ADVERTISEMENT
“Had Parlade also done his research and listened to the oral arguments, he would have known that posts like these are what petitioners claim as evidence of a credible threat of prosecution – threat that can warrant a judicial review of the law he seeks to protect and promote.”
Petitioners against the Philippine terror law argued m before the Supreme Court that the controversial law suffers from overbreadth and impermissible vagueness. During the oral arguments, they called on SC to declare the law unconstitutional even before it causes more harm than the evil it is supposed to fight.
In their petition, the two Aetas decried that the law’s definition of terrorism is “impermissibly vague.” They also argued that it is “overly broad that it sweepingly stifles even innocent and legitimate acts, including the exercise of protected freedoms.”
Bulatlat looks back at the decisions of the high court which affect the public the most, and the Filipino people's fundamental rights and welfare.
The group asserted that the Anti-Terrorism Act, unless struck down by the high court, will be used to crack down on dissent and limit academic freedom in the country’s colleges and universities.
Teddy Casiño of Bayan said the Duterte administration is the "number one human rights violator."
"With the worsening crisis brought about by the pandemic and the Duterte government's negligence following the calamities and the weak COVID-19 response, there is no questioning the legitimacy of the workers' and the people's protest."
This is not the first time that a national minority was charged with terrorism.
“The issuance of the IRR has set the stage for the unimpeded implementation of the assailed law; the targeting of activists and critics of the government; the suppression of dissent; and the curtailment of civil and political rights, all in the altar of national security,” the motion read.
With the release of implementing rules and regulations, experts and concerned citizens see the potential of the law of being abused and used against those who simply want to express their opinion on issues affecting the country.
The Anti-Terrorism Act violates international standards on human rights and countering-terrorism with its vague and overboard definitions of “terrorism” as well as the excessive powers it grants to the Executive branch of the government.
"The terror law is added ammunition to the existing arsenal of repressive laws against the Indigenous and Moro people. This is a mockery to the exercise of our fundamental rights”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwwqVRhA0xU&t=1s With the Terror Law in effect, Sr. Mary John Mananzan of Movement Against Tyranny assures us that it is okay to be afraid but invites us to act for the good of humanity inspite fear. Hosted by JANESS ANN ELLAO...
In their petition, church leaders assailed that the vagueness of the Republic Act No. 11479 or the Anti-Terror Act of 2020 will expose them to “credible threat of prosecution” for their ministries and advocacies.
“Hence, one’s acts may constitute terrorism when the law’s implementors adjudge them to be so. One does not know what acts constitute disobedience of the law. One does not know when and why she or he had become a terrorist.”
Updated July 23, 9:16 p.m. By ALYSSA MAE CLARIN Bulatlat.com MANILA— Journalists, artists, and free expression advocates filed the 14th petition today, July 23, before the Supreme Court against RA 114979, or the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020. Joined by almost 40...
The dangers have always been real. This aggressive troll offensive is trying to obscure the fact that the Philippines has been ranked the deadliest country in the world for land and environmental defenders just last year in an incisive report by international investigative group Global Witness.
“We are against terrorism but the law [against terrorism] should not violate human rights and the Philippine Constitution.”
A community of readers and supporters that help us sustain our operations through microdonations for as low as $1.