Putting persons on surveillance should have authorization under anti-terror law, says Biazon

MANILA, Philippines — Muntinlupa City Rep. Ruffy Biazon said Friday proper process should be followed if the controversial Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 would be used to justify putting persons—such as the House of Representatives’ Makabayan bloc members—under surveillance.

In an online forum, Biazon said surveillance of individuals should have an authorization, as stated in the Anti-Terrorism Law.

To recall, in a radio interview, Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) Southern Luzon Command chief Lt. Gen. Antonio Parlade Jr. admitted that the Makabayan bloc lawmakers were under surveillance for their alleged ties with the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and the New People’s Army (NPA).

In that interview, Parlade mentioned the anti-terrorism law.

“Because we have this anti-terror law now, it’s actually in effect, and we have to do our job to make sure that we are focusing on the right persons and we are properly implementing the law, and part of that is to make sure that we have a strong case against people…We have to make sure that we do our assignment well,” he added.

Should this be the case, Biazon, who serves as the vice-chairperson of the House committee on national defense and security, said that proper authorization should have been secured.

“If I remember correctly tung surveillance has to have authorization. So siguro naman kung gagamitin or invoke yung Anti-Terrorism Law, dapat susunod doon sa proseso with regard to surveillance,” Biazon said.

(If they will invoke the Anti-Terrorism Law, it should follow the process concerning surveillance.)

Biazon was referring to Section 16 of the Anti-Terror Law which specifically states that a written order has to be released by the Court of Appeals before surveillance could commence.

“So we just hope na if that is an admission from his (Parlade) part  na they are doing surveillance, dapat sumunod ‘yun doon sa process, as prescribed. Otherwise, it would be said na maaabuso,” Biazon said.

(We hope that if that is an admission from his part that they are doing surveillance, it should follow the process as prescribed. Otherwise, it could be said that the law is being abused.)

Not being weaponized

Nonetheless, Biazon believes that the controversial measure is not yet used as a “weapon” to justify red-tagging some lawmakers and celebrities.

“Masabi natin na (We can say) it is being weaponized if the law is actually being used to prosecute personalities,” Biazon said.

“Sa ngayon ang nakikita ko, hindi pa naman nila ini-invoke yung anti-terror law itself to bring people to court. Sa akin, ang specific definition, for me, my opinion, ang specific definition ng weaponizing it is kakasuhan ka in the court using that law,” he added.

(Right now, I’m seeing that the Anti-Terror Law has yet to be invoked to bring people to the court. My personal opinion is that the definition of weaponizing the law is when someone is charged in court using that law.)

Biazon, however, recognized that red-tagging is a form of propaganda used as a weapon with or without the anti-terror law.

He also cautioned uniformed personnel against doing such without any concrete evidence.

The red-tagging issue again hogged headlines when Parlade gave unsolicited advice to actress Liza Soberano and Miss Universe 2018 Catriona Gray, urging them to distance themselves from the Gabriela Women’s party-list.

Although Parlade said he gave the advice out of concern, critics of the government viewed it as a veiled threat.

“They might have been invited to speak before certain organizations pero maliwanag naman na (it is clear that) the advocacy that they were talking about is an advocacy that is shared by many. Hindi naman (It is not) confined to those who are against the government or confined to leftist or progressive movements,” Biazon said.

“I don’t think that is sufficient to brand somebody or somebody as being part of an underground movement kasi maraming naniniwala sa advocacy na ‘yun e (because many believe in that advocacy too),” he added.

Back when the House was still on its way to approve the Anti-Terror Law, Biazon withdrew his measure’s authorship. He also voted against it despite being supportive of the goals of the measure.

Biazon said that the lower chamber should “come up with an important piece of legislation that is truly the work of the House of Representatives” and not just merely adopt the work of the Senate.

All proposed amendments to the measure were also rejected during the House deliberations. [ac]