Local sectoral reps form group vs. Anti-terror law

Sectoral representatives in Cebu have come together to oppose what they believe is a “front to martial rule” - the newly enacted Human Security Act of 2007.

The Movement for the Protection of People’s Rights was launched yesterday with the aim to educate the public of the alleged defects in the new law, which reportedly infringes human rights. The group also seeks to have Congress repeal the law.

Atty. Kit Enriquez, the group’s spokesperson, said they intend to create chapters in the different schools in the city and once enough support is gathered, a formal petition for the amendment of the law would be sent to both the Congress and the Supreme Court.

A major defect in the HSA, the group said, is the lack of proper definition of “terrorism” and “terrorist”. Lawyer Gloria Dalawampu, a supporter of the group, said that the law “merely declares acts of terrorism” such as rebellion and illegal possession of firearms but does not necessarily properly define what constitutes terrorism and who should be referred as terrorists.

She said a proper definition of “terrorism” and “terrorist” is necessary so as not to create confusion in the premise and coverage of the HSA. After all, she said, the supposed acts of terrorism mentioned in the law are already enumerated in the Revised Penal Code.

“This is the worst law I have encountered as a lawyer,” Dalawampu said.

Lawyer Poch Cinco, the group’s convenor and representative of the National Union of Progressive Lawyers, said the other equally condemnable provisions include the surveillance of persons and interception of their communications (Section 7), arrest and detention of suspects without judicial warrants (Section 18 and 19), and examination of bank deposits and financial papers (Section 27).

Cinco said that instead of securing citizens, it seems that the real purpose of the Act is to suppress groups that oppose the government, giving it legal basis to tag these groups as terrorists.

Former Cebu City Mayor Alvin Garcia was also present to show support to the new group. Garcia said he is not opposing the law per se but joins the call for it to have balance “between security of the state and the freedoms that people enjoy.”

Garcia said he is willing to affix his signature in the formal petition that the group would send to Congress and the Supreme Court. — Joeberth M. Ocao/QSB