The principal author of the Anti-Terrorism Bill Senator Panfilo Lacson is being interviews by Communications Secretary Martin Andanar. (PIA NCR)
CALOOCAN CITY, June 29 (PIA) -- Senator Panfilo Lacson, a principal author of the Anti-Terrorism Bill 2020, is urging the public not to listen to disinformation and take time to read the measure.
During Monday’s edition of the Laging Handa public briefing powered by the Presidential Communications and affiliate media, Lacson hit those spreading doubts on the measure designed to reinforce government powers to run after and arrest terrorists, and said the bill has many safeguards to prevent abuse of authority.
“Sana po 'wag tayong makinig sa maling interpretasyon ng mga kumokontra. Magkaroon tayo ng tiwala sa pamahalaan at alagad ng batas. Katakot-takot na safeguards ang nilagay natin dito para maiwasan ang abuso,” he said, emphasizing that he will utilize all available platforms presented to him in order to explain to the public, and enlighten those with “misplaced perceptions” that stemmed from “misinformation and misinterpretation.”
“Katulad ng oportunidad na ipinagkaloob ninyo sa akin ngayong umaga, lahat ng available na platform, nakausap ko na ang PNP [Philippine National Police], Management Association of the Philippines, League of Provinces of the Philippines, at kung ano ‘yung available na platform para maipaliwanag at ma-enlighten ang ating mga kababayan para [maituwid] ‘yung misplaced perceptions bunga ng katakot-takot na misinformation at misinterpretation,” he said.
“Ang pinaka-glaring na misinterpretation siguro, pinaka-controversial ‘yung lagi kong ine-explain ay sa Section 29 kung saan sinasabi nila na binibigyan ng authority o power ang Anti-Terrorism Council na i-authorize ang ating military personnel o mga law enforcement agents na mag-aresto,” he added, explaining that the legislative intent of the measure is clearly to premise Section 29 on a valid warrantless arrest, as also lawfully allowed in other crimes that are not related to terrorism.
“Napakalayo po ‘yun sa katotohanan. Kung babasahin po natin ang Section 29, ‘yung title mismo detention without judicial warrant ang sinasabi rito,” the senator said.
“The Anti-Terrorism Council is only giving authority to those who will conduct custodial investigation because not all police, soldiers have special training to do so,” he added.
“Ang pino-propose nating ma-amend ay ‘yung Article 125 ng Revised Penal Code hindi yung Section 135 kasi hindi natin pwedeng galawin ‘yun o amyendahan dahil ‘yun ay rules of court ng judiciary; Supreme Court ang pwedeng mag-revise ng rules of court,” he added.
Under Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code, detention of suspects committing grave offenses in regular cases is only up to 36 hours.
Lacson explained that part of the safeguards included in the final provision in the measure will require authorities to “report” to the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) the details of their planned arrest.
“Nilagyan pa natin ng safeguards… Dinagdagan pa natin ito na ang CHR ay kaagad na ma-notify in writing ng mga nag-aresto based on a valid warrantless arrest,” he said.
“Unang-una, kapag naaresto ka base sa warrantless arrest under Rule 113 Section 5, agad-agad kailangan i-notify ng pulis na nag-areto ang huwes, ang Anti-Terrorism Council, at ang Commission on Human Rights. At para hindi maabuso ang karapatang-pantao, ang CHR dapat nandiyan kaagad mag-inspect, mag-imbestiga, kunin ang mga records,” he added.
“The mere failure on the part of the law enforcement agents na i-notify ‘yung huwes, pwede siyang makulong ng 10 taon bukod pa sa perpetual absolute disqualification from holding public office at lahat ng kanyang pension ay tanggal hindi makukuha. Kung hindi makukulong, ang mananagot ‘yung kanyang superior officer,” he furthered.
“Pangalawa, ‘yung ATC ang siyang magbibigay, mag-de-deputize sa mga alagad ng batas na magsasagawa ng custodial investigation. Kung walang written authority as mentioned sa Section 29, hindi maski sino na miyembro ng AFP at PNP ay makakapagsagawa ng custodial investigation,” he said.
Lacson said in applying for a court order to conduct surveillance activities, the Court of Appeals was also given jurisdiction and not only the Regional Trial Court judge.
“Ang isa pang safeguard dito ay information lahat ng proceeds. Lahat ng makakalap na information o ebidensya sa pagwa-wiretap classified, hindi pwedeng ipagkalat,” he said.
“Ang pwede lamang mag-release ay Court of Appeals. Kapag nag-violate ang alagad ng batas na nag-wiretap at hindi niya pinangalagaan, kulong siya at ganun din ang mga parusa, administrative and criminal,” he added.
The lawmaker then clarified that the bill defined terrorism as engaging in acts with the purpose of inciting fear and seriously destabilizing structures in the country, among others, and that it is different from inciting to sedition.
“Kung inciting to sedition, ini-incite mo ang mga tao para mag-rebelyon. Ito ini-incite mo para mag-commit ng terrorism na defined naman adequately under Section 4,” he said.
“Sinama natin ‘yung inciting to commit acts of terrorism kasi nga para sa pagplaplano pa lang, pag-recruit, pag-facilitate eh meron ng karampatang aksyon na pwedeng gawin ang ating mga alagad ng batas, Otherwise, magkukulang ang ngipin ng batas kasi alalahanin natin na ang terrorism malaki ang damage hindi lang sa buhay ng tao. Mga inosenteng sibilyan talaga ang target nito for maximum impact,” he added.
“Ang target talaga nila ay makapag-create, mag-sow ng fear, takutin ang ating mga kababayan. Magkaibang-magkaiba ang inciting to sedition at inciting to commit acts of terrorism,” he further said.
The Anti-Terrorism Bill, Lacson said, should be enacted into law with urgency as government cannot wait for terrorists to attack and then respond.
“Ang terorismo, wala itong pinipili. Hindi naman natin pwedeng sabihan ‘yung mga terorista na pakiusap lang po, huwag muna kayong magbomba dahil meron pang COVID-19,” he said
“Hindi ganun. Sila ang hinahanap nila oportunidad at maximum impact. Pag sinabing urgent, ang Anti-Terror Bill is always anurgent measure kasi nga terrorism knows no timing nor boundaries nor borders so dapat laging handa tayo sa pamamagitan ng isang potent, strong legal backbone to address terrorism,” he added. (PIA NCR)
CALOOCAN CITY, June 29 (PIA) -- Senator Panfilo Lacson, a principal author of the Anti-Terrorism Bill 2020, is urging the public not to listen to disinformation and take time to read the measure.
During Monday’s edition of the Laging Handa public briefing powered by the Presidential Communications and affiliate media, Lacson hit those spreading doubts on the measure designed to reinforce government powers to run after and arrest terrorists, and said the bill has many safeguards to prevent abuse of authority.
“Sana po 'wag tayong makinig sa maling interpretasyon ng mga kumokontra. Magkaroon tayo ng tiwala sa pamahalaan at alagad ng batas. Katakot-takot na safeguards ang nilagay natin dito para maiwasan ang abuso,” he said, emphasizing that he will utilize all available platforms presented to him in order to explain to the public, and enlighten those with “misplaced perceptions” that stemmed from “misinformation and misinterpretation.”
“Katulad ng oportunidad na ipinagkaloob ninyo sa akin ngayong umaga, lahat ng available na platform, nakausap ko na ang PNP [Philippine National Police], Management Association of the Philippines, League of Provinces of the Philippines, at kung ano ‘yung available na platform para maipaliwanag at ma-enlighten ang ating mga kababayan para [maituwid] ‘yung misplaced perceptions bunga ng katakot-takot na misinformation at misinterpretation,” he said.
“Ang pinaka-glaring na misinterpretation siguro, pinaka-controversial ‘yung lagi kong ine-explain ay sa Section 29 kung saan sinasabi nila na binibigyan ng authority o power ang Anti-Terrorism Council na i-authorize ang ating military personnel o mga law enforcement agents na mag-aresto,” he added, explaining that the legislative intent of the measure is clearly to premise Section 29 on a valid warrantless arrest, as also lawfully allowed in other crimes that are not related to terrorism.
“Napakalayo po ‘yun sa katotohanan. Kung babasahin po natin ang Section 29, ‘yung title mismo detention without judicial warrant ang sinasabi rito,” the senator said.
“The Anti-Terrorism Council is only giving authority to those who will conduct custodial investigation because not all police, soldiers have special training to do so,” he added.
“Ang pino-propose nating ma-amend ay ‘yung Article 125 ng Revised Penal Code hindi yung Section 135 kasi hindi natin pwedeng galawin ‘yun o amyendahan dahil ‘yun ay rules of court ng judiciary; Supreme Court ang pwedeng mag-revise ng rules of court,” he added.
Under Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code, detention of suspects committing grave offenses in regular cases is only up to 36 hours.
Lacson explained that part of the safeguards included in the final provision in the measure will require authorities to “report” to the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) the details of their planned arrest.
“Nilagyan pa natin ng safeguards… Dinagdagan pa natin ito na ang CHR ay kaagad na ma-notify in writing ng mga nag-aresto based on a valid warrantless arrest,” he said.
“Unang-una, kapag naaresto ka base sa warrantless arrest under Rule 113 Section 5, agad-agad kailangan i-notify ng pulis na nag-areto ang huwes, ang Anti-Terrorism Council, at ang Commission on Human Rights. At para hindi maabuso ang karapatang-pantao, ang CHR dapat nandiyan kaagad mag-inspect, mag-imbestiga, kunin ang mga records,” he added.
“The mere failure on the part of the law enforcement agents na i-notify ‘yung huwes, pwede siyang makulong ng 10 taon bukod pa sa perpetual absolute disqualification from holding public office at lahat ng kanyang pension ay tanggal hindi makukuha. Kung hindi makukulong, ang mananagot ‘yung kanyang superior officer,” he furthered.
“Pangalawa, ‘yung ATC ang siyang magbibigay, mag-de-deputize sa mga alagad ng batas na magsasagawa ng custodial investigation. Kung walang written authority as mentioned sa Section 29, hindi maski sino na miyembro ng AFP at PNP ay makakapagsagawa ng custodial investigation,” he said.
Lacson said in applying for a court order to conduct surveillance activities, the Court of Appeals was also given jurisdiction and not only the Regional Trial Court judge.
“Ang isa pang safeguard dito ay information lahat ng proceeds. Lahat ng makakalap na information o ebidensya sa pagwa-wiretap classified, hindi pwedeng ipagkalat,” he said.
“Ang pwede lamang mag-release ay Court of Appeals. Kapag nag-violate ang alagad ng batas na nag-wiretap at hindi niya pinangalagaan, kulong siya at ganun din ang mga parusa, administrative and criminal,” he added.
The lawmaker then clarified that the bill defined terrorism as engaging in acts with the purpose of inciting fear and seriously destabilizing structures in the country, among others, and that it is different from inciting to sedition.
“Kung inciting to sedition, ini-incite mo ang mga tao para mag-rebelyon. Ito ini-incite mo para mag-commit ng terrorism na defined naman adequately under Section 4,” he said.
“Sinama natin ‘yung inciting to commit acts of terrorism kasi nga para sa pagplaplano pa lang, pag-recruit, pag-facilitate eh meron ng karampatang aksyon na pwedeng gawin ang ating mga alagad ng batas, Otherwise, magkukulang ang ngipin ng batas kasi alalahanin natin na ang terrorism malaki ang damage hindi lang sa buhay ng tao. Mga inosenteng sibilyan talaga ang target nito for maximum impact,” he added.
“Ang target talaga nila ay makapag-create, mag-sow ng fear, takutin ang ating mga kababayan. Magkaibang-magkaiba ang inciting to sedition at inciting to commit acts of terrorism,” he further said.
The Anti-Terrorism Bill, Lacson said, should be enacted into law with urgency as government cannot wait for terrorists to attack and then respond.
“Ang terorismo, wala itong pinipili. Hindi naman natin pwedeng sabihan ‘yung mga terorista na pakiusap lang po, huwag muna kayong magbomba dahil meron pang COVID-19,” he said
“Hindi ganun. Sila ang hinahanap nila oportunidad at maximum impact. Pag sinabing urgent, ang Anti-Terror Bill is always anurgent measure kasi nga terrorism knows no timing nor boundaries nor borders so dapat laging handa tayo sa pamamagitan ng isang potent, strong legal backbone to address terrorism,” he added. (PIA NCR)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.