Jan Ver M.

Dianopra JD4-B

The Security of Freedom: Anti-Terrorism Law?

The threat of terrorism in the Philippines is real and growing. It has taken a bloody
evolution — from killings, kidnappings, and armed attacks in the past, to increased use of
improvised explosive devices in the last decade that will never be going to be stopped unless
something was done to improve the unbearable conditions under which many Filipinos lived. 

"Haven for terrorists", that was the Philippines has been dubbed with and was identified as
one of the countries with the most number of terrorist organizations in the recent decade. 1 The
extremist alliance swore allegiance to Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in 2017 and
launched a takeover of Marawi on May 23 of that year in a siege that took government troops by
surprise. For fighting in five months, the Philippine military waged ground assaults and airstrikes
to defeat them.2

The lives of the Filipinos has changed due to the war on terrorism and strained the
capacities of the government. Several challenges and responses from the Philippine government
have been presented by this war on terrorism. The Philippines has combated terrorism in many
ways over the years. It has implemented defensive measures, prosecuted terrorists, retaliated
militarily, preempted terrorist attacks, and addressed some of the causes of terrorism.3

President Rodrigo Duterte signed the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 on July 3 repealing the
Human Security Act of 2007, giving more surveillance powers to government forces. The siege
of Marawi in 2017 has cited by the proponents of the law as well as criminal activities from
the Islamic State-linked New People's Army Communist Rebels, Abu Sayyaf group, and other
supposed emerging threats to peace and public safety.4

Section 1, Article III of the 1987 Philippine Constitution guarantees that no Filipino shall
be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. He or she should not be in
trouble as long as a citizen abides by the law.

The aim of the Republic Act (RA) 11479 or the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 is to protect
life, liberty, and property from terrorism which is deemed as inimical and dangerous to the
national security of the country and to the welfare of the people. The State acknowledges that the
fight against terrorism requires a comprehensive approach, comprising political, economic,

1
FABE, AMPARO PAMELA. “The Cost of Terrorism: Bombings by the Abu Sayyaf Group in the Philippines.”
2
JULIE MCCARTHY. “The Philippines' Marawi City Remains Wrecked Nearly 2 Years After ISIS War”
3
EUSAQUITO P. MANALO. “The Philippine Response to Terrorism: The Abu Sayaff Group” NAVAL POSTGRADUATE
SCHOOL THESIS
4
News, Arianne Merez, ABS-CBN. "Duterte signs anti-terror bill into law despite growing opposition". ABS-CBN
News. Retrieved July 4, 2020.
diplomatic, military, and legal means duly taking into account the root causes of terrorism
without recognizing these as justifications for terrorist and/or criminal activities.5

The police or law enforcement officer who has taken custody of the person suspected of
terrorism, under the Anti-Terrorism Act, may detain such person for a period of fourteen (14)
days from apprehension or arrest, and the period of detention may be extended by a maximum
period of ten (10) days.6 This allows a person suspected of terrorism to be put into preventive
detention for a maximum of 24 days on the grounds such as completion of the investigation, the
preservation of evidence, to conduct investigation ‘properly and without any delay’ and the
necessity for further detention.

Contrary to the provisions under Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code, if you are
arrested without a warrant, you will be immediately brought to the proper police station and be
put into preventive detention for not more than 12 hours for crimes or offenses punishable by
light penalties; 18 hours for crimes or offenses punishable by correctional penalties; and for
crimes or offenses punishable by capital penalties that is 36 hours.

This new law on the other hand also criminalizes the vague new offense: the incitement
of terrorism “by means of speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems, banners or other
representations . . . without compelling any direct part in the commission of terrorism.” 7 There is
nothing to worry about, some supporters might say because, under the said law, protest,
advocacy, and dissent are protected so long as they don’t “create a serious risk to public safety.”
But who decides who is inciting terror or creating a serious public safety risk?8

Section 4, Article III of the 1987 Philippine Constitution provides that “no law shall be
passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people
peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.” 9 The right
emphasizes open-mindedness to different views and thoughts. However, the scope of the
protection extends to right to access to information on matters of public concern, to form
associations or societies not contrary to law and freedom of religion. These are all crucial to the
advancement of beliefs and ideas.

In the Bill of Rights, freedom of expression is accorded the highest protection since it is
indispensable to the preservation of liberty and democracy. Therefore, the constitutional
guarantee protects the religious, academic, political, artistic, and commercial speeches.

5
Section 2, Declaration of Policy, RA 11479
6
Section 29, Detention Without Judicial Warrant of Arrest, RA 11479
7
Section 9, Inciting to Commit Terrorism, RA 11479
8
AARON SOBEL, The Philippines’ Anti-terror Bill Will Stifle Dissent
9
Section 4, Article III-Bill of Rights of the 1987 Philippine Constitution
 On the other hand, this right has certain boundaries that make it not absolute. It must be
exercised within the bounds of law, public policy and public order, morals and with due regard
for the rights of others. Thus, slanderous, obscene, libelous and speeches are not protected by the
guarantee. So are fighting words and seditious that advocate imminent lawless conduct.

Hence, terrorism is a permanent and never-ending struggle as it has often been said. The
government can neither protect Manila from terrorism nor eliminate terrorism out of Mindanao
until it applies the full force of the law to the terrorists and bandits.

The terrorist influence cannot be eliminated without an effective government. What is