Calida's motions for extension defer SC resolution on halting anti-terrorism law
MANILA, Philippines — The Office of the Solicitor General’s motions for extension to answer the push for a temporary stop on the implementation of the anti-terrorism law have kept the Supreme Court from deliberating on the petitioners’ pleas citing urgency, documents showed.
Petitioners against the Anti-Terrorism Act have pressed the Supreme Court time and again to issue a temporary restraining order against the law’s enforcement even before the much-anticipated oral arguments. They have not stopped asking for this, even during the debates.
RELATED: Petitioners to SC: 'Profiling' of state workers' groups shows 'terror' in anti-terrorism law
Before the oral arguments were officially suspended on February 16, Rep. Edcel Lagman (Albay) again appealed to the court that petitioners and their counsels are “seriously threatened with prosecution.”
A week later, more than 20 petitioners filed a fresh plea for TRO, listing several “supervening events” such as continued red-tagging and arrests of petitioners, scrapping of the Department of National Defense and University of the Philippines accord, and continued prosecution and detention of two Aeta farmers under the law.
But the SC, in a notice on March 2, said they will wait for the OSG’s comment before it resolves the petitioners’ motion.
The SC continues to wait, as Solicitor General Jose Calida sought an extension to file its comment from first for another ten days and move the deadline from March 14 to March 24.
“To date, however, the draft Comment/Opposition remains under preparation as the OSG is still coordinating with the respondents to get a full grasp of the facts with respect to the allegations asserted by the petitioners, so as to come up with a comprehensive Comment/Opposition,” Calida said in a motion dated March 15.
Calida then sought another extension, this time for a month. In a motion filed on March 23, the solicitor general said they are “coordinating with the respondents, some of which also need more time to address fully the OSG’s inquiries as well as the allegations of petitioners.”
Calida has asked the SC to be given until April 23 to file its comment.
“The OSG assures that the instant motion is not intended to delay but is prompted by the afore-mentioned circumstances and by a sincere desire to submit a responsive and comprehensive Comment/Opposition that will aid this Honorable Court in resolving the present matter,” he added.
RELATED: Cheat sheet: Petitioners argue for the nullification of anti-terrorism law
In the time between the petitioners' filing on February 23 to end of March, counsel to petitioners Angelo Karlo Guillen was attacked and petitioners have also raised alleged intelligence-gathering and profiling of lawyers for "communist terrorist groups" and members of Confederation for Unity, Recognition and Advancement of Government Employees (COURAGE) and the Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT).
OSG: Parlade’s ‘threatening’ post made in personal capacity
Even with explaining Lt. Gen. Antonio Parlade’s Facebook post deemed by petitioners as a “clear threat” against them, Calida had to ask the SC for at least two extensions citing the need to “confirm… circumstances surrounding the subject Facebook post” and to “carefully verify these.”
Petitioners led by retired SC Justice Antonio Carpio in late January asked the SC to compel Parlade to explain his post which ended with: “Very soon, blood debts will be settled. The long arm of the law will catch up on you, and your supporters.”
On March 19, Calida filed the Comment, stating that Parlade made the posts in his personal capacity and statements are not officially from Armed Forces of the Philippines and the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict where the military general holds ranking positions.
Calida also noted that the Facebook post “shows no indication—not even the logo of said agencies—that the same was posted on behalf of the government. The AFP and the NTF-ELCAC, clearly, have no personal knowledge on the circumstances and intent behind its alleged posting.”
“There can be no violation of the Bill of Rights when committed by a private individual. To stress, the subject Facebook post was posted by Parlade in his personal capacity,” the solicitor general also said.
The SC will resume the oral arguments on April 6.
President Rodrigo Duterte signed the Anti-Terrorism Law on July 3 despite opposition from rights groups and civil society groups that it could be used to stifle human rights.
A petition against the law has been filed at the Supreme Court and other groups are preparing pleadings of their own.
Follow this page for updates. Photo courtesy of The STAR/Michael Varcas
National Security Adviser Hermogenes Esperon moves to block access to several websites, including news sites of alternative news orrganizations Bulatlat.com and Pinoyweekly.org.
In his letter to the National Telecommunications Commission, he only says the websites are "affiliated to and are supporting these terrorists and terrorist organizations."
No other basis to back up his allegation was cited in the letter.
Citing the designation of the CPP-NPA-NDF as terrorists, NSA Hermogenes Esperon moves to block access to several sites.
— Kristine Patag (@kristinepatag) June 22, 2022
In Esperon's letter to the NTC, he included news sites @bulatlat and @pinoyweekly; sites of other progressive groups RMP and Save our Schools. @PhilstarNews pic.twitter.com/nAzMITJFsS
The Commission on Human Rights says it "partly welcomes" the Supreme Court decision that some parts of the controversial Anti-terrorism Law are unconstitutional.
CHR spokesperson Jacqueline de Guia says the commission remains hopeful that the remaining contentious provisions of the law will be clarified by the high cour in the full text of the decision.
"At the same time, our commitment remains in guarding against possible human rights violations arising from the implementation of the anti-terror law. We steadfastly remind the government that countering terrorism and protecting human rights are not competing values but are, in fact, mutual and complementary," De Guia says in a statement.
The Supreme Court has deliberated and voted on the controversial Anti-Terrorism Act but the decision will be released "at the soonest time possible."
"However, considering that there were numerous issues resolved in the case, as well as the fact that each Justice had to vote on each issue, there is a need to accurately confirm and tally the vote of each Justice in order to ensure the correct resolution of the Court per issue," SC spokesperson Brian Hosaka says.
The Anti-Terrorism Council designates the National Democratic Front of the Philippines, the panel that negotiates for communist rebels during peace talks a terrorist organization.
Previous designation of the Communist Party of the Philippines and New People's Army led to the designation of supposed members of the CPP's Central Committee. Among those designated as terorrists were peace consultants.
Designation gives the Anti-Terrorism Council the authority to investigate and freeze the accounts of designated persons.
The Anti-Terrorism Council has designated 29 people, including alleged members of the Communist Party of the Philippines-New People's Army, as terrorists in two resolutions.
Designation allows the Anti-Money Laundering Council to freeze the assets of those on the list.
- Latest
- Trending
