31st case filed vs terror law

MANILA, Philippines — An anti-torture organization, which includes defenders of victims of human trafficking, political detainees and families of victims of involuntary disappearances, filed in the Supreme Court on Friday the 31st case against the controversial Republic Act No. 11470 or the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020.

The petitioners belong to the Quezon City-based United Against Torture Coalition (UATC)-Philippines, composed of Balay Rehabilitation Center Inc., Children’s Legal Rights and Development Center, Coalition Against Trafficking in Women-Asia Pacific, Medical Action Group, Task Force Detainees of the Philippines (TFDP), Families of Victims of Involuntary Disappearances, forensic doctor Benito Molino and former political detainee Gregorio Bituin Jr.

Named respondents were President Duterte and Executive Secretary Salvador Medialdea, chair of the Anti-Terrorism Council.

Like the earlier petitioners, the UATC argued that many of the main provisions of the terror law are contrary to the provisions of the Constitution and the antitorture law, particularly those that value the dignity of every human person and guarantee full respect for human rights of all persons, including suspects, detainees and prisoners.

“The [terror law] effectively removes and/or diminishes the constitutionally guaranteed fundamental rights, including freedom from torture, ill-treatment, and enforced or involuntary disappearance. Petitioner’s ultimate plea before his honorable court of last resort is to protect the people by defending our Constitution,” stated the group’s 22-page certiorari petition filed by lawyers Cristina Sevilla and Ma. Pamela Eleanore Camacho.

The group argued that under Section 29 of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020, suspected terrorists may be detained for up to 14 days, extendible for another 10 days before they have to be charged in court—a condition that is conducive to the person detained for being tortured or coerced into involuntary confession, forcibly made to disappear or even summarily executed which the antitorture law aims to prevent.

The petitioners have pointed out that this period is much longer than the three-day detention period allowed by the Constitution when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended.

In a joint statement with fellow petitioners, Balay executive director Joy Lascano said that while it was the duty of the government to protect its jurisdiction from the threat of terrorism, “it should not be at the expense of fulfilling its mandate to promote, protect, and guarantee the exercise and enjoyment of all human rights.”

TFDP said it feared that the [terror law] will only institutionalize the government’s repressive and discriminatory measures, which is to “weaponize the law to suppress fundamental freedoms.”