SC: No need for terror courts

Saying there is no need for it, the Supreme Court has denied the request of the Anti-Terrorism Council (ATC) for the creation of special courts to handle and prosecute cases related to terrorism, particularly those in violation of Republic Act 9372 or the Human Security Act (HSA).

In a minute resolution, the Court instead directed the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) to just monitor all cases involving terrorism, “and see to it that the judges concerned shall set these cases for continuous trial” as stated in Section 48 of the HSA.

The ATC, through retired police deputy director Marcelo Ele, had asked the Court to designate regional trial courts in Manila, Cebu City and Cagayan de Oro City to act as special courts for cases related to terrorist acts.

Court spokesman attorney Midas Marquez said the Court at this time does not see the pressing need to establish special courts just for terrorism cases.

“We find no reason yet to create special courts because the regular courts can still handle cases related to terrorism if there are any,” Marquez said.

The HSA took effect on July 15, 2007 despite strong opposition from various cause-oriented groups claiming the law would lead to human rights abuses. 

Marquez said the Court has yet to issue its decision on several petitions lodged by various groups calling for the scrapping of the HSA.

Under the HSA, suspected terrorists may be charged for violation of the Revised Penal Code’s Article 122 (Piracy in General and Mutiny in the High Seas or in the Philippine Waters); Article 134 (Rebellion or Insurrection); Article 134-a (coup d’ etat), including acts committed by private persons; Article 248 (Murder); Article 267 (Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention); Article 324 (Crimes Involving Destruction), or under Presidential Decree 1613 (The Law on Arson); Republic Act 6969 (Toxic Substances and Hazardous and Nuclear Waste Control Act of 1990); Republic Act 5207 (Atomic Energy Regulatory and Liability Act of 1968); Republic Act 6235 (Anti-Hijacking Law); Presidential Decree 532 (Anti-piracy and Anti-highway Robbery Law of 1974); and, Presidential Decree 1866, as amended (Decree Codifying the Laws on Illegal and Unlawful Possession, Manufacture, Dealing in, Acquisition or Disposition of Firearms, Ammunitions or Explosives) “to sow and create a condition of widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the populace, in order to coerce the government to give in to an unlawful demand.”

Those found guilty of violating the HSA may face imprisonment of up to 40 years without parole.

Last December, Justice Undersecretary Ricardo Blancaflor, ATC spokesman, announced that the Philippines now has the distinction of having the most number of convictions for terrorism at 39 convictions.

Included in this list are the 14 members of the Abu Sayyaf Group who were convicted for involvement in the Dos Palmas resort kidnapping incident.

“This is one of the highest, if not the highest in the world. Great Britain does not have that many convictions. In Spain, they have convicted four for the Madrid bombing and the mastermind was not included. In the United States, as far as we know, there were four who were meted out life sentences. It is Indonesia and the Philippines that have many convictions. The Philippines has the highest at 39,” he said.

Opposition to HSA still active

Different human rights advocate had previously tried to put pressure on the government to stop implementing the HSA.

Even a group of lawyers calling itself the Union of People’s Lawyers in Mindanao (UPLM) questioned and brought the matter before the Supreme Court.

According to the group, the HSA is another attempt of the President and her allies to perpetuate a state terror after her Presidential Proclamation 1017, Executive Order 464 and CPR (Calibrated Preemptive Response) were thrashed by the Supreme Court for being unconstitutional.

“The Philippine Constitution expresses the ultimate well-being envisioned by the Filipinos for the Filipinos,” a statement of the group released before the passage of the law was quoted.

It said HSA will degrade individual well-being by legitimizing warrantless arrests in indefinite detention, house arrests, restriction of travel, wiretapping, electronic surveillance, seizure of deposits in proscription of people’s organizations.

The UPLM has challenged the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and other lawyers’ groups to stand by and defend the bill of rights.

Another human rights group, Karapatan, earlier praised the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines for its stand on the Human Security Act of 2007.

The political opposition, on the other hand, said the law could be abused and worst, used against Mrs. Arroyo’s political opponents.