Lawmakers have started rolling up their sleeves to come up with their recommendations and include "safeguards" in the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of the recently signed Anti-Terrorism Act to address concerns over abusive enforcement of the controversial law, Muntinlupa lone district Rep. Rozzano Rufino "Ruffy" Biazon said on Sunday, July 5.
The vice chairperson of the House Committee on National Defense and Security said there are provisions in Republic Act No. 11479 that may be subjected to "different interpretations and implementation" and should be tweaked in the IRR.
"Nakausap ko ang ibang kongresista at sa kasalukuyan ay bumubuo na sila ng recommendation. Ako rin mismo pinapaaral ko na sa staff ko kung paano kami makapagbigay ng recommendation patungo dun sa IRR. Although medyo maselan 'yan kasi ang IRR hindi naman dapat kami nakikialam," he said in an interview over DZBB on Sunday,
(I have talked to other congressmen and currently, they are coming up with their recommendation. I myself I have asked my staff to study how can we give our recommendation with respect to the IRR. Although it is somehow sensitive, because we should not meddle in the crafting of the IRR.)
He said since the controversial law was signed by President Duterte last Friday, the ball is now in the hands of the Executive and not Congress.
"Nasa executive na 'yan, since nakatukoy kung sino ang bubuo ang IRR. Kailangan maingat din kami na hindi kami magoverstep sa authority namin at manghimasok sa function ng Executive," Biazon said.
(It is within the purview of the Executive, since it was identified who will craft the IRR. We have to be careful so as not to overstep beyond our authority and meddle with the function of the Executive.)
"Hopefully, meron din naman na oversight committee, isa yun sa pamamaraan para magkaroon ng check and balance between the Legislature and the Executive," he added.
(Hopefully, we have oversight committee, one of the ways to have check and balance between the Legislature and the Executive.)
Biazon said there should be "clear process" as far the designation of terrorists is concerned, zeroing on the need to take a second look at Section 25 of RA 11479, which authorizes the Anti-Terror Council (ATC) to designate as terrorist a person or an organization without judicial process or intervention.
"Bago madesignate ang isang tao bilang terrorist ay may probable cause na magdetermine ng ating judiciary, sa judicial process natin at hindi lang yung arbitrary na designation by the Anti-Terror Council, isa 'yun puwede pang habulin sa IRR restating na ang determination ng probable cause ay by the prosecutors," he said.
(Before a person is designated as terrorist, there should be probable cause as determined by our judiciary, by our judicial process and not just the arbitrary designation by the Anti-Terror Council, this one can be tweaked in the IRR restating that the determination of probable cause should be by the prosecutors.)
He noted that there are other provisions that may be misinterpreted and should be cleared in the IRR.
"Ayoko sabihin na intention na mang abuso pero may room for misinterpretation. Pag gumawa tayo ng batas gusto natin na malinaw talaga 'yung puwedeng gawin, 'yung kailangan gawin para hindi maging subject sa iba't ibang interpretasyon at lalong lalo na 'yung iba ibang implementasyon," Biazon said.
(I am not saying that there is intention to abuse, but there is a rooom for misinterpretation. Once we passed a law, we wanted it to be clear in its purpose and objective, so that it will not be subjected to different interpretation and more so, different implementation.)
Biazon said should the law be questioned before the Supreme Court, he expressed hope that there will be speedy resolution so as not to prevent the security forces from fully running after the terrorists.
"May ibang batas na maaring gamitin pansamantala pero dapat maresolve din ito the soonest possible time kasi kung under question ang batas hindi tayo makakakilos na talagang lubusan na kakailanganin natin laban sa terorista. Kung dalhin man ito sa Supreme Court ay sana maaga rin ang resolution nito," he explained.
(We can use other laws temporarily, but this should be resolved the soonest possible time because if the law will be under question, we cannot fully take actions needed to fight the terrorists. If this will be elevated to the Supreme Court, I hope there will be immediate resolution.)
He said in case the SC issues injunction, the law enforcers will be somehow hindered from running after and preempting the acts of the terrorists and their cohorts, as such directive might pose " some gaps" in how the state forces will use their powers under the law.
Biazon said though he voted against the measure because of some vague provisions, he recognized the need to "update" the country's “Human Security Act of 2007” to crush down the terrorists and their financiers.
In a statement issued on Sunday, Albay 1st district Rep. Edcel Lagman said he is not yet convinced that there will be no abuses in the implementation of the "abusive" law.
"The new anti-terrorism law must be cleansed of its constitutional infirmities notwithstanding the say-so of its implementors," he said.
He maintained that RA 11479 itself is abusive and derogatory of human rights, civil liberties and fundamental freedoms.
He said with the signing of the law, state security forces will be emboldened "to perpetrate errant and arbitrary implementation against spirited ordinary citizens, progressive activists and political dissenters who have long been considered as “enemies of the state”.
"It is incumbent upon the Supreme Court to use the scalpel of judicial review to excise the numerous oppressive and unconstitutional provisions of the new law in its adjudication of relevant petitions," Lagman said.