Anti-Terror Act, Calls It Worse Than Martial Law, Im ready to challenge it in SC - Carpio

One of the loudest voice who always criticizes the administration of President Rodrigo Roa Duterte is non other than retired Supreme Court senor associate justice Antonio Carpio.

As early as now, even if it is not yet signed by President Rodrigo Duterte, Carpio has already made it known to the public that he will question the said measure was it is already signed into law.

He calls the Anti-Terrorism bill as a “very defective” measure with “many unconstitutional provisions.”

Retired Supreme Court senor associate justice Antonio Carpio
(photo credit to owner)

Carpio notes that if signed into law it will put the whole Philippines “permanently under a situation worse than martial law.”

Carpio has been intimately described as “best chief justice we never had,” said he would be among the many petitioners who would challenge the proposed bill once signed by the President.

“With the Anti-Terrorism Act as part of the law of the land, it is as if the Philippines is permanently under a situation worse than martial law,” Carpio said in an online forum 

Carpio specifically objected to the following provisions for going against the Constitution or for being too vague and broad:

• Section 29 allows the ATC to authorize the arrest of persons who are merely “suspected” of committing terrorism, in violation of the Constitution’s requirement that a warrant of arrest be issued by a judge upon finding of probable cause.

• Section 29 allows the detention of a suspect for as long as 24 days without being charged with any crime before the courts, eight times longer than the three-day maximum period provided by the Constitution.

• Section 25 empowers the ATC to designate persons or organizations as

“terrorist” without being required to conduct hearings where they can air their side and rebut the allegations. Recruitment to or membership in such organizations is penalized under Section 10.

• Section 34 provides for the house arrest of suspects even if they are entitled to bail as a matter of right in non-grave felonies or by reason of weak evidence in nonbailable offenses.

• Section 4(a) vaguely defines terrorism as committed by a person who “engages in acts intended to cause death or serious bodily injury to any person, or endangers a person’s life.”

  

What can you say about this?

Share us your thoughts by simple news updates, feel free to visit our site often.

Stay updatey leaving on the comment section below. For mord with today's relevant news and trends by hitting the LIKE button.

Thanks for dropping by and reading this post.

Report from OneNews

Disclaimer: Contributed articles does not reflect the view of THE PH CHRONICLES. This website cannot guarantee the legitimacy of some of the information contributed to us. You may do additional research if you find some information doubtful. No part of this article maybe reproduced without permission from this website.