Anti-terrorism legislation

Anti-terrorism legislation are laws with the purpose of fighting terrorism. They usually,

if not always, follow specific bombings or assassinations. Anti-terrorism legislation usually
includes specific amendments allowing the state to bypass its own legislation when fighting
terrorism-related crimes, under alleged grounds of necessity.
Because of this, suspension of regular procedure, such legislation is sometimes criticized as a
form of lois scélérates which may unjustly repress all kinds of popular protests. Critics often
allege that anti-terrorism legislation endangers democracy by creating a state of exception that
allows authoritarian style of government.

Terrorism has been on the international agenda since 1934, when the League of Nations,
predecessor of the United Nations, began the elaboration of a convention for the prevention and
punishment of terrorism.[4] Although the convention was eventually adopted in 1937, it never
came into force.
Today, there are 15 counter-terrorism international conventions in force. They were developed
under the auspices of the United Nations and its specialized agencies and the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Moreover, on 8 September 2006, the UN General
Assembly adopted a "Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy".[5]

Under Anti-Terrorism Law people can be apprehended without a warrant and detained for weeks
prior to appearance before a judge. Not only is the law broad enough to permit the detention of
people for social media posts critical of the government, it also makes it a criminal offense to ‘incite
others’ to commit terrorism through ‘speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems, banners,’ further
restricting freedom of expression and the media. This builds on existing cases of arrests for social
media posts made during the pandemic, blatant attacks on the right to freedom of expression, as
well as red-tagging of civilians and activists. 

Various petitions have been filed against the Law at the national level, and a group of UN Special
Procedures expressed concern that the law will ‘further dilute human rights safeguards, by justifying
the arrests of human rights defenders and government’s critics.’

‘While advocacy continues at the national level toward the passage of a specific law for the
protection of human rights defenders, they are now even more vulnerable with the passage of this
law’, said ISHR’s Programme Manager and Legal Counsel Tess McEvoy. ‘This law not only fails to
comply with international human rights law, it will severely restrict due process and the rule of law in
the Philippines’, McEvoy added. 

This law passed in the context of ongoing violations against defenders in the country, with recent
instances of judicial harassment of defenders and targeting defenders with smear campaigns. It is
the most recent example of the country’s worsening human rights record, and while steps have been
taken at the UN to address the situation, the recent report of the UN High Commissioner highlights
widespread and systematic killings and arbitrary detention in the context of the war on drugs,
silencing of independent media and critics, and stark and persistent impunity.
‘We echo the call of national civil society and UN Special Procedures for an  independent
investigation mechanism into the human rights situation in the Philippines,’ added McEvoy.

POLITICS

The Philippines' Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020: Five

things to know
Legislation already on Duterte's desk would give the president dramatic powers

Protesters call on Philippine legislators to scrap an anti-terror bill that human rights activists fear will be used to
suppress free speech and harass opponents of President Rodrigo Duterte. The rally was held June 4 in Quezon City.
© Reuters

CLIFF VENZON, Nikkei staff writerJune 10, 2020 17:28 JST

MANILA -- Days after being marked "urgent" by President Rodrigo Duterte,

the Philippines' House of Representatives last week approved the Anti-
Terrorism Act of 2020, adopting the Senate's version, which was passed in
February.

The bill has triggered online and street protests even as community
quarantine restrictions are in place due to the coronavirus outbreak. A
multisectoral backlash has also ensued, but supporters of the bill are pressing
on.

Here are five things to know about the legislation that has polarized the
Southeast Asian nation as it grapples with the pandemic's economic fallout.

What exactly does this bill say and do?

The Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 amends the Human Security Act of 2007. It
expands the definition of terrorism to include acts intended to cause "death or
serious bodily injury to any person," "extensive damage and destruction" to a
government facility, private property or critical infrastructure and when the
purpose of those acts is to "intimidate [the] general public," "create an
atmosphere or message of fear," or "seriously destabilize or destroy the
fundamental political, economic and social structures of the country." Those
found guilty face life sentences without the chance of parole.
The act also criminalizes the "threat, planning, training, facilitating of" and
"proposal" and "inciting" to terrorist activities by means of speeches,
proclamations, writings, banners and emblems. It also subjects suspects to
surveillance, warrantless arrest and detention for up to 24 days. In addition, it
removes compensation for the suspect in the event of acquittal and boosts the
Anti-Terrorism Council, the implementer of the law, whose members are
appointed by the president.