By Martin Sadongdong Ahead of the looming passage of the proposed Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020, Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana assured the public on Wednesday, June 3, that social activists and government critics who will organize or participate in mass protests will not be considered as terrorists. Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana
(EPA/ROLEX DELA PENA / MANILA BULLETIN FILE PHOTO) "No, they are not terrorists. Anybody who makes a peaceful protest is not a terrorist. It is enshrined in our constitution that you can do peaceful protest, a peaceful assembly. Those are actually protected by the Bill of Rights," said Lorenzana in a television interview over CNN Philippines. Further, the Defense Chief stated that it would depend on the spontaneity of the moment if a protest becomes violent. "About things against the police, I don't think these are terrorism. It's only when it is done very deliberately to manufacture weapons or bombs and to threaten people," he said. Concerns were raised as to the supposedly vague definition of terrorist acts under the proposed Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020. Under House Bill No. 6875, terrorism is described as any activity committed by any person who within or outside the Philippines, regardless of the stage of execution;

1. Engages in acts intended to cause death or serious bodily injury to any person, or endangers a person’s life;
2. Engages in acts intended to cause extensive damage or destruction to a government or public facility, public place or private property:
3. Engages in acts intended to cause extensive interference with, damage or destruction to critical infrastructure;
4. Develops, manufactures, possesses, acquires, transports, supplies or uses weapons, explosives or of biological, nuclear, radiological or chemical weapons; and
5. Release of dangerous substances, or causing fire, floods or explosions.

Further, the bill described terrorist activities as acts that "intimidate the general public or a segment thereof, create an atmosphere or spread a message of fear, to provoke or influence by intimidation the government or any of its international organization, or seriously destabilize or destroy the fundamental political, economic, or social structures of the country, or create a public emergency or seriously undermine public safety." Two House committees adopted last week the Senate's version of the bill, SB 1083, that seeks to repeal the Human Security Act of 2007. Several lawmakers who opposed the Senate and House's versions of the bill argued that the definition of terrorism was "vague" and can be used in "red-tagging" activists who dissent against the government. Lorenzana insisted that there are enough safeguards in the bill to ensure it won't be abused. "There are enough or stringent sanctions to anybody who will commit abuses in implementing this law so the people should not worry about this," he said. He also defended the timing of the fast-tracking of the passage of the bill especially since the country is still dealing with the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. "We need it now because the threat that the terrorist will also take advantage of the pandemic is very great. I think, this is just to me, it is high time that this bill is approved and passed into law," he said. Meanwhile, the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) welcomed President Duterte's decision to certify as urgent the bill, which would fast-track its passage. "The new proposed legislation gives more teeth to the existing law and eliminates some provisions that tend to curtail rather than aid security forces to defeat terrorism," said General Felimon Santos Jr., AFP Chief of Staff. "It may not immediately wipe away the menace, but it shall provide big strides toward winning the war against it beginning from the definition as to who are terrorists to penalizing other acts or acts that are contributory or leading to the eventual commission of the felony," Santos said. Like Lorenzana, Santos called for calm among the public as he said only those who are law-breakers are afraid of the proposed bill. "The bill passes through the crucible of intense deliberations to ensure that it will not trample upon people’s right but rather defend their rights to life, liberty, and property as well as the freedom from fear which the AFP seeks to uphold," he said.