fake news and fake social media accounts.
He denounced the spate of misinformation on social media after Facebook said it is investigating reports of suspicious activity such as the proliferation of dummy accounts.
READ: Businesses junk anti-terror bill
READ: UN hits out at terror bill ‘vague’ proviso
READ: New anti-terror measure needed, but left slams it
Willie Casas, Macon Ramos-Araneta
