Date: September 5, 2022

1st Quarter

Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 Essay

The Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020, also known as Republic Act No. 11479, is a
counterterrorism law created with the goal of preventing, forbidding, and punishing terrorism
in the Philippines. The legislation, which was ratified by former president Rodrigo Duterte on
July 3, 2020, punishes anybody who authorities believe has incited terrorism through
declarations, writings, speeches, symbols, banners, and other visual representations. A life
sentence without the possibility of parole or other privileges is the punishment for violating
this Act's requirements. This is the latest attempt to combat terrorism and all associated
activities while still maintaining the 'protection' of our civil and political rights.

This act evoked a dichotomy of reactions from the people: those who agreed with the
concept and those who opposed it. According to Maria Angela Ponce, Minister and Legal
Adviser of the Philippine Mission to the UN, the Anti-Terrorism Act was passed in
accordance with the Philippines' commitment and strict adherence to relevant Security
Council resolutions. She emphasized that the law requires the state to uphold the
fundamental rights and liberties of the people as guaranteed by the Constitution. In addition,
according to Minister Ponce, the National Action Plan on Preventing & Countering Violent
Extremism is a complementary measure to the Act that strengthens Philippine efforts to
combat terrorist financing by addressing the root causes that lead people to violent extremist
groups.

A setback for human rights, a human rights disaster in the making—that would be how
people who oppose this law would describe the Anti-terrorism Act of 2020. This law giving
the government too much-unchecked power will only endanger the safety of defenders in the
current environment of impunity and attacks against those who stand up for human rights.
People may be detained for weeks prior to actually appearing before a judge under the
Anti-Terrorism Law and may be arrested without a warrant. In addition, the legislation also
makes it unlawful to detain someone for posting critical content about the government on
social media, severely limiting freedom of the press. This adds to instances of red-tagging
activists and citizens, as well as arrests over social media posts made during the epidemic
and flagrant violations of the right to free expression. A law so ambiguous on the definition of
‘terrorism,’ in the words of Nicholas Bequelin, Asia-Pacific Regional Director of Amnesty
International, "can only worsen attacks against human rights defenders." The government
has threatened, harassed, and prosecuted hundreds of local journalists, farmers,
environmentalists, trade union leaders, and community activists over the years on the
grounds that they are communists or terrorist sympathizers.

After all that’s said, I would say that people have reason to be suspicious of this law
because, given the number of people killed during the war against drugs, government
violations of human rights, particularly under the Duterte administration, would not be
surprising. Although I could see how some would see this law as advantageous since it
‘protects’ us from terrorists, there is still something sketchy about it. With this law having
such a vague definition of terrorism, people would have trouble seeing the line between
terrorism and activism. I suspect that when crafting this law, lawmakers also considered how
they might use it to silence individuals who disagree with them. Moreover, this law promotes
the red-tagging of those who criticize the government. I believe that cases of blacklisting
have been even more prominent since the moment that this law was signed. If someone
believes that killing a person is immoral and illegal, they may put up a sign denouncing drug
war deaths. This would be considered terrorism since it might encourage people to fight
against the government. It is not terrorism to disagree with what the government has done.

Activism is not terrorism. And this extremely imprecise law insinuates that any form of it
could be called terrorism. As Isaac Asimov has said, “Violence is the last refuge of the
incompetent.” The idea is that the incompetent individual turns to violence since they are
unable to come up with any other solutions. Stop fighting with violence. This Anti-Terrorism
Act is to protect our people and our country, do not let it be an absolute disgrace that led
many people to die and get hurt.

Sources:
PH Condemns Terrorism, Cites 2020 Anti-Terrorism Act as Valued Tool in Fight Against It at
UNGA Sixth Committee Opening. (2020, October 15). GOVPH. https://dfa.gov.ph/dfa
-news/news-from-our-foreign-service-postsupdate/27947-ph-condemns-terrorism-cites
-2020-anti-terrorism-act-as-valued-tool-in-fight-against-it-at-unga-sixth-committee-open
ing#:~:text=The%20Anti%2DTerrorism%20Act%20also,laws%20or%20face%20possib
le%20greylisting.

Philippines | Anti-Terrorism Law further threatens the safety of human rights defenders.
(2020, July 22). International Service for Human Rights.https://ishr.ch/latest-updates
/philippines-anti-terrorism-law-further-threatens-safety-human-rights-defenders/

Philippines: Dangerous anti-terror law yet another setback for human rights. (2020, July 3).
AMNESTY International. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/07/philippines-
dangerous-antiterror-law-yet-another-setback-for-human-rights/

Philippines: New Anti-Terrorism Act Endangers Rights. (2020, June 5). Human Rights
Watch. https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/06/05/philippines-new-anti-terrorism-act-
endangers-rights