It's final: Only 2 portions of Anti-Terror Law are unconstitutional | Inquirer News

It’s final: Only 2 portions of Anti-Terror Law are unconstitutional

/ 03:57 PM April 26, 2022

BAGUIO CITY, Philippines—The Supreme Court on Tuesday has denied with finality the bid to reverse its 2021 ruling dismissing the more than 30 petitions against Republic Act 11479 or Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020.

Denial of the motion means that only two parts of the Anti-Terror Law remain unconstitutional.

In its decision last year, the high court struck down for being overbroad and violative of freedom of expression the qualifier portion of Section 4 stating that “…which are not intended to cause death or serious physical harm to a person, to endanger a person’s life, or to create a serious risk to public safety.”


Another portion that has been stricken down is the second method for designation under Section 25.


The second method of section 25 states that “Request for designations by other jurisdictions or supranational jurisdictions may be adopted by the ATC after determination that the proposed designee meets the criteria for designation of UNSCR No. 1373.”

The high court, in its decision last year, said that the other provisions subject of more than 30 petitions “are not unconstitutional.”

In dismissing the motions for reconsideration, the high court petitioners was not able to provide substantial issues and arguments.

“The Court resolved to deny the motions for reconsideration due to lack of substantial issues and arguments raised by petitioners,” read the statement from its Public Information Office.

The Anti-Terrorism Act was signed into law on July 3, 2020, and took effect on July 18. It is the subject of 37 petitions before the Supreme Court, making it the most contentious law to date.

Basically, the law challenges at least 15 fundamental rights under the 1987 Constitution: 1. freedom of speech and expression; 2. freedom of religion; 3. freedom of assembly; 4. freedom of association; 5. freedom of the press; 6. the due process of law; 7. freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures; 8. right to privacy; 9. right to travel; 10. right to bail; 11. presumption of innocence; 12. freedom of information; 13. right against ex post facto laws and bills of attainder; 14. right against torture and incommunicado detention; and 15. academic freedom.


Aside from the 37 petitions, several reiterative motions were also filed by various petitioners after some of its petitioners have been arrested or red-tagged by government forces as having ties with the leftist groups.


Anti-Terror Law constitutional except for two parts, says SC  

Booc of ‘Bakwit School 7’ killed in armed encounter in Davao de Oro 

Groups dispute Army account of ‘lumad’ teachers’ slay

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

Citing ‘alarming developments,’ SC asked to halt anti-terror law’s implementation

TAGS: ATA, Human rights, red tag, Supreme Court

© Copyright 1997-2024 | All Rights Reserved

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. By continuing, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more, please click this link.