"We are deeply concerned about the adoption of that new legislation", said Sidiki Kaba, President of FIDH. "This new piece of legislation, widely opposed by the Filipino civil society, does not provide for the necessary human rights safeguards", he added.
The Bill, pending in the Congress since several years, has been relabelled ‘Act to Secure the State and Protect our People from Terrorism’ otherwise known as the Human Security Act of 2007. The final version shows some improvements with regard to previous drafts.
Under that newly adopted legislation, the definition of terrorism is too broad, and not in line with the definition proposed by the UN High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change entitled "A more secure world: our shared responsibility." [1] Indeed, the Act provides that "Any persons who commits an act punishable under any of the following provisions of the Revised Penal Code (...) thereby sowing and creating 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 shall be guilty of the crime of terrorism". The UN High-Level Panel definition imposes that "the action must be intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants". This fundamental aspect of terrorist acts is not taken into account in the definition enshrined in the Filipino legislation.
FIDH and PAHRA recall that the ASEAN Convention on Counter Terrorism was adopted by the ASEAN Summit in Cebu (Philippines), last January. The definition of terrorist acts enshrined in Article 2 of the Convention is done through a reference to a limitative list of UN Conventions in the field of terrorism [2]. The Philippines, host of that Summit, should abide by such a definition, which is consistent with international law.
In addition, arrest without warrant and detention without judicial control will be allowed for three days "in the event of an actual or imminent terrorist attack". This is of concern since judicial control from the very outset of the criminal procedures constitutes a crucial safeguard against torture.
The adoption of that law is all the more worrying in view of the current political situation in the Philippines. Several Muslim armed groups are fighting the government in Mindanao. In addition, another armed group, the New People’s Army, of Marxist ideology, is also fighting the government since more than 30 years. FIDH and PAHRA unreservedly condemn human rights violations perpetrated by those non-State actors. However, the current trend to assimilate peaceful dissent with the NPA is extremely worrying. Indeed, left opposition political parties and peaceful mass organisations are regularly labelled as "fronts for the NPA", and consequently as "terrorists" themselves [3]. "In that context, the adoption of the new Anti-Terrorism law is frightening : it may indeed aggravate the human rights violations against those who are peacefully working for political, social, and economic changes in the country, and who are currently frequently targeted by extrajudicial killings", said Cynthia Gabriel, Deputy Secretary General of FIDH.
Last but not least, the newly adopted legislation establishes an Anti-Terrorism Council, composed of high-level government officials, with far-reaching powers. It may notably adopt plans against terrorists in the country, direct the speedy investigation and prosecution of all persons accused of terrorism, freeze the assets and bank deposits of persons suspected of terrorism, establish a data-base on terrorism and grant monetary rewards to informers who give vital information leading to the apprehension and arrest of persons liable for terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism, etc. Those wide powers are not regulated under the Act, and the accountability of such body for human rights violations in the fight against terrorism is not addressed at all.
FIDH and PAHRA consider that the Philippines anti-terrorism law should have been revised to clearly ensure protection of human rights, and its adoption should have been left for the Congress which will be elected in May, rather than adopted hastily by the outgoing Congress. FIDH and PAHRA are determined to follow up closely whether human rights will be duly respected in the framework of the implementation of the new legislation.