Sunday, August 19, 2007

Republic Act No. 9372, nakakabuti ba o nakakasama

ni: Jon Lee


Lahat ng bansa ay namomoblema sa terrorismo. Isa na dito ang Pilipinas. Ang Abu Sayyaf at Moro Islamic Liberation Font (MILF) ay mga halimbawa ng mga grupong kilalang terroristang namamayani sa Pilipinas. Dahil dito gumawa ang pamahalaan ng batas, ang Republic Act No.9372, laban sa terrorismo. Pinirmahan nito ni Pangulong Gloria Macapagal Arroyo noong ika-anim ng Marso taong 2007. Dito opisyal niyang idineklara na maging batas ang aktong ito at noong ika-labing lima ng Hulyo nagsimula ang implementasyon ng batas. Ang Republic Act No.9372 o Human Security Act of 2007 (HSA) ay batas na ang layunin ay maprotketahan ang buhay, kalayaan at ari-arian ng mamamayan sa akto ng terrorismo.

Kung papakinggan, mukhang maganda at nakakabuti sa lahat ang batas na ito pero kapag binasa ng maiigi ang mga nilalaman, mapapansin na maraming butas o kwestyonableng sitwasyon ang nakasaad sa batas na ito. Dahil sa mga nilalaman ng batas, may mga taong nagsasabi na ito ay pasimpleng paraan ni Pangulong Arroyo para maging Martial Law ang bansa dahil lumalabas ay nagiging kontrolado na niya ang mga tao gamit ang batas na iyon.

Isa na dito ang nakasaad sa Seksyon 3 na ito na sino man ang gumawa o magpalaganap ng takot sa mamamayan ay masasabing isang akto ng pagterrorismo. Dahil dito, pati ang pagrarally laban sa kasalukuyang administrasyon ay pwede na rin ituring na isang paraan ng terrorismo dahil ang pagrarally ay masasabing isang akto ng pagrerebelde. Kung ganoon man, lumalabas na bawal n gang pagrarally. Parang tinanggalan na ang mga tao ng karapatan para magsalita.

Isa pang halimbawa ay iyong nakasaad sa Sekyson 15 at 16. Nakasaad dito na kahit anong recorded na usapin, nakasulat man o hindi, ay hindi pwedeng gamiting ebidensya laban sa kahit kanino o sa kahit anong klaseng judicial o hearing. Kung sino man ang hindi otorisadong nagrerecord ng usapin na iyon ay mapaparusahan. Dahil sa batas na ito lumalabas na gumagawa ng paraan ang pangulo na gawing tama lahat ng kanyang ginawang mali. Noong 2004 eleksyon, nawire-tapped ang pag-uusap ng pangulo at ni Garcilliano tungkol sa pagdadaya ng boto, ang “Hello Garci”. Ipinipahawatig nito na bawal o walng sino man ang pwedeng makailam sa pangulo, kahit na may hinala ka nang may masamang nangyayari.

Dahil sa mga ito masasabi ngang may balak nag awing Martial Law ng pangulo ang Pilipinas. Pero sa tingin ko hindi naman siguro nila gagawin itong batas na ito kung magdudulot lang pala sa mas magulong bansa. Ang France, Australia, Britain ai iba pang bansa ay nagpatupad rin ng itong batas at ok naman iyong bansa. Wala naman sigurong matinong tao na gugustuhin na mas pahirapin ang sariling bayan kaysa ikabubuti nito. Kailangan lang siguro nilang liwanagin ang mga bagay-bagay para magkaayusan. Siguro may kwenta rin ang pagiging malabo ng kontento dahil kapag ganoon, mas mahirapan humanap ng lusot ang mga terrorista. Mahihirapan na silang gumawa ng kalokohan.

Pagtalakay sa mga isyung hinggil sa Republic Act No. 9372

Ang Republic Act No. 9372 na tinatawag na Human Security Act o Anti - Terror Law ay naglalayong maprotektahan ang mga mamamayan laban sa lumalaganap na terorismo sa bansa. Dahil sa pagraratipika ng batas na ito noong ika-6 ng Marso 2007 (implementasyon noong ika-15 ng Hulyo 2007), sinasabi ng administrasyon na ito ang magiging solusyon sa terorismong idinudulot ng mga grupong tulad ng Abu Sayyaf at pandaigdigang teroristang grupong al-Qaeda. Ngunit ang batas na inihain ng gobyerno ay sadyang malabo. Ang ibig sabihin ng terorismo ayon sa kasalukuyang administrasyon ay ang paghahasik at paglikha ng kondisyon ng malaganap at kakaibang takot at pangamba sa populasyon.

Sa inilatag na depinisyon ng terorismo, napakalaki ng kalabuan na ipinapahiwatig nito. Una, dahil maraming butas ang batas na ito, maaaring ang mga simpleng bagay ay maaari ng tawaging terorismo. Halimbawa ng matatawag na terorismo ay ang mga normal na rally. Kapag ang mga rally nito ay sabihin ng naging isang riot o gulo, maaari ng ikulong ang mga raliyista o di kaya’y mas masaklap ay ang pagpigil sa mga raliyista gamit ang dahas.

Pangalawa ay ang paghuli sa mga hinihinalang suspek ng terorismo na walang ibinibigay na piyansa sa mga ito. Tinatanggalan din ang mga suspek ng due process (ito ang karapatan ng isang indibidwal na magkaroon ng tamang proseso ng isang kaso tulad ng pagkakaroon ng “right to remain silent” at “right to have an attorney”) at presumption of innocence (ito ang pagbibigay karapatan sa mga taong naakusahan ng krimen na sila ay inosente pa hangga’t hindi pa nakakapagdesisyon ang korte) na tumataliwas sa Bill of Rights ng Konstitusyon ng Pilipinas. Ayon sa administrasyon, ang dahilan nila sa pagdadagdag ng batas na ito sa laman ng Human Security Act ay dahil ang mga pinaghihinalaang terorista ay maaaring makapaghain ng piyansa. Kung saka-sakaling ang mga pinaghihinalaang indibidwal ay tunay na terorista at nakapaghain ng piyansa sapagkat hawak sila ng kanilang organisasyon at kayang sustentohan ang pagpapiyansa, ang mga teroristang ito ay malayang makakaalis at maaari ng magtago o di kaya’y pumunta sa lugar na hindi abot ng kapangyarihan ng bansa. At kung magbabase sa Penal Code of the Philippines, mababaw lamang ang nakasaad na parusa sa mga pinaghihinalaang terorista. Sa kabilang dako, dahil nga malabo ang kriterya ng pagiging terorista, ang mga mapaghihinalaan mapa-may sala man o wala, ay magdudulot din ng takot sa mga tao sapagkat ito ay isang uri ng pagpapawala ng karapatang makapagsalita o freedom of speech na nakasaad sa bill of rights sapagkat kapag ang mga inihaing pahayag na may kinalaman sa paglaban sa gobyerno ay maaaring tawaging akto ng terorista sapagkat ayon din sa gobyerno ay ginugulo nito ang katiwasayan ng mga mamamayan sa mga pahayag na magdudulot sa mga rali at kung minsan ay kudeta. Ang ipinapakita ng parte ng batas na ito ay ang pagiging di-makatarungan ng batas sapagkat lahat ng mamamayan ay kasama sa maaaring mapagbintangan.

Pangatlo ay ang pagmamatiyag ng gobyerno sa mga sirkulasyon ng komunikasyon sa bansa lalo na ang mga taong pinaghihinalaang terorista. Ayon sa batas, ang sirkulasyon ng komunikasyon na nabanggit ay ang pagmamatiyag sa daloy ng komunikasyon ng cellphones at computers (mail, networks at internet). Ginagamit ding midyum ito upang malaman ang lokasyon ng kanilang target at dahil dito, nawawalan ng bisa ang right to privacy ng mga mamamayan na nakasaad ulit sa bill of rights ng Pilipinas.

Kung titingnan natin ang kasalukuyang pangyayari, sinasabi ng Pangulo na may mga planong distabilisasyon upang pabagsakin ang kanyang administrasyon. At sa mga nakasaad na batas sa Human Security Act, ang mga nagbabalak na magsimula ng mga distabilisasyon ay napigilan at may karampatang kaso at parusa. Ang ipinapahiwatig marahil ng pangyayaring ito ay ang nagpapakita na may pinapanigan ang batas. Pero kung ang anggulong titingnan ay ang neutral o walang kinikilingan, ang pagpapatupad ng batas na ito ay ang sagot ng bansa sa lumalaganap na terorismo sapagkat hindi lang naman ang Pilipinas ang nagpatupad ng batas na ito. Ayon kay Bb. Athena Gardon na aming nakapanayam hinggil sa mga isyung tumatalakay sa batas na ito, pati ang France, Australia, Britain at iba pang mga bansa ay nagpatupad na ng ganitong batas. Kung hindi ito ipapatupad ng Pilipinas, ang estadong ito ay papamahayan ng samu’t-saring terorista sapagkat ito lang ang lugar na walang batas na naglalayong pabagsakin ang mga indibidwal na ito. Ang dahilan ng mga taong nagrereklamo at nag-aalsa laban sa pagpapatupad ng Human Security Act ay hindi maaaring itulad sa ibang bansa sapagkat mayroong malisya sa pagpapatupad nito sa termino ni Pangulong Arroyo sapagkat marami na ring ginawa ang presidente upang mapahaba ang termino o di kaya’y pigilan ang mga kumakalaban sa kanya na kung saan ang batas ay mismong kumakatawan sa ginawa ng Pangulo na protektahan ang sarili.

Sa pagtatapos, ang Republic Act No. 9372 o Human Security Act ay nag-iwan ng napakaraming kontrobersiya at nakatiwang-wang na isyu na nagbibigay ng napakaraming tanong sa mga mamamayang saklaw sa batas na ito kung ito ba ay makabubuti sa kanila o di kaya’y makasasama. At dahil sa ang batas ayon sa perspektibo ng nakararami’y karamihan ay nakasasama, ang batas mismo ang naging terorista na nagbibigay takot sa mga mamamayan.

Pinagsanggunian:

Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (BAYAN), Hunyo 2007. Batas Anti-Terorismo – Resipi para sa Di-deklaradong Batas Militar mula sa http://www.bayan.ph.

AGHAM, 2007. State Surveillance and the Human Security Act of 2007

Del Rosario, Lance

Saturday, August 18, 2007

Human Security Act, sagot o salot?

By: Cherry Ahve M. Suarez

Noong ika-6 ng Marso taong 2007, pinirmahan ni Pangulong Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo ang Republic Act No. 9372 o ang Human Security Act of 2007 kung saan opisyal niyang idineklara na ito ay isang batas. Ika-15 ng Hulyo taong 2007 naman sinimulan ni PGMA ang implementasyon ng batas na ito. Nilalayon ng batas na ito na protektahan ang mamamayan, kalayaan, at mga pag-aari ng bansang Pilipinas laban sa terorismo. Kinokondena nito ang terorismo bilang isang krimen at labag sa karapatang pantao ng mga Pilipino. Ayon sa panayam naming kay Athena Gardon, isang Political Science na estudyante ng Unibersidad ng Pilipinas, Maynila, ang HSA daw ay hindi lamang dito sa Pilipinas, kundi marami nang naunang bansa ang nagpatupad nito. Kabilang na rito ang France, Australia, Britain at iba pang mga bansa. Ang nagbunsod sa mga bansang ito upang ipatupad ang nasabing batas ay dahil sa pangyayari noong ika-11 ng Setyembre taong 2001. Nabahala ang maraming bansa noon kaya naman nabuo ang batas na ito. Taong 2005 ay ipinasa ito ni Juan Ponce Enrile at kamakailan lang ito naaprubahan at hanggang ngayon ay marami pa ring tanong ukol dito.

Masasabi nga kaya natin na ang batas na ito ay maganda? Maraming kabutihan ang maaaring idulot nito sa mamamayang Pilipino. Marahil ay marami ang mag-iingat na sa paggawa ng anumang ikababahala ng kapwa. Ang terorismo ay magiging kasalanan na sa ating bansa kung kaya’t liliit naman siguro ang bilang ng mga kaso hinggil sa terorismo. Malamang ay magiging tahimik na rin ang Pilipinas sapagkat matatakot na silang gumawa ng krimen. Subalit, ito nga lang ba ang tanging maidudulot ng batas sa atin, lahat ay mabubuti at magaganda? Syempre hindi. Marami rin ang naidudulot nitong masama. Kabilang na rito ang maaaring agrabyado sa posibleng pagkakamali kapag ikaw ay mahuli o mapagbintangan. Hindi naman yata madali ang makulong nang walang kasalanan. Ang sinasabing “A person is innocent until proven guilty” ay walang epekto sapagkat dahil naipasa na ang batas na ito, maaari nang arestuhin ang kahit sino na nagdudulot ng takot sa kanyang kapwa. Bukod dito, ang batas na ito ay lumalabag sa karapatang pantao. Maaaring wala nang maging privacy ang mga Pilipino dahil kahit anong oras ay maaari silang sumailalim sa wiretapping kapag pinaghihinalaan na sila. Ngunit kapalit naman ng pagkakakulong ng walang kadahilanan, o kapag napagbintangan siya ay babayaran naman siya sa halagang limandaang libong piso ( P 500, 000) sa bawat araw na siya ay nakakulong.

Ang lahat ng mamamayan ay subhektibo na maaaring makulong kapag nagdudulot ng takot sa ibang tao, maliban na lang sa gobyerno at CIA. Hindi ba’t ito ay masyadong maraya sapagkat hindi lamang naman tayong mga mamamayan ang maaaring akusahan ng terorismo? Sa lumabas na scandal ni Pangulong Arroyo kaugnay kay dating COMELEC Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano, ito ay hindi naging legal dito noon sapagkat ipinagbabawal pa noon ang wiretapping sapagkat ito nga ay labag pa sa karapatang pantao noon.

Ang terorismo ay masyadong malawak upang maunawaan ng marami ang tunay na kahulugan nito. Maaaring para sa iba, ang terorismo ay kahit anong gawain na nagdudulot ng takot sa ibang tao. Maaari namang ito ay kasing lantad ng terorismo noong 9-11. Masyasong malawak ang terminong ito at maraming pumapaloob dito. Ang mga kasong nagpapakita ng economic sabotage ay maituturing din namang terorismo. Ilan dito ay ang pangyayari sa Philippine Airlines nang magsagawa ng strike ang mga empleyado dito dahil hindi ibinigay ang 13th month pay nila. Ang nangyari sa Hacienda Luisita ay maituturing din na terorismo. Ang mga strike ng mga estudyante sa kani-kanilang paaralan kung saan nagdudulot din naman ng takot ay isang terorismo din kung susundin lang ang kahulugan ng terorismo na masasabi kong vague.

Ang Human Security Act na naglalayon na protektahan tayong mamamayan ng Pilipinas, ay masasabi nga kayang sagot sa kaguluhan, o salot sa lipunan? Sapat na nga kaya ang mga kabutihang dulot ng batas na ito upang mapagtakpan ang mga negatibong epekto nito? Ang batas bang ito ay makapipigil talaga ng terorismo sa bansa natin? Magdadala nga ba ito ng kapayapaan at pantay na sistema dito sa Pilipinas? O ito kaya ay isang pagbabalat-kayo ng ating gobyerno upang makapagdahilan sila at makagawa na naman ng mga kasamaan? Sa pagpirma nga kaya ni Pangulong Arroyo upang maging batas na ang R.A. 9372, nangangahulugan nga kaya ito na matatahimik na nang tuluyan an gating bansa, o kabaligtaran nito’y lalo tayong magkakagulo sa iba’t-ibang dahilan? Ito ay ilan sa mga katanungang bumabagabag sa akin hinggil sa isyung ito at malamang, ang ibang mga mamamayan din ng Pilipinas ay ganito rin ang tumatakbo sa isipan nila.

Iba-iba ang takbo ng isip nating mga Pilipino. Kahit ako ay hindi ko masagot ang katanungan na inihayag ko sa simula pa lang sapagkat parehong may punto ang magkabilang panig. Alam kong ang iba ay nakumbinsi ko sa aking mga ipinahayag at ipinresenta na mga datos at alam ko din namang may ilan na hindi nagkatugma ang aming iniisip. Magkagayon man, iniiwan ko na sa inyo ang pagkakataon. Kayo na ang bahalang magdesisiyon: Human Security Act, sagot o salot?



Pinagsanggunian: http://philippinecommentary.blogspot.com/2007/03/human-security-act-of-2007.html

Sapat na ba ang Republic Act No. 9372 Human Security Act (HAS) o Anti-Terrorism Law sa ating kaligtasan laban sa terrorista o ito ay may ibang motibo?

ni: Kim Share


Ano nga ba ang Human Security Act (HSA) o kilala ring Republic Act No. 9372? Noong Marso 6, 2007, pinirmahan ni Pangulong Gloria Macapagal Arroyo ang Human Security Act 2007 at nagkaroon ng pagtitipon ukol dito. Ito ay naging opisyal na batas nang aprubahan ito ni Arroyo at naging epektibo nung Hulyo 15, 2007. Sinabi na itong batas ang siyang liligtas sa mga mamamayan laban sa mga terrorista sa ating bansa tulad ng Abu Sayyaf na kilalang kilala na terrorista sa ating bansa, Al-Qaeda, Moro Islamic Liberation Front at marami pang iba. Marami na ang naging biktima at dinakip ng iba’t ibang grupo ng terrorista tulad nila Angelito Nayan, Angelito dela Cruz, Gracia Burnham, Martin Burnham (namatay dahil sa pagdakip sa kanya ng Abu Sayyf), at si Father Giancarlo Bossi. Marami ang nasawi at nagdusa dahil sa mga terrorista. Sapat na ba ang Human Security Act? Hakbang ba ito para mabawasan na ang krimen sa ating bansa o sadyang hakbang ni Arroyo patungo sa Martial Law?


Maraming tanong ang lumabas ng isakatuparan itong batas sa ating bansa. Marami nagsasabi na ito ba ay isang paraan ni Arroyo patungong Martial Law dahil kontrol niya ang lahat ng tao gamit ang batas na ito. Marami ang isinaad sa R.A no. 9372 na nagbigay daan sa konklusyon na ito.


Isinaad sa R.A. 9372 Seksyon 2 na ang layunin ng batas na ito ay bigyan ng kapayapaan at kaligtasan ang mga mamamayan sa mga terrorista. Ang mga terrorista ay ang mga grupo na siyang gumugulo, nakakasakit at gumagawa ng krimen na laban sa batas at tao. Ito ay ang naging klasipikasyon ng terrorista. Sa Seksyon 3 nakasaad ang mga klasipikasyon ng isang terrorista tulad ng paglabag sa batas ng Pilipinas tulad ng Article 122 (Piracy in General and Mutiny in the High Seas or in the Philippine Waters), Article 134 (Rebellion or Insurrection), Article 134-a (Coup d’état), atbp. Kung may mga aksyon na may implikasyon na panakot sa mga mamamayan ay siyang mapapatawan na terrorista at makukulong sa loob ng 40 na taon. Sa Seksyon 5 nakasaad na ang mga tao na sangkot sa operasyon na terrorismo ay mapapatawan ng kaparusahan at makukulong 17 taon 4 buwan at 1 araw hanggang 20 taon. Sinabi ng Seksyon 7 na sa pahintulot ng pamahalaan maaari magsagawa ang pulis o law enforcement ng wiretapping gamit ng mga elektronik na device sa mga usapan ng mga grupo ng terrorista (Abu Sayyaf atbp) at sa mga sinususpektang terrorista. May exception na bawal i-wiretap ang usapan pagitan ng abogado at kliyente, doktor at pasyente at journalist at source. Seksyon 18 sinasabi na kung may suspek sa terrorismo ay maaaring huliin na ng pulis or law enforcement na walang warrant of arrest. Ang magiging suspek ay ma-detain sa loob ng 3 araw habang iniimbistiga ang kaso ng suspek. Kung napatunayan na walang sala ang suspek ay mabibigyan ng $1000 bawat araw ng detention.


Makikita natin sa R.A. 9372 ang mga bagong paraan ng ating pamahalaan sa terrorista. Masasabi ba natin na tama ang naging klasipikasyon ng pamahalaan sa terrorismo? Ang simpleng pananakot ay masasabi na bang isang terrorismo? Kinatatakutan ng mga tao ang batas na ito dahil sa marami nagrally sa ating bansa laban sa ating pangulo. Ang mga rally dito sa Pilipinas ay pinatatamaan ang maling pamamalakad ng ating pangulo at ipinapakita nila ang kanilang saloobin sa mga pangyayari na nagaganap sa ating bansa. Maaari silang patawan bilang terrorista sa mga welga dahil sila ay lumalaban sa pamahalaan at nagkakagulo. Maaari silang mahuli dahil sa welgang isinigawa ng mga rallista dahil sa panggugulo na ginagawa nila sa pamahalaan. Sinabi rin sa batas na kung ano mang kasangkutan sa grupo ng terrorista ay mapapatawan na rin ng kaso. Ayon sa aming nakapanayam na si Athena, nagkaroon ng isyu na ang reporter ng ABS-CBN na si Julius Babao ay isang terrorista dahil sa pakikipagpanayam niya sa isang taga- Abu Sayyaf. Nasabi na terrorista ang aksyon ni Babao dahil sa pagkakaroon ng impormasyon sa mga terrorista. Masasabi na ba na terrorista si Babao kung nakipagpanayam lamang siya sa Abu Sayyaf? Paano kung ang tanging layunin ng reporter ay ipaalam sa mga tao kung ano ang pananaw ng isang Abu Sayyaf? Ito ay confidential na sa station kung ano man ang nalalaman nila ukol sa Abu Sayyaf kaya nagkaroon isyu dito dahil tingin ng pamahalaan ay kinakampihan ng reporter ang grupo.


Ang pagkakaroon ng kapangyarihan ng wiretapping ng pamahalaan ay karapatdapat ba? Paraan ito ng ating pamahalaan upang malaman ang bawat galaw ng terrorista. Maaaring gamitin ito ng pamahalaan sa kahit sinong tao na hinihinalaan ng gobyerno. Mapapansin natin na ang proseso na ito ay pabor sa gobyerno kung sino man ang may laban sa gobyerno. Masasabi ba natin na Martial Law ito? Nung panahon ng Martial Law, hindi pwede magsalita ng masasamang bagay ang mga tao tungkol sa gobyerno kaya nababantayan ang bawat galaw. Sa R.A. 9372, makikita natin na maaari magkaroon ng pagbantay sa mga usapan ng mga tao kung may laban man sa gobyerno o sa lipunan.


Papayag ba kayo na huhuliin kayo basta basta kahit walang warrant of arrest? Maaari huliin ng pulis kung sino man ang hinihinalaan nilang terrorista. Madaya ito sa mga taong mahuhuli ng pulis. Sasailalim ka pa ng detention kung ikaw ay mahuli ng pulis. Iimbistigahan ka pa ng pulis sa mga galaw mo upang mapatunayan na terrorista ka. May nagsasabi na paraan ito ni Arroyo na gamitin laban sa mga kanyang kaaway o oposisyon dahil may kapangayarihan siyang ipahuli kung sino man.


Makatarungan nga ba ito? Marami usapin laban sa batas na ito. Sana ang batas na ito ay makakaligtas nga sa mga mamamayan laban sa terrorista at sana ang batas ay gamitin sa tamang paraan hindi sa pagkontrol sa mga galaw ng iba’t ibang tao.
R.A. 9372...makatarungan ba o hindi??
ni: Joanna Marie Ignacio
Ang Human Security Act ng 2007 ay naipasa sa ilalim ng administrasyon ng Pangulong Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. Ito aymas kilala bilangAnti -Terrorism Law. Ang batas na ito ay ang magpoprotekta sa mga taong bayan at para din maiwasan ang pagkalat ng mga terorista at ng terorismo sa buing bansa. Kasama sa mga nag-apruba ng batas na ito ay ang presidente ng Senado na si Senador Manny Villar at si Jose de Venecia na siyang pinuno ng mga mambabatas. Ano nga ba ang maidudulot ng batas na ito sa mga Pilipino? Maganda ba ang R.A. 9372 para sa ikauunlad at ikatatahimik ng bansang Pilipinas? Ang akdang ito ay tatalakayin ang mga magaganda at masasamang bagay na maidudulot nitong batas na ito sa mga Pilipino at sa bansa.
Ang isinasaad sa batas na ito ay ang pagiging mahigpit na pag-iimbestiga o mahigpit na pamamalakad ng mga pulis ukol sa terorismo. Napapadalas na kasi ang pagbobomba, pagpatay sa mga tao at pagpasok ng mga terorista sa loob ng bansa. Itong batas na ito ang sagot sa problema ng bansa tungkol sa terorismo sabi ng iba. Lalagyan ng wire tapping device ang bawat linya o metro ng telepono sa buong bansa. Ang makaliligtas lang sa batas na ito ay ang mga abogado, doktor, manunulat at ang kanilang mga kliyente. Kasama din dito ang mga konpidensyal na pag-uusap ng mga nagnenegosyo. Sa ganitong klaseng batas, matatakot diumano ang mga tao at hindo na basta basta gagawa ng mga krimen. Ang parusa sa mga taong ito ay 40 taong pagkakakulong.
Narito ang ilang mga nasaliksik ng manunulat kung bakit dapat ipagpatuloy ang pagpapatupad ng nasabing batas. Nagtanung tanong ang mananaliksik sa mga tao at narito ang kani-kanilang pahayag o opinyon tungkol sa isyu. Una ay ang masisigurado daw ang katahimikan at kapayapaan sa bansa. Maaaring hindi na silang masyadong mangamba sa kung ano man ang maaaring mangyari. Hindi na sila natatakot sumakay ng mga LRT o MRT na may pangambang baka sumabog ito na katulad na rin sa mga bus na maramimg insidente ng pambobomba. Ang pangambang ito ay dulot ng mga pambobomba ng mga terorista tulad ng nangyari sa Rizal Day bombings. Pangalawa, maaaring mabawasan ang kaso ng mga pandurukot sag ma bata o kahit sa mga matatanda. Pwedeng maiwasan ang ganitong pangyayari sa pamamagitan ng batas na ito. Sabi rin nila na mahuhuli na rin ang mga politikong may balak na masama o may ginagawang hindi maganda o walang magandang maidudulot sa bansa tulad noong nangyari kay Gloria sa isyu ng “Hello Garci Scandal”. Isa pang magandang maidudulot nito ay kung may papasok man na dayuhang terorista ay madali nilang malalaman. Maaari din itong maiwasan bago pa may mangyaring hindi kaaya-aya sa mga Pilipino o sa bansa mismo. Sabi rin na mas magiging maganda ang seguridad ng bansa at hindi na matatakot ang mga dayuhang bumisita sa ating bansa para makita ang napakagandang mga tanawin na angkin ng bansang Pilipinas. Ito ang mga magagandang bagay na maibibigay ng Human Security Act sa ating bansang Pilipinas at sa ating mga kapwa mamamayan.
Ngunit sa kabilang banda ng mga magagandang bagay na naidudulot ng batas na ito, mayroon ding mga pangit na bagay at may mga hinaing ang maraming tumututol sa pagpapatupad ng batas na ito. Sabi ng mga taong ito na nawawalan daw ng privacy o ang pagiging pribado ng isang tao kung naka-wire tap ang sarili nilang mga telepono. Nawawalan daw ng respeto ang gobyerno sa mga mamamayan nito. Mayroon namang ibang solusyon dito tulad ng pagkakaroon ng National Identity Card o ID. Isa pang pangit na bagay na maidudulot nito ay ang pwedeng pang-aabuso ng mga nasa gobyerno. Pwede nilang gamitin ang kanilang posisyon para abusuhin o di kaya ay mang-block mail sa mga target nilang tao. Kung hindi sila pagbibgyan ng mga taong ito sa mga kagustuhan nila, gagawin nilang alas laban sa mga taong iyon kung ano man ang narinig nila sa usapan ng mga naturang tao. Mas magiging malakas ang loob ng mga taong nasa posisyon dahil sila ang may hawak ng halos na lahat. Ang huli at ang pinakapunto ng mga hindi sumasang-ayon ay ang pwedeng pagkawala ng press freedom o ang paglalabas ng totoong saloobin laban sa gobyerno. Hindi pwedeng magsalita ang mga taong bayan ng kahit na anong masama laban sa gobyerno. Pwede nilang sabihin na iyon ay isang porma ng terorismo. Lalong mahihirapan ang pagkamit ng katarungan sa bansa at lalong makakawawa ang masang Pilipino sa ganitong klaseng batas. Ang mga tao at organisasyong na laban sa administrasyon ang mas nadedehado sa pagpapatupad ng batas na ito dahil ang pangulo at kakampo nito ang may hawak sa batas at may kapangyarihan sa batas na ito.
Para sa huling parte ng akdang ito, ang masasabi ng manunulat ay mayroon ngang magagandang bagay na naidudulot ang batas na tio ngunit mayroon din itong masamang magagawa. Hindi lahat ng mga batas ay magaganda. Kung ito ay magbibigay oportunidad sa mga may kapangyarihan na maging abusado, sana ay hindi na ipinatupad ito. At ang isa pang magulo ay kung bakit kailangang isuspinde ang batas na ito isang buwan bago ang eleksyon at dalawang buwan pagkatapos ng eleksyon. Hindi ba’t maaring makakatakas o makalusot ang mga mandarayang politiko ng bansa?

paglabag o pagligtas sa seguridad ng mamamayan?


Noong ika-8 ng Pebrero taong 2007 ay ipinasa ang huling pagbasa sa ang Anti-Terrorism Act at binigyan ng titulong Human Security Act of 2007. Ika-6 ng Marso 2007 nang pirmahan ng Pangulong Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo ang bill para maging batas. Ang batas na ito ay naunahan pa ang mga mas mahalaga at mas naunang ipinapatupad gaya ng P125.00 na pagtaas ng suweldo, pagbalik ng bill para sa mga biktima ng Marcos human rights, at ang pagbaba ng presyo ng mga medisina. Ito ay ang sinasabing batas para na proprotekta sa buhay, kalayaan, at mga karapatan mula sa akto ng terorismo. Ginagawa ng batas na ito ang terorismo bilang krimen laban sa mga Pilipino, sa buong mamamayan, at laban sa batas ng lipunan. Ang tinutukoy na pagiging terorista sa batas na ito ay ang ano mangakto kung saan nakakagawa ang indibidwal ng katkot o pangamba sa publiko na pumupwersa sa gobyerno upang magbigay ng hindi ligal na utos. Pero sa sinasabing batas na ito, pagligtas nga ba talaga o paglabag sa seguridad ng mga mamammayan ang magaganap?

Ang sino mang indibidwal ang mapagsususpentyahan na terorismo ay hindi mabibigyan ng kalayaan sa proseso ng pagiging inosente. Ang Anti-Terrorism Act ay nagbibigay ng mas medaling proseso upang mabuwag ang isang organization o ang isang indibidwal. Ang pagakakakulong ng isang tao na hihigit sa 48 na oras ay madaling masasabi na kinakailangan at ligal. Ang 48-oras ay higit pa sa sapat na oras upang parusahan ang isang bilanggo. Ilan pa sa mga biolasyon sa batas na mas pinadali gawa ng Human Security Act ay ang hindi pagtukoy kung gaano katagal ang pagkakakulong ng indibidwal at hindi maaaring bayaran ang kanyang paglaya, ang paghinto at pagkuha sa mga pinansyal na pagmamay-ari ng taong sinasabing “terorista,” ang mas pinadaling paghuli ng mga kasama o mga may kinalaman sa nagawa ng “terorista,” at ang pagsubaybay sa buhay indibidwal at pati na rin sa kanyang pamilya. Marahil ay marami ang masisiyahan na mas madaling mahuhuli ang mga “terorista” dahil sa batas na ito. Pero marami namang nalalabag at nababagong iba pang batas ang batas na ito. May mga prosesong kinakailangan ng mas mahabang pag-aaral ang napapadali dahil sa nasabing batas at maaari itong mahantong sa isang hindi makatwiran na desisyon.

Sa ika-19 na Seksyon ay nakasaad na sa aktual na pag atake ng terotista, ang mga napaghihinalaang terorista ay mananatili sa pagkahuli sa loob ng 72-oras kahit pa walang warrant. Nakasaad din na ang mga municipal, city, probinsyal, o rihional human right commission official ay mayroong kapangyarihan na iutos ang pagkakakulong ng isang “terorista” ng higit pa sa 48-oras. Malinaw nito na sinusuway ang batas Section 18, Artikulo VII ng Constitution, sino mang indibidwal na inaresto o ikinulong ay dapat mabigyan ng tama at makatarungang desisyon sa loob ng tatlong araw lamang at kung hindi siya mapatawan ng ano mang desisyon ay mapapalaya na lamang siya.

Sa ika-26 na Seksyon, ang paglimita sa karapatan sa paglakbay. Ang indibidwal na hindi malakas ang ebidensya sa sinasabing sala niya ay malilimitahan ang karapatan niya na lumakbay. Ang “terorista” ay hahatulan din ng “house arrest” kung saan hindi siya maaaring gumamit ng cell phone, telepono, computer, at ng iba pang pamamaraan ng pakiki-pagkomunikasyon sa kahit kanino pa na nasa labas ng tahanan niya hanggat hindi iniuutos ng batas. Ang sitwasyon din kung saan ang indibidwal ay maaaring mapalaya sa pamamamagitan ng pagbayad ay makakaharap din ang pagiging exkomulgado habang nasa “house arrest”. Ang ika-7 Seksyon naman ay lumalabag sa karapatan ng indibidwal na magkaroon ng pribadong buhay. Ligal na obserbahan ang anumang gawain ng nasabing terorista. Ang autoridad ay mayroong karapatan na making at irecord ang lahat ng nagaganap at magaganap na komunikasyon ng “terorista”. Kinakailangan lamang ng permisyo mula sa REegional Trial Court ang pag-wiretap at iba pang uri ng electronic na pag-obserba. Ang kapangyarihan ng pakikinig ay medaling maaabusa sa batas na ito.

Sa ika-27, ang mga bank deposits, accounts, at records ng indibidwal ay maaaring tignan ng nasa atoridad. Kahit pa ang simpleng salarin ay maaaring matignan ang kanyang records sa banko. Lahat ng mga inpromasyon na may kinalaman ang indibidwal ay maaaring tingnan ng autoridad. Ang ika-57 na sekstyon ay nagsasabi na hindi ipinapatupad ng batas ang “extraordinary rendition,” kung saan ang salarin ay maaaring ipadala sa ibang bansa at ipaubaya sa ibang gobyerno, pero sinasabi rin dito na maari naman itong gamitin kung kinakailangan. Kinakailangan lamang ng pirmisyo ng gobyerno ng Pilipinas na ang mga karapatan ng “terorista” ay gagalangin ng bansang padadalahan nito. Ang hindi magandang parte ng Seksyon na ito ay ang indibidwal ay maaaring dalhin na lamang sa isang hindi pamilyar na lugar at kasuhan siya ng krimen na pagiging terorista at pipiliting maging parte siya ng “ligal” na proseso. Ang proseso na ito ay madalas na mayroong kasamang pagpapahirap.

-ycasiano-

Saturday, August 11, 2007

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9372

Anu nga ba ang Human Security Act o ang Anti-Terror Law? Kung kayo ay interesado at mahaba ang libreng oras.. basahin ninyo ang batas mismo na makikita sa ibaba. Sigurado akong maiintindihan ninyo ang batas na ito.
===============================================================
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9372
AN ACT TO SECURE THE STATE AND PROTECT OUR PEOPLE FROM TERRORISM

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled:

SECTION 1. Short Title. – This Act shall henceforth be known as the “Human Security Act of 2007.”

SEC. 2. Declaration of Policy. – It is declared a policy of the State to protect life, liberty, and property from acts of terrorism, to condemn terrorism as inimical and dangerous to the national security of the country and to the welfare of the people, and to make terrorism a crime against the Filipino people, against humanity, and against the law of nations.

In the implementation of the policy stated above, the State shall uphold the basic rights and fundamental liberties of the people as enshrined in the constitution.

The State recognizes that the fight against terrorism requires a comprehensive approach, comprising political, economic, diplomatic, military, and legal means duly taking into account the root causes of terrorism without acknowledging these as justifications for terrorist and/or criminal activities. Such measures shall include conflict management and post-conflict peace-building, addressing the roots of conflict by building state capacity and promoting equitable economic development.

Nothing in this Act shall be interpreted as a curtailment, restriction or diminution of constitutionally recognized powers of the executive branch of the government. It is to be understood, however, that the exercise of the constitutionally recognized powers of the executive department of the government shall not prejudice respect for human rights which shall be absolute and protected at all times.

SEC. 3. Terrorism. – Any person who commits an act punishable under any of the following provisions of the Revised Penal Code:

1. Article 122 (Piracy in General and Mutiny in the High Seas or in the Philippine Waters);
2. Article 134 (Rebellion or Insurrection);
3. Article 134-a (Coup d‘Etat), including acts committed by private persons;
4. Article 248 (Murder);
5. Article 267 (Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention);6. Article 324 (Crimes Involving Destruction,
or under

1. Presidential Decree No. 1613 (The Law on Arson);
2. Republic Act No. 6969 (Toxic Substances and Hazardous and Nuclear Waste Control Act of 1990);
3. Republic Act No. 5207, (Atomic Energy Regulatory and Liability Act of 1968);
4. Republic Act No. 6235 (Anti-Hijacking Law);
5. Presidential Decree No. 532 (Anti-piracy and Anti-highway Robbery Law of 1974); and,
6. Presidential Decree No. 1866, as amended (Decree Codifying the Laws on Illegal and Unlawful Possession, Manufacture, Dealing in, Acquisition or Disposition of Firearms, Ammunitions or Explosives)

thereby sowing and creating a condition of widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the populace, in order to coerce the government to give in to an unlawful demand shall be guilty of the crime of terrorism and shall suffer the penalty of forty (40) years of imprisonment, without the benefit of parole as provided for under Act No. 4103, otherwise known as the Indeterminate Sentence Law, as amended.

SEC. 4. Conspiracy to Commit Terrorism. – Persons who conspire to commit the crime of terrorism shall suffer the penalty of forty (40) years of imprisonment.

There is conspiracy when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of the crime of terrorism as defined in Section 3 hereof and decide to commit the same.

SEC. 5. Accomplice. – Any person who, not being a principal under Article 17 of the Revised Penal Code or a conspirator as defined in Section 4 hereof, cooperates in the execution of either the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism by previous or simultaneous acts shall suffer the penalty of from seventeen (17) years, four (4) months one day to twenty (20) years of imprisonment.

SEC. 6. Accessory. – Any person who, having knowledge of the commission of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism, and without having participated therein, either as principal or accomplice under Articles 17 and 18 of the Revised Penal Code, takes part subsequent to its commission in any of the following manner: (a) by profiting himself or assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the crime; (b) by concealing or destroying the body of the crime, or the effects, or instruments thereof, in order to prevent its discovery; (c) by harboring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of the principal or conspirator of the crime, shall suffer the penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment.

Notwithstanding the above paragraph, the penalties prescribed for accessories shall not be imposed upon those who are such with respect to their spouses, ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural, and adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by affinity within the same degrees, with the single exception of accessories falling within the provisions of subparagraph (a).

SEC. 7. Surveillance of Suspects and Interception and Recording of Communications. – The provisions of Republic Act No. 4200 (Anti-wire Tapping Law) to the contrary notwithstanding, a police or law enforcement official and the members of his team may, upon a written order of the Court of Appeals, listen to, intercept and record, with the use of any mode, form, kind or type of electronic or other surveillance equipment or intercepting and tracking devices, or with the use of any other suitable ways and means for that purpose, any communication, message, conversation, discussion, or spoken or written words between members of a judicially declared and outlawed terrorist organization, association, or group of persons or of any person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism.

Provided, That surveillance, interception and recording of communications between lawyers and clients, doctors and patients, journalists and their sources and confidential business correspondence shall not be authorized.

SEC. 8. Formal Application for Judicial Authorization. – The written order of the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals to track down, tap, listen to, intercept, and record communications, messages, conversations, discussions, or spoken or written words of any person suspected of the crime of terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit terrorism shall only be granted by the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals upon an ex parte written application of a police or of a law enforcement official who has been duly authorized in writing by the Anti-Terrorism Council created in Section 53 of this Act to file such ex parte application, and upon examination under oath or affirmation of the applicant and the witnesses he may produce to establish: (a) that there is probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances that the said crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism has been committed, or is being committed, or is about to be committed; (b) that there is probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances that evidence, which is essential to the conviction of any charged or suspected person for, or to the solution or prevention of, any such crimes, will be obtained; and, (c) that there is no other effective means readily available for acquiring such evidence.

SEC. 9. Classification and Contents of the Order of the Court. – The written order granted by the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals as well as its order, if any, to extend or renew the same, the original application of the applicant, including his application to extend or renew, if any, and the written authorizations of the Anti-Terrorism Council shall be deemed and are hereby declared as classified information: Provided, That the person being surveilled or whose communications, letters, papers, messages, conversations. Discussions, spoken or written words and effects have been monitored, listened to, bugged or recorded by law enforcement authorities has the right to be informed of the acts done by the law enforcement authorities in the premises or to challenge, if he or she intends to do so, the legality of the interference before the Court of Appeals which issued the written order. The written order of the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals shall specify the following: (a) the identity, such as name and address, if known, of the charged or suspected person whose communications, messages, conversations, discussions, or spoken or written words are to be tracked down, tapped, listened to, intercepted, and recorded and, in the case of radio, electronic, or telephonic (whether wireless or otherwise) communications, messages, conversations, discussions, or spoken or written words, the electronic transmission systems or the telephone numbers to be tracked down, tapped, listened to, intercepted, and recorded and their locations or if the person suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism is not fully known, such person shall be subject to continuous surveillance provided there is a reasonable ground to do so; (b) the identity (name, address, and the police or law enforcement organization) of the police or of the law enforcement official, including the individual identity (names, addresses, and the police or law enforcement organization) of the members of his team, judicially authorized to track down, tap, listen to, intercept, and record the communications, messages, conversations, discussions, or spoken or written words; (c) the offense or offenses committed, or being committed, or sought to be prevented; and, (d) the length of time within which the authorization shall be used or carried out.

SEC. 10. Effective Period of Judicial Authorization. – Any authorization granted by the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals, pursuant to Sec. 9 (d) of this Act, shall only be effective for the length of time specified in the written order of the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals, which shall not exceed a period of thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of the written order of the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals by the applicant police or law enforcement official.

The authorizing division of the Court of Appeals may extend or renew the said authorization for another non-extendible period, which shall not exceed thirty (30) days from the expiration of the original period: Provided, That the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals is satisfied that such extension or renewal is in the public interest: and Provided, further, That the ex parte application for extension or renewal, which must be filed by the original applicant, has been duly authorized in writing by the Anti-Terrorism Council.

In case of death of the original applicant or in case he is physically disabled to file the application for extension or renewal, the one next in rank to the original applicant among the members of the team named in the original written order of the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals shall file the application for extension or renewal: Provided, That, without prejudice to the liability of the police or law enforcement personnel under Section 20 hereof, the applicant police or law enforcement official shall have thirty (30) days after the termination of the period granted by the Court of Appeals as provided in the preceding paragraphs within which to file the appropriate case before the Public Prosecutor’s Office for any violation of this Act.

If no case is filed within the thirty (30)-day period, the applicant police or law enforcement official shall immediately notify the person subject of the surveillance, interception and recording of the termination of the said surveillance, interception and recording. The penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment shall be imposed upon the applicant police or law enforcement official who fails to notify the person subject of the surveillance, monitoring, interception and recording as specified above.

SEC. 11. Custody of Intercepted and Recorded Communications. – All tapes, discs, and recordings made pursuant to the authorization of the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals, including all excerpts and summaries thereof as well as all written notes or memoranda made in connection therewith, shall, within forty-eight (48) hours after the expiration of the period fixed in the written order of the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals or within forty-eight (48) hours after the expiration of any extension or renewal granted by the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals, be deposited with the authorizing Division of the Court of Appeals in a sealed envelope or sealed package, as the case may be, and shall be accompanied by a joint affidavit of the applicant police or law enforcement official and the members of his team.

In case of death of the applicant or in case he is physically disabled to execute the required affidavit, the one next in rank to the applicant among the members of the team named in the written order of the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals shall execute with the members of the team that required affidavit.

It shall be unlawful for any person, police officer or any custodian of the tapes, discs and recording, and their excerpts and summaries, written notes or memoranda to copy in whatever form, to remove, delete, expunge, incinerate, shred or destroy in any manner the items enumerated above in whole or in part under any pretext whatsoever.

Any person who removes, deletes, expunges incinerates, shreds or destroys the items enumerated above shall suffer a penalty of not less than six (6) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment.

SEC. 12. Contents of Joint Affidavit. – The joint affidavit of the police or of the law enforcement official and the individual members of his team shall state: (a) the number of tapes, discs, and recordings that have been made, as well as the number of excerpts and summaries thereof and the number of written notes and memoranda, if any, made in connection therewith; (b) the dates and times covered by each of such tapes, discs, and recordings; (c) the number of tapes, discs, and recordings, as well as the number of excerpts and summaries thereof and the number of written notes and memoranda made in connection therewith that have been included in the deposit; and (d) the date of the original written authorization granted by the Anti-Terrorism Council to the applicant to file the ex parte application to conduct the tracking down, tapping, intercepting, and recording, as well as the date of any extension or renewal of the original written authority granted by the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals.

The joint affidavit shall also certify under oath that no duplicates or copies of the whole or any part of any of such tapes, discs, and recordings, and that no duplicates or copies of the whole or any part of any of such excerpts, summaries, written notes, and memoranda, have been made, or, if made, that all such duplicates and copies are included in the sealed envelope or sealed package, as the case may be, deposited with the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals.

It shall be unlawful for any person, police or law enforcement official to omit or exclude from the joint affidavit any item or portion thereof mentioned in this Section.

Any person, police or law enforcement officer who violates any of the acts proscribed in the preceding paragraph shall suffer the penalty of not less than ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment.

SEC. 13. Disposition of Deposited Materials. – The sealed envelope or sealed package and the contents thereof, which are deposited with the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals, shall be deemed and are hereby declared classified information, and the sealed envelope or sealed package shall not be opened and its contents (including the tapes, discs, and recordings and all the excerpts and summaries thereof and the notes and memoranda made in connection therewith) shall not be divulged, revealed, read, replayed, or used as evidence unless authorized by written order of the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals, which written order shall be granted only upon a written application of the Department of Justice filed before the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals and only upon a showing that the Department of Justice has been duly authorized in writing by the Anti-Terrorism Council to file the application with proper written notice the person whose conversation, communication, message discussion or spoken or written words have been the subject of surveillance, monitoring, recording and interception to open, reveal, divulge, and use the contents of the sealed envelope or sealed package as evidence.
Any person, law enforcement official or judicial authority who violates his duty to notify in writing the persons subject of the surveillance as defined above shall suffer the penalty of six (6) years and one day to eight (8) years of imprisonment.

SEC. 14. Application to Open Deposited Sealed Envelop or Sealed Package. – The written application with notice to the party concerned to open the deposited sealed envelope or sealed package shall clearly state the purpose or reason: (a) for opening the sealed envelope or sealed package; (b) for revealing or disclosing its classified contents; (c) for replaying, divulging, and or reading any of the listened to, intercepted, and recorded communications, messages, conversations, discussions, or spoken or written words (including any of the excerpts and summaries thereof and any of the notes or memoranda made in connection therewith); and, (d) for using any of said listened to ,intercepted, and recorded communications, messages, conversations, discussions, or spoken or written words (including any of the excerpts and summaries thereof and any of the notes or memoranda made in connection therewith) as evidence.

Any person, law enforcement official or judicial authority who violates his duty to notify as defined above shall suffer the penalty of six (6) years and one day to eight (8) years of imprisonment.

SEC. 15. Evidentiary Value of Deposited Materials. – Any listened to, intercepted, and recorded communications, messages, conversations, discussions, or spoken or written words, or any part or parts thereof, or any information or fact contained therein, including their existence, content, substance, purport, effect, or meaning, which have been secured in violation of the pertinent provisions of this Act, shall absolutely not be admissible and usable as evidence against anybody in any judicial, quasi-judicial, legislative, or administrative investigation, inquiry, proceeding, or hearing.

SEC. 16. Penalty for Unauthorized or malicious Interceptions and/or Recordings. – Any police or law enforcement personnel who, not being authorized to do so by the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals, tracks down, taps, listens to, intercepts, and records in whatever manner or form any communication, message, conversation, discussion, or spoken or written word of a person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit terrorism shall be guilty of an offense and shall suffer the penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment.

In addition to the liability attaching to the offender for the commission of any other offense, the penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment and the accessory penalty of perpetual absolute disqualification from public office shall be imposed upon any police or law enforcement personnel who maliciously obtained an authority from the Court of Appeals to track down, tap, listen to, intercept, and record in whatever manner or form any communication, message, conversation, discussion, or spoken or written words of a person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism: Provided, That notwithstanding Section 13 of this Act, the party aggrieved by such authorization shall be allowed access to the sealed envelope or sealed package and the contents thereof as evidence for the prosecution of any police or law enforcement personnel who maliciously procured said authorization.

SEC. 17. Proscription of Terrorist Organizations, Association, or Group of Persons. – Any organization, association, or group of persons organized for the purpose of engaging in terrorism, or which, although not organized for that purpose, actually uses the acts to terrorize mentioned in this Act or to sow and create a condition of widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the populace in order to coerce the government to give in to an unlawful demand shall, upon application of the Department of Justice before a competent Regional Trial Court, with due notice and opportunity to be heard given to the organization, association, or group of persons concerned, be declared as a terrorist and outlawed organization, association, or group of persons by the said Regional Trial Court.

SEC. 18. Period of Detention Without Judicial Warrant of Arrest. – The provisions of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code to the contrary notwithstanding, any police or law enforcement personnel, who, having been duly authorized in writing by the Anti-Terrorism Council has taken custody of a person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit terrorism shall, without incurring any criminal liability for delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial authorities, deliver said charged or suspected person to the proper judicial authority within a period of three (3) days counted from the moment the said charged or suspected person has been apprehended or arrested, detained, and taken into custody by the said police, or law enforcement personnel: Provided, That the arrest of those suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism must result from the surveillance under Section 7 and examination of bank deposits under Section 27 of this Act.
The police or law enforcement personnel concerned shall, before detaining the person suspected of the crime of terrorism, present him or her before any judge at the latter’s residence or office nearest the place where the arrest took place at any time of the day or night. It shall be the duty of the judge, among other things, to ascertain the identity of the police or law enforcement personnel and the person or persons they have arrested and presented before him or her, to inquire of them the reasons why they have arrested the person and determine by questioning and personal observation whether or not the suspect has been subjected to any physical, moral or psychological torture by whom and why. The judge shall then submit a written report of what he/she had observed when the subject was brought before him to the proper court that has jurisdiction over the case of the person thus arrested. the judge shall forthwith submit his/her report within three (3) calendar days from the time the suspect was brought to his/her residence or office.

Immediately after taking custody of a person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism, the police or law enforcement personnel shall notify in writing the judge of the court nearest the place of apprehension or arrest: Provided, That where the arrest is made during saturdays, sundays, holidays or after office hours, the written notice shall be served at the residence of the judge nearest the place where the accused was arrested.

The penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment shall be imposed upon the police or law enforcement personnel who fails to notify any judge as provided in the preceding paragraph.

SEC. 19. Period of Detention in the Event of an Actual or Imminent Terrorist Attack. – In the event of an actual or imminent terrorist attack, suspects may not be detained for more than three (3) days without the written approval of a municipal, city, provincial or regional official of a Human Rights Commission or judge of the municipal, regional trial court, the Sandiganbayan or a justice of the Court of Appeals nearest the place of the arrest. If the arrest is made during Saturdays, Sundays, holidays or after office hours, the arresting police or law enforcement personnel shall bring the person thus arrested to the residence of any of the officials mentioned above that is nearest the place where the accused was arrested. The approval in writing of any of the said officials shall be secured by the police or law enforcement personnel concerned within five (5) days after the date of the detention of the persons concerned: Provided, however, That within three (3) days after the detention the suspects, whose connection with the terror attack or threat is not established, shall be released immediately.

SEC. 20. Penalty for Failure to Deliver Suspect to the Proper Judicial Authority Within Three (3) Days. – The penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment shall be imposed upon any police or law enforcement personnel who has apprehended or arrested, detained and taken custody of a person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism and fails to deliver such charged or suspected person to the proper judicial authority within the period of three (3) days.

SEC. 21. Rights of a Person Under Custodial Detention. – The moment a person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit terrorism is apprehended or arrested and detained, he shall forthwith be informed, by the arresting police or law enforcement officers or by the police or law enforcement officers to whose custody the person concerned is brought, of his or her right: (a) to be informed of the nature and cause of his arrest, to remain silent and to have competent and independent counsel preferably of his choice. If the person cannot afford the services of counsel of his or her choice, the police or law enforcement officers concerned shall immediately contact the free legal assistance unit of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) or the Public Attorney’s Office (PAO). It shall be the duty of the free legal assistance unit of the IBP or the PAO thus contacted to immediately visit the person(s) detained and provide him or her with legal assistance. These rights cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence of the counsel of choice; (b) informed of the cause or causes of his detention in the presence of his legal counsel; (c) allowed to communicate freely with his legal counsel and to confer with them at any time without restriction; (d) allowed to communicate freely and privately without restrictions with the members of his family or with his nearest relatives and to be visited by them; and, (e) allowed freely to avail of the service of a physician or physicians of choice.

SEC. 22. Penalty for Violation of the Rights of a Detainee. – Any police or law enforcement personnel, or any personnel of the police or other law enforcement custodial unit that violates any of the aforesaid rights of a person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit terrorism shall be guilty of an offense and shall suffer the penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment.

Unless the police or law enforcement personnel who violated the rights of a detainee or detainees as stated above is duly identified, the same penalty shall be imposed on the police officer or head or leader of the law enforcement unit having custody of the detainee at the time the violation was done.

SEC. 23. Requirement for an Official Custodial Logbook and Its Contents. – The police or other law enforcement custodial unit in whose care and control the person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit terrorism has been placed under custodial arrest and detention shall keep a securely and orderly maintained official logbook, which is hereby declared as a public document and opened to and made available for the inspection and scrutiny of the lawyer or lawyers of the person under custody or any member of his or her family or relative by consanguinity or affinity within the fourth civil degree or his or her physician at any time of the day or night without any form of restriction. The logbook shall contain a clear and concise record of: (a) the name, description, and address of the detained person; (b) the date and exact time of his initial admission for custodial arrest and detention; (c) the name and address of the physician or physicians who examined him physically and medically; (d) the state of his health and physical condition at the time of his initial admission for custodial detention; (e) the date and time of each removal of the detained person from his cell for interrogation or for any purpose; (f) the date and time of his return to his cell; (g) the name and address of the physician or physicians who physically and medically examined him after each interrogation; (h) a summary of the physical and medical findings on the detained person after each of such interrogation; (i) the names and addresses of his family members and nearest relatives, if any and if available; (j) the names and addresses of persons who visit the detained person; (k) the date and time of each of such visits; (l) the date and time of each request of the detained person to communicate and confer with his legal counsel or counsels; (m) the date and time of each visit, and date and time of each departure of his legal counsel or counsels; and, (n) all other important events bearing on and all relevant details regarding the treatment of the detained person while under custodial arrest and detention.

The said police or law enforcement custodial unit shall upon demand of the aforementioned lawyer or lawyers or members of the family or relatives within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity of the person under custody or his or her physician issue a certified true copy of the entries of the logbook relative to the concerned detained person without delay or restriction or requiring any fees whatsoever including documentary stamp tax, notarial fees, and the like. This certified true copy may be attested by the person who has custody of the logbook or who allowed the party concerned to scrutinize it at the time the demand for the certified true copy is made.

The police or other law enforcement custodial unit who fails to comply with the preceding paragraph to keep an official logbook shall suffer the penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment.

SEC. 24. No Torture or Coercion in Investigation and Interrogation. – No threat, intimidation, or coercion, and no act which will inflict any form of physical pain or torment, or mental, moral, or psychological pressure, on the detained person, which shall vitiate his free-will, shall be employed in his investigation and interrogation for the crime of terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit terrorism; otherwise, the evidence obtained from said detained person resulting from such threat, intimidation, or coercion, or from such inflicted physical pain or torment, or mental, moral, or psychological pressure, shall be, in its entirety, absolutely not admissible and usable as evidence in any judicial, quasi-judicial, legislative, or administrative investigation, inquiry, proceeding, or hearing.

SEC. 25. Penalty for Threat, Intimidation, Coercion, or Torture in the Investigation and Interrogation of a Detained Person. – Any person or persons who use threat, intimidation, or coercion, or who inflict physical pain or torment, or mental, moral, or psychological pressure, which shall vitiate the free-will of a charged or suspected person under investigation and interrogation for the crime of terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit terrorism shall be guilty of an offense and shall suffer the penalty of twelve (12) years and one day to twenty (20) years of imprisonment.

When death or serious permanent disability of said detained person occurs as a consequence of the use of such threat, intimidation, or coercion, or as a consequence of the infliction on him of such physical pain or torment, or as a consequence of the infliction on him of such mental, moral, or psychological pressure, the penalty shall be twelve (12) years and one day to twenty (20) years of imprisonment

SEC. 26. Restriction on Travel. - In cases where evidence of guilt is not strong, and the person charged with the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism is entitled to bail and is granted the same, the court, upon application by the prosecutor, shall limit the right of travel of the accused to within the municipality or city where he resides or where the case is pending, in the interest of national security and public safety, consistent with Article III, Section 6 of the Constitution. Travel outside of said municipality or city, without the authorization of the court, shall be deemed a violation of the terms and conditions of his bail, which shall then be forfeited as provided under the Rules of Court.

He or she may also be placed under house arrest by order of the court at his or her usual place of residence.

While under house arrest, he or she may not use telephones, cellphones, e-mails, computers, the internet or other means of communications with people outside the residence until otherwise ordered by the court.

The restrictions abovementioned shall be terminated upon the acquittal of the accused or of the dismissal of the case filed against him or earlier upon the discretion of the court on motion of the prosecutor or of the accused.

SEC. 27. Judicial Authorization Required to Examine Bank Deposits, Accounts, and Records. – The provisions of Republic Act No. 1405 as amended, to the contrary notwithstanding, the justices of the Court of Appeals designated as a special court to handle anti-terrorism cases after satisfying themselves of the existence of probable cause in a hearing called for that purpose that (1) a person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism, (2) of a judicially declared and outlawed terrorist organization, association, or group of persons, and (3) of a member of such judicially declared and outlawed organization, association, or group of persons, may authorize in writing any police or law enforcement officer and the members of his/her team duly authorized in writing by the anti-terrorism council to: (a) examine, or cause the examination of, the deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets and records in a bank or financial institution; and (b) gather or cause the gathering of any relevant information about such deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets, and records from a bank or financial institution. the bank or financial institution concerned shall not refuse to allow such examination or to provide the desired information, when so ordered by and served with the written order of the Court of Appeals.

SEC. 28. Application to Examine Bank Deposits, Accounts, and Records. – The written order of the Court of Appeals authorizing the examination of bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets, and records: (1) of a person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism, (2) of any judicially declared and outlawed terrorist organization, association, or group of persons, or (3) of any member of such organization, association, or group of persons in a bank or financial institution, and the gathering of any relevant information about the same from said bank or financial institution, shall only be granted by the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals upon an ex parte application to that effect of a police or of a law enforcement official who has been duly authorized in writing to file such ex parte application by the Anti-Terrorism Council created in Section 53 of this Act to file such ex parte application, and upon examination under oath or affirmation of the applicant and the witnesses he may produce to establish the facts that will justify the need and urgency of examining and freezing the bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets, and records: (1) of the person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism, (2) of a judicially declared and outlawed terrorist organization, association or group of persons, or (3) of any member of such organization, association, or group of persons.

SEC. 29. Classification and Contents of the Court Order Authorizing the Examination of Bank Deposits, Accounts, and Records. – The written order granted by the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals as well as its order, if any, to extend or renew the same, the original ex parte application of the applicant, including his ex parte application to extend or renew, if any, and the written authorizations of the Anti Terrorism Council, shall be deemed and are hereby declared as classified information: Provided, That the person whose bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets, and records have been examined, frozen, sequestered and seized by law enforcement authorities has the right to be informed of the acts done by the law enforcement authorities in the premises or to challenge, if he or she intends to do so, the legality of the interference. The written order of the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals designated to handle cases involving terrorism shall specify: (a) the identity of the said: (1) person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism, (2) judicially declared and outlawed terrorist organization, association, or group of persons, and (3) member of such judicially declared and outlawed organization, association, or group of persons, as the case may be, whose deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets, and records are to be examined or the information to be gathered; (b) the identity of the bank or financial institution where such deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets, and records are held and maintained; (c) the identity of the persons who will conduct the said examination and the gathering of the desired information; and, (d) the length of time the authorization shall be carried out.

SEC. 30. Effective Period of Court Authorization to Examine and Obtain Information on Bank Deposits, Accounts, and Records. – The authorization issued or granted by the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals to examine or cause the examination of and to freeze bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets, and records, or to gather information about the same, shall be effective for the length of time specified in the written order of the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals, which shall not exceed a period of thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of the written order of the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals by the applicant police or law enforcement official.

The authorizing division of the Court of Appeals may extend or renew the said authorization for another period, which shall not exceed thirty (30) days renewable to another thirty (30) days from the expiration of the original period, provided that the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals is satisfied that such extension or renewal is in the public interest, and provided further that the application for extension or renewal, which must be filed by the original applicant, has been duly authorized in writing by the Anti-Terrorism Council.

In case of death of the original applicant or in case he is physically disabled to file the application for extension or renewal, the one next in rank to the original applicant among the members of the team named in the original written order of the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals shall file the application for extension or renewal: Provided, That, without prejudice to the liability of the police or law enforcement personnel under Section 19 hereof, the applicant police or law enforcement official shall have thirty (30) days after the termination of the period granted by the Court of Appeals as provided in the preceding paragraphs within which to file the appropriate case before the Public Prosecutor’s Office for any violation of this Act.

If no case is filed within the thirty (30)-day period, the applicant police or law enforcement official shall immediately notify in writing the person subject of the bank examination and freezing of bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets and records. The penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment shall be imposed upon the applicant police or law enforcement official who fails to notify in writing the person subject of the bank examination and freezing of bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets and records.
Any person, law enforcement official or judicial authority who violates his duty to notify in writing as defined above shall suffer the penalty of six (6) years and one day to eight (8) years of imprisonment.

SEC. 31. Custody of Bank Data and Information Obtained after Examination of Deposits, Placements, Trust Accounts, Assets and Records. – All information, data, excerpts, summaries, notes, memoranda, working sheets, reports, and other documents obtained from the examination of the bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets and records of: (1) a person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit terrorism, (2) a judicially declared and outlawed terrorist organization, association, or group of persons, or (3) a member of any such organization, association, or group of persons shall, within forty-eight (48) hours after the expiration of the period fixed in the written order of the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals or within forty-eight (48) hours after the expiration of the extension or renewal granted by the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals, be deposited with the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals in a sealed envelope or sealed package, as the case may be, and shall be accompanied by a joint affidavit of the applicant police or law enforcement official and the persons who actually conducted the examination of said bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets and records.

SEC. 32. Contents of Joint Affidavit. – The joint affidavit shall state: (a) the identifying marks, numbers, or symbols of the deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets, and records examined; (b) the identity and address of the bank or financial institution where such deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets, and records are held and maintained; (c) the number of bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets, and records discovered, examined, and frozen; (d) the outstanding balances of each of such deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets; (e) all information, data, excerpts, summaries, notes, memoranda, working sheets, reports, documents, records examined and placed in the sealed envelope or sealed package deposited with the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals; (f) the date of the original written authorization granted by the Anti-Terrorism Council to the applicant to file the ex parte application to conduct the examination of the said bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets and records, as well as the date of any extension or renewal of the original written authorization granted by the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals; and (g) that the items enumerated were all that were found in the bank or financial institution examined at the time of the completion of the examination.

The joint affidavit shall also certify under oath that no duplicates or copies of the information, data, excerpts, summaries, notes, memoranda, working sheets, reports, and documents acquired from the examination of the bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets and records have been made, or, if made, that all such duplicates and copies are placed in the sealed envelope or sealed package deposited with the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals.

It shall be unlawful for any person, police officer or custodian of the bank data and information obtained after examination of deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets and records to copy, to remove, delete, expunge, incinerate, shred or destroy in any manner the items enumerated above in whole or in part under any pretext whatsoever.

Any person who copies, removes, deletes, expunges incinerates, shreds or destroys the items enumerated above shall suffer a penalty of not less than six (6) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment.

SEC. 33. Disposition of Bank Materials. – The sealed envelope or sealed package and the contents thereof, which are deposited with the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals, shall be deemed and are hereby declared classified information, and the sealed envelope or sealed package shall not be opened and its contents shall not be divulged, revealed, read, or used as evidence unless authorized in a written order of the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals, which written order shall be granted only upon a written application of the Department of Justice filed before the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals and only upon a showing that the Department of Justice has been duly authorized in writing by the Anti-Terrorism Council to file the application, with notice in writing to the party concerned not later than three (3) days before the scheduled opening, to open, reveal, divulge, and use the contents of the sealed envelope or sealed package as evidence.

Any person, law enforcement official or judicial authority who violates his duty to notify in writing as defined above shall suffer the penalty of six (6) years and one day to eight (8) years of imprisonment.

SEC. 34. Application to Open Deposited Bank Materials. – The written application, with notice in writing to the party concerned not later than three (3) days of the scheduled opening, to open the sealed envelope or sealed package shall clearly state the purpose and reason: (a) for opening the sealed envelope or sealed package; (b) for revealing and disclosing its classified contents; and, (c) for using the classified information, data, excerpts, summaries, notes, memoranda, working sheets, reports, and documents as evidence.

SEC. 35. Evidentiary Value of Deposited Bank Materials. – Any information, data, excerpts, summaries, notes, memoranda, work sheets, reports, or documents acquired from the examination of the bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets and records of: (1) a person charged or suspected of the crime of terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit terrorism, (2) a judicially declared and outlawed terrorist organization, association, or group of persons, or (3) a member of such organization, association, or group of persons, which have been secured in violation of the provisions of this Act, shall absolutely not be admissible and usable as evidence against anybody in any judicial, quasi-judicial, legislative, or administrative investigation, inquiry, proceeding, or hearing.

SEC. 36. Penalty for Unauthorized or Malicious Examination of a Bank or a Financial Institution. – Any person, police or law enforcement personnel who examines the deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets, or records in a bank or financial institution of: (1) a person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit terrorism, (2) a judicially declared and outlawed terrorist organization, association, or group of persons, or (3) a member of such organization, association, or group of persons, without being authorized to do so by the Court of Appeals, shall be guilty of an offense and shall suffer the penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment.

In addition to the liability attaching to the offender for the commission of any other offense, the penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment shall be imposed upon any police or law enforcement personnel, who maliciously obtained an authority from the Court of Appeals to examine the deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets, or records in a bank or financial institution of: (1) a person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism, (2) a judicially declared and outlawed terrorist organization, association, or group of persons, or (3) a member of such organization, association, or group of persons: Provided, That notwithstanding Section 33 of this Act, the party aggrieved by such authorization shall upon motion duly filed be allowed access to the sealed envelope or sealed package and the contents thereof as evidence for the prosecution of any police or law enforcement personnel who maliciously procured said authorization.

SEC. 37. Penalty of Bank Officials and Employees Defying a Court Authorization. – An employee, official, or a member of the board of directors of a bank or financial institution, who refuses to allow the examination of the deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets, and records of: (1) a person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit terrorism, (2) a judicially declared and outlawed terrorist organization, association, or group of persons, or (3) a member of such judicially declared and outlawed organization, association, or group of persons in said bank or financial institution, when duly served with the written order of the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals, shall be guilty of an offense and shall suffer the penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment.

SEC. 38. Penalty for False or Untruthful Statement or Misrepresentation of Material Fact in Joint Affidavits. – Any false or untruthful statement or misrepresentation of material fact in the joint affidavits required respectively in Section 12 and Section 32 of this Act shall constitute a criminal offense and the affiants shall suffer individually the penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment.

SEC. 39. Seizure and Sequestration. – The deposits and their outstanding balances, placements, trust accounts, assets, and records in any bank or financial institution, moneys, businesses, transportation and communication equipment, supplies and other implements, and property of whatever kind and nature belonging: (1) to any person suspected of or charged before a competent Regional Trial Court for the crime of terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit terrorism; (2) to a judicially declared and outlawed organization, association, or group of persons; or (3) to a member of such organization, association, or group of persons shall be seized, sequestered, and frozen in order to prevent their use, transfer, or conveyance for purposes that are inimical to the safety and security of the people or injurious to the interest of the State.

The accused or a person suspected of may withdraw such sums as may be reasonably needed by the monthly needs of his family including the services of his or her counsel and his or her family’s medical needs upon approval of the court. He or she may also use any of his property that is under seizure or sequestration or frozen because of his or her indictment as a terrorist upon permission of the court for any legitimate reason.

Any person who unjustifiably refuses to follow the order of the proper division of the Court of Appeals to allow the person accused of the crime of terrorism or of the crime of conspiracy to commit terrorism to withdraw such sums from sequestered or frozen deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets and records as may be necessary for the regular sustenance of his or her family or to use any of his or her property that has been seized, sequestered or frozen for legitimate purposes while his or her case is pending shall suffer the penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment.

SEC. 40. Nature of Seized, Sequestered and Frozen Bank Deposits, Placements, Trust Accounts, Assets and Records. – The seized, sequestered and frozen bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets and records belonging to a person suspected of or charged with the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism shall be deemed as property held in trust by the bank or financial institution for such person and the government during the pendency of the investigation of the person suspected of or during the pendency of the trial of the person charged with any of the said crimes, as the case may be and their use or disposition while the case is pending shall be subject to the approval of the court before which the case or cases are pending.

SEC. 41. Disposition of the Seized, Sequestered and Frozen Bank Deposits, Placements, Trust Accounts, Assets and Record. – If the person suspected of or charged with the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism is found, after his investigation, to be innocent by the investigating body, or is acquitted, after his arraignment or his case is dismissed before his arraignment by a competent court, the seizure, sequestration and freezing of his bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets and records shall forthwith be deemed lifted by the investigating body or by the competent court, as the case may be, and his bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets and records shall be deemed released from such seizure, sequestration and freezing, and shall be restored to him without any delay by the bank or financial institution concerned without any further action on his part. The filing of any appeal on motion for reconsideration shall not state the release of said funds from seizure, sequestration and freezing.

If the person charged with the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism is convicted by a final judgment of a competent trial court, his seized, sequestered and frozen bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets and records shall be automatically forfeited in favor of the government.

Upon his or her acquittal or the dismissal of the charges against him or her, the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P500,000.00) a day for the period in which his properties, assets or funds were seized shall be paid to him on the concept of liquidated damages. The amount shall be taken from the appropriations of the police or law enforcement agency that caused the filing of the enumerated charges against him or her.

SEC. 42. Penalty for Unjustified Refusal to Restore or Delay in Restoring Seized, Sequestered and Frozen Bank Deposits, Placements, Trust Accounts, Assets and Records. – Any person who unjustifiably refuses to restore or delays the restoration of seized, sequestered and frozen bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets and records of a person suspected of or charged with the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism after such suspected person has been found innocent by the investigating body or after the case against such charged person has been dismissed or after he is acquitted by a competent court shall suffer the penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment.

SEC. 43. Penalty for the Loss, Misuse, Diversion or Dissipation of Seized, Sequestered and Frozen Bank Deposits, Placements, Trust Accounts, Assets and Records. – Any person who is responsible for the loss, misuse, diversion, or dissipation of the whole or any part of the seized, sequestered and frozen bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets and records of a person suspected of or charged with the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism shall suffer the penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment.

SEC. 44. Infidelity in the Custody of Detained Persons. – Any public officer who has direct custody of a detained person under the provisions of this Act and who by his deliberate act, misconduct, or inexcusable negligence causes or allows the escape of such detained person shall be guilty of an offense and shall suffer the penalty of: (a) twelve (12) years and one day to twenty (20) years of imprisonment, if the detained person has already been convicted and sentenced in a final judgment of a competent court; and (b) six (6) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment, if the detained person has not been convicted and sentenced in a final judgment of a competent court.

SEC. 45. Immunity and Protection of Government Witnesses. – The provisions of Republic Act No. 6981 (Witness Protection, Security and Benefits Act) to the contrary notwithstanding, the immunity of government witnesses testifying under this Act shall be governed by Sections 17 and 18 of Rule 119 of the Rules of Court: Provided, however, That said witnesses shall be entitled to benefits granted to witnesses under said Republic Act No. 6981.

SEC. 46. Penalty for Unauthorized Revelation of Classified Materials. – The penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment shall be imposed upon any person, police or law enforcement agent, judicial officer or civil servant who, not being authorized by the Court of Appeals to do so, reveals in any manner or form any classified information under this Act.

SEC. 47. Penalty for Furnishing False Evidence, Forged Document, or Spurious Evidence. – The penalty of twelve (12) years and one day to twenty (20) years of imprisonment shall be imposed upon any person who knowingly furnishes false testimony, forged document or spurious evidence in any investigation or hearing under this Act.

SEC. 48. Continuous Trial. - In cases of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism, the judge shall set the case for continuous trial on a daily basis from Monday to Friday or other short-term trial calendar so as to ensure speedy trial.

SEC. 49. Prosecution Under This Act Shall Be a Bar to Another Prosecution Under the Revised Penal Code or Any Special Penal Laws. - When a person has been prosecuted under a provision of this Act, upon a valid complaint or information or other formal charge sufficient in form and substance to sustain a conviction and after the accused had pleaded to the charge, the acquittal of the accused or the dismissal of the case shall be a bar to another prosecution for any offense or felony which is necessarily included in the offense charged under this Act.

SEC. 50. Damages for Unproven Charge of Terrorism. – Upon acquittal, any person who is accused of terrorism shall be entitled to the payment of damages in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P500,000.00) for every day that he or she has been detained or deprived of liberty or arrested without a warrant as a result of such an accusation. The amount of damages shall be automatically charged against the appropriations of the police agency or the Anti-Terrorism Council that brought or sanctioned the filing of the charges against the accused. It shall also be released within fifteen (15) days from the date of the acquittal of the accused. The award of damages mentioned above shall be without prejudice to the right of the acquitted accused to file criminal or administrative charges against those responsible for charging him with the case of terrorism.

Any officer, employee, personnel, or person who delays the release or refuses to release the amounts awarded to the individual acquitted of the crime of terrorism as directed in the paragraph immediately preceding shall suffer the penalty of six (6) months of imprisonment.
If the deductions are less than the amounts due to the detained persons, the amount needed to complete the compensation shall be taken from the current appropriations for intelligence, emergency, social or other funds of the Office of the President.

In the event that the amount cannot be covered by the current budget of the police or law enforcement agency concerned, the amount shall be automatically included in the appropriations of the said agency for the coming year.

SEC. 51. Duty to Record and Report the Name and Address of the Informant. - The police or law enforcement officers to whom the name of a suspect in the crime of terrorism was first revealed shall record the real name and the specific address of the informant.

The police or law enforcement officials concerned shall report the informant’s name and address to their superior officer who shall transmit the information to the Congressional Oversight Committee or to the proper court within five (5) days after the suspect was placed under arrest or his properties were sequestered, seized or frozen.

The name and address of the informant shall be considered confidential and shall not be unnecessarily revealed until after the proceedings against the suspect shall have been terminated.

SEC. 52. Applicability of the Revised Penal Code. - The provisions of Book I of the Revised Penal Code shall be applicable to this Act.

SEC. 53. Anti-Terrorism Council. – An Anti-Terrorism Council, hereinafter referred to, for brevity, as the “Council,” is hereby created. The members of the Council are: (1) the Executive Secretary, who shall be its chairperson; (2) the Secretary of Justice, who shall be its Vice Chairperson; and (3) the Secretary of Foreign Affairs; (4) the Secretary of National Defense; (5) the Secretary of the Interior and Local Government; (6) the Secretary of Finance; and (7) the National Security Advisor, as its other members.

The Council shall implement this Act and assume the responsibility for the proper and effective implementation of the anti-terrorism policy of the country. The Council shall keep records of its proceedings and decisions. All records of the Council shall be subject to such security classifications as the Council may, in its judgment and discretion, decide to adopt to safeguard the safety of the people, the security of the Republic, and the welfare of the nation.

The National Intelligence Coordinating Agency shall be the Secretariat of the Council. The Council shall define the powers, duties, and functions of the National Intelligence Coordinating Agency as Secretariat of the Council. The National Bureau of Investigation, the Bureau of Immigration, the Office of Civil Defense, the Intelligence Service of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, the Anti-Money Laundering Council, the Philippine Center on Transnational Crime, and the Philippine National Police intelligence and investigative elements shall serve as support agencies for the Council.

The Council shall formulate and adopt comprehensive, adequate, efficient, and effective anti-terrorism plans, programs, and counter-measures to suppress and eradicate terrorism in the country and to protect the people from acts of terrorism. Nothing herein shall be interpreted to empower the Anti-Terrorism Council to exercise any judicial or quasi-judicial power or authority.

SEC. 54. Functions of the Council. – In pursuit of its mandate in the previous Section, the Council shall have the following functions with due regard for the rights of the people as mandated by the Constitution and pertinent laws:

1. Formulate and adopt plans, programs and counter-measures against terrorists and acts of terrorism in the country;

2. Coordinate all national efforts to suppress and eradicate acts of terrorism in the country and mobilize the entire nation against terrorism proscribed in this Act;

3. Direct the speedy investigation and prosecution of all persons accused or detained for the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism and other offenses punishable under this Act, and monitor the progress of their cases;

4. Establish and maintain comprehensive data-base information systems on terrorism, terrorist activities, and counter-terrorism operations;

5. Freeze the funds property, bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets and records belonging to a person suspected of or charged with the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism, pursuant to Republic Act No. 9160 otherwise known as the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2001, as amended;

6. Grant monetary rewards and other incentives to informers who give vital information leading to the apprehension, arrest, detention, prosecution, and conviction of person or persons who are liable for the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism;

7. Establish and maintain coordination with and the cooperation and assistance of other nations in the struggle against international terrorism; and

8. Request the Supreme Court to designate specific divisions of the Court of Appeals and regional trial courts in Manila, Cebu City and Cagayan de Oro City, as the case may be, to handle all cases involving the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism and all matters incident to said crimes. The Secretary of Justice shall assign a team of prosecutors from: (a) Luzon to handle terrorism cases filed in the regional trial court in Manila; (b) from the Visayas to handle cases filed in Cebu City; and (c) from Mindanao to handle cases filed in Cagayan de Oro City.

SEC. 55. Role of the Commission on Human Rights. - The Commission on Human Rights shall give the highest priority to the investigation and prosecution of violations of civil and political rights of persons in relation to the implementation of this Act; and for this purpose, the Commission shall have the concurrent jurisdiction to prosecute public officials, law enforcers, and other persons who may have violated the civil and political rights of persons suspected of, accused of, or detained for the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism.

SEC. 56. Creation of a Grievance Committee. - There is hereby created a Grievance Committee composed of the Ombudsman, as chair, and the Solicitor General, and an undersecretary from the Department of Justice (DOJ), as members, to receive and evaluate complaints against the actuations of the police and law enforcement officials in the implementation of this Act. The Committee shall hold office in Manila.

The Committee shall have three (3) subcommittees that will be respectively headed by the Deputy Ombudsmen in Luzon, the Visayas and Mindanao. The subcommittees shall respectively hold office at the Offices of Deputy Ombudsmen. Three (3) Assistant Solicitors General designated by the Solicitor General, and the regional prosecutors of the DOJ assigned to the regions where the Deputy Ombudsmen hold office shall be members thereof. The three (3) subcommittees shall assist the Grievance Committee in receiving, investigating and evaluating complaints against the police and other law enforcement officers in the implementation of the Act. If the evidence warrants it, they may file the appropriate cases against the erring police and law enforcement officers. Unless seasonably disowned or denounced by the complainants, decisions or judgments in the said cases shall preclude the filing of other cases based on the same cause or causes of action as those that were filed with the Grievance Committee or its branches.

SEC. 57. Ban on Extraordinary Rendition. - No person suspected or convicted of the crime of terrorism shall be subjected to extraordinary rendition to any country unless his or her testimony is needed for terrorist related police investigations or judicial trials in the said country and unless his or her human rights, including the right against torture, and right to counsel, are officially assured by the requesting country and transmitted accordingly and approved by the Department of Justice.

SEC. 58. Extra-Territorial Application of this Act. – Subject to the provision of an existing treaty of which the Philippines is a signatory and to any contrary provision of any law of preferential application, the provisions of this Act shall apply: (1) to individual persons who commit any of the crimes defined and punished in this Act within the terrestrial domain, interior waters, maritime zone, and airspace of the Philippines; (2) to individual persons who, although physically outside the territorial limits of the Philippines, commit, conspire or plot to commit any of the crimes defined and punished in this Act inside the territorial limits of the Philippines; (3) to individual persons who, although physically outside the territorial limits of the Philippines, commit any of the said crimes on board Philippine ship or Philippine airship; (4) to individual persons who commit any of said crimes within any embassy, consulate, or diplomatic premises belonging to or occupied by the Philippine government in an official capacity; (5) to individual persons who, although physically outside the territorial limits of the Philippines, commit said crimes against Philippine citizens or persons of Philippine descent, where their citizenship or ethnicity was a factor in the commission of the crime; and (6) to individual persons who, although physically outside the territorial limits of the Philippines, commit said crimes directly against the Philippine government.

SEC. 59. Joint Oversight Committee. - There is hereby created a Joint Oversight Committee to oversee the implementation of this Act.

The Oversight Committee shall be composed of five (5) members each from the Senate and the House in addition to the Chairs of the Committees of Public Order of both Houses who shall also Chair the Oversight Committee in the order specified herein. The membership of the Committee for every House shall at least have two (2) opposition or minority members. The Joint Oversight Committee shall have its own independent counsel.

The Chair of the Committee shall rotate every six (6) months with the Senate chairing it for the first six (6) months and the House for the next six (6) months. In every case, the ranking opposition or minority member of the Committee shall be the Vice Chair.

Upon the expiration of one year after this Act is approved by the President, the Committee shall review the Act particularly the provisions that authorize the surveillance of suspects of or persons charged with the crime of terrorism. To that end, the Committee shall summon the police and law enforcement officers and the members of the Anti-Terrorism Council and require them to answer questions from the members of Congress and to submit a written report of the acts they have done in the implementation of the law including the manner in which the persons suspected of or charged with the crime of terrorism have been dealt with in their custody and from the date when the movements of the latter were subjected to surveillance and his or her correspondences, messages, conversations and the like were listened to or subjected to monitoring, recording and tapping.

Without prejudice to its submitting other reports, the Committee shall render a semi-annual report to both Houses of Congress. The report may include where necessary a recommendation to reassess the effects of globalization on terrorist activities on the people, provide a sunset clause to or amend any portion of the Act or to repeal the Act in its entirety.

The courts dealing with anti-terrorism cases shall submit to Congress and the President a report every six (6) months of the status of anti-terrorism cases that have been filed with them starting from the date this Act is implemented.

SEC. 60. Separability Clause. – If for any reason any part or provision of this Act is declared unconstitutional or invalid, the other parts or provisions hereof which are not affected thereby shall remain and continue to be in full force and effect.

SEC. 61. Repealing Clause. – All laws, decrees, executive orders, rules or regulations or parts thereof, inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed, amended, or modified accordingly.

SEC. 62. Special Effectivity Clause. - After the bill shall have been signed into law by the President, the Act shall be published in three (3) newspapers of national circulation; three (3) newspapers of local circulation, one each in Ilocos Norte, Baguio City and Pampanga; three (3) newspapers of local circulation, one each in Cebu, Iloilo and Tacloban; and three (3) newspapers of local circulation, one each in Cagayan de Oro, Davao and General Santos City.

The title of the Act and its provisions defining the acts of terrorism that are punished shall be aired everyday at primetime for seven (7) days, morning, noon and night over three (3) national television and radio networks; three (3) radio and television networks, one each in Cebu, Tacloban and Iloilo; and in five (5) radio and television networks, one each in Lanao del Sur, Cagayan de Oro, Davao City, Cotabato City and Zamboanga City. The publication in the newspapers of local circulation and the announcements over local radio and television networks shall be done in the dominant language of the community.

After the publication required above shall have been done, the Act shall take effect two (2) months after the elections are held in May 2007.

Thereafter, the provisions of this Act shall be automatically suspended one month before and two months after the holding of any election.
===============================================================
Siguradong sa inyong pagbabasa ng napakaikling batas na ito, lalo kayong naliwanagan sa kung anu ang ibig sabihin ng Human Security Act. Ako, siguradong hindi ko naintindihan ito.
Hintayin ninyo ang ang susunod kong entry sa blog.
MABUHAY PO KAYO!!!