Human rights activists in the Philippines are staging protest actions that call for the repeal of the Human Security Act of 2007, or the Anti-Terror Law, which took effect on July 15. Protesters fear the law will become a means to justify militarisation and suppression of dissent against the government, and promote terror, rather than peace, among citizens.

Hundreds of human rights and peace advocates join protests of the enactment of the Human Security Act of 2007 or simply called the Anti-Terror Law in the Philippines on July 15, 2007. Demonstrations took place in various parts of the country as well as in other parts of the world including Australia, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan.

Renato Reyes, Jr., secretary-general of the progressive organisation Bayan, said that “The law violates due process because of warrantless arrests, prolonged detention without charges, and it gives too much power to the Anti-Terror Council,” that will have the sole authority in identifying who the so-called “terrorists” are.

The new law, passed by the Philippine Congress in February and signed by President Gloria Arroyo in March, took effect on July 15.

While the government vows that this law would be used to counter terrorists and militants, protesters fear that it would be used to suppress dissent against the present administration.

The law loosely defines terrorism as a criminal act that “causes widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the populace.”

This “vague language of the Human Security Act invites the government to misuse it,” said Joanne Mariner, terrorism and counterterrorism director at Human Rights Watch, an international organisation dedicated to protecting the human rights.

Under the law, terrorism is punishable by 40 years imprisonment without parole. A person accused of the crime but is later acquitted is entitled to Php500, 000 ($10, 000) in damages for every day that the person was detained.

A petition will be filed in the country’s Supreme Court to question the constitutionality of the law as well as to seek a temporary restraining order on its implementation.

“The terror law is the single biggest threat to our basic freedoms and civil liberties. We hope the high court can help the people defeat this terrible legal monstrosity,” Reyes said. Similar laws have been passed in Nepal and Australia.

For the full text of the Anti-Terror Law, go to <http://philippinecommentary.blogspot.com/2007/03/human-security-act-of-2007.html>.

Related article:
“Philippines: Journalists say new Anti-Terror Law threatens press freedom” in we! July 2007, No. 2

Sources:
“Activists protest as terror law takes effect” from the Inquirer.net, posted on July 16, 2007, <http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view_article.php?article_id=76811>.
“Australia’s Anti-Terrorism Bill: The framework for a police state” from the World Socialist Web Site, posted on November 3, 2005, <http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/nov2005/stat-n03.shtml>.
“Nepal government tightens anti-terror law” from Jurist, posted on April 5, 2006, <http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2006/04/nepal-government-tightens-anti-terror.php>.
“Philippines: New Terrorism Law Puts Rights at Risk” from Human Rights Watch, posted on July 17, 2007, <http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/07/16/philip16404.htm>.
“South Asia: Uproar over Nepal terrorism bill” from BBC News, posted on September 22, 1999, <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/454479.stm>.