The Anti-terrorism Act gives government forces more oversight powers. Surveillance of prohibited, named and suspected terrorists could take up to 90 days under the measure, compared to the 60-day period under the Human Security Act. Article 34 of the Anti-Terrorism Act – which restricts the movement of an accused within the city or municipality where he resides – has also been challenged for violating a person`s right of movement. Since the Philippine House of Representatives passed a new anti-terrorism law on June 3, protests have rocked the Philippines. The recent conviction of Maria Ressa, a famous journalist who covered the bloody war on drugs in the Philippines, is a chilling indication of how President Rodrigo Duterte will enforce the anti-terrorism law. As calls on social media to drop the law (#JunkTerrorBill) mounted, the Philippine Department of Justice announced on June 11 – the day before the country`s Independence Day – that protest rallies had been temporarily banned. Despite threats of arrest, hundreds of people continued to demonstrate against the law. The petitioners stated that one of them was a provision they had described as a “killer reserve”, which they said was so vague that a demonstration or strike could be declared an act of terrorism. But other governments around the world do not have to be helpless bystanders to the erosion of Philippine democracy. The law will automatically go into effect on July 9, unless Duterte blocks it.

Before that crucial date, governments must pressure Duterte to reject the anti-terrorism law itself. If it takes place on the 9th. July becomes law, a constitutional trial awaits the legislation of the country`s most influential lawyers` organization. At this point, other governments must monitor and support these legal challenges to ensure they receive a legitimate hearing. As the Philippines moves closer and closer to the rule of law, world leaders working on the pandemic must raise their voices and remain vigilant to save Philippine democracy. Manila (AFP) – The Philippines` highest court has removed a “killer reserve” in President Rodrigo Duterte`s controversial anti-terrorism law, but critics said Thursday that the rest of the legislation still threatens human rights. The Washington Post called the passage of the bill “yet another nail in the coffin of the Philippines` declining democracy.” [72] The diplomat stated that the law “targets dissenting opinions.” [73] While Al Jazeera claims that the law “is ready to cause more terror.” [74] Various international artists have spoken out against the law, including Taylor Swift. [75] [76] Swedish environmental activist Greta Thunberg also joined the petition against the anti-terrorism law. [77] An Ethiopian anti-terrorism law passed in 2009 mirrors Manila`s law: it criminalized acts (such as writing, publishing, publishing, or disseminating statements) that would directly or indirectly “promote” terrorism and gave the police the power to detain suspects for forty-eight hours without a warrant. to be saved.

For years, this law has been used to imprison peaceful political activists, opposition members and journalists. Since the summer of 2011, at least thirty-three dissidents have been charged with terrorism. In Kafkaesque fashion, a well-known journalist was arrested as a terrorist for publishing an article criticizing the Ethiopian government`s application of the law to imprison journalists. He was sentenced to eighteen years in prison and his newspaper had to close. Nine judges said it was unconstitutional for the Counter-Terrorism Council to designate individuals and groups as terrorists on the basis of requests from other countries or international organizations such as ASEAN or the EU. The applicants described him as a flagrant violation of due process because he deprived an accused of the opportunity to be heard in the Philippines before being classified as a terrorist. Seven protesters from the University of the Philippines and one bystander condemning the controversial anti-terrorism law were arrested in Cebu city for alleged violations of the General Community Quarantine Guidelines (GCQ). [97] [98] [99] Prisoners known as “Cebu 8” spent 36 hours in detention.

[99] The PNP`s Central Visayas denied allegations that they had used excessive force to disperse protests against the anti-terrorism law. [100] In recent months, human rights defenders, trade unions, and journalists have been arrested or killed on trumped-up charges. The Department of National Defense announced a decades-old agreement banning state forces from entering the University of the Philippines campus without notice to school officials, while security forces raided an indigenous Lumad school in Cebu City. Civil society groups are challenging the draconian anti-terrorism law in the Supreme Court. A total of 37 petitions were filed in the hope of challenging the constitutionality of the anti-terrorism law. However, government officials have repeatedly defended the measure, arguing that there are enough safeguards in place to protect citizens` rights. The law allows suspects to be detained without a judicial arrest warrant for 14 days and can be extended for another 10 days and monitored by the police or army for 60 days, which can also be extended up to 30 days. [6] However, one analyst argues that this provision is essential for the fight against terrorism in order to “give investigators more time to obtain valuable information from the terrorism suspect. A longer period of detention may also allow sufficient time to facilitate interrogation.

It can also prevent the suspected terrorist from wreaking havoc. More importantly, prolonged pre-trial detention may be legally suspected if customary criminal charges cannot be laid for technical reasons. [8] Greenpeace`s Southeast Asia office has lobbied for the repeal of the 2020 anti-terrorism law because of its “comprehensive definition of terrorism,” which it says could be misused to suppress dissent. [71] Peacebuilding requires strengthening local civil society and peace actors, building local capacity for non-violent conflict resolution, strengthening institutional capacities, and promoting economic development and livelihood systems to transform cycles of conflict and violence. .