Thread by @rapplerdotcom

The House is now tackling HB 6875 or the anti-terrorism bill. Lawmakers are expected to approve this on 3rd and final reading today. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda The House begins nominal voting for the controversial anti-terror bill, feared by many will be used by the government to go after dissenters. This means each lawmaker will be called to express his or her vote. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Deputy Minority Leader Carlos Zarate, who voted no, tells secretariat other congs joining the session through Zoom were muted and were not able to say their no vote. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda JUST IN: With a vote of 173-31-29, the House approves on final reading the anti-terrorism bill, feared by many will be used by the Duterte government to go after dissenters. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda The bill would broaden the definition for terrorism while lessening the restrictions on law enforcement agent effecting the arrest. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda There are 302 House members. 173 voted yes, 31 voted no, and 29 abstained. That means 69 lawmakers did not manifest a vote. We'll find out their names once the journal of today's session is drafted. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda House Minority Leader and Manila 6th District Rep Benny Abante on why he voted no to anti-terror bill: Under this bill, anyone suspected of being a terrorist can be detained without warrant for up to 24 days. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda FULL STORY: rappler.com/nation/262757-…

@maracepeda Abante: Kahit sino sa atin ay maaaring ipaaresto or ipakulong ng 24 days ng walang kasong isinasampa sa hukuman. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Abante: Hindi po yan ang aking ipinapangarap para sa aking mga anak at mga apo… The questionable and unconstitutional provisions of this bill defeats the very purpose why we are enacting this bill in the first place! | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Surigao del Norte D2 Rep Robert Ace Barbers defends his yes vote: For terrorists, this bill is laudable. Putting them in custody for long periods to extract valuable information from them is ideal. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda QC D6 Rep Kit Belmonte on his no vote: Reasonable ba humarap tayo sa ating mga nasasakupan na, "Pasensya na kayo. Sinabay pa namin ang terror bill sa mass testing at stimulus bills na magliligtas sa mga buhay, negosyo at trabaho ninyo." | @maracepeda

@maracepeda Belmonte: Gusto ba talagang pigilan lang ng batas na ito ang terorismo? O sa totoo lang, gusto lang bigyan ng lisensiya ang pamahaalaan na magparatang at mag-arasto nang walang kabayaran kung nagkamali? | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Belmonte: It is intended to widen the net on who can be considered as terrorists. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Belmonte: With this bill, in the guise of protecting our country, we are in fact undermining it!... We are repressing our freedoms. We are in fact destroying our democracy. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda CamSur D3 Rep Gabriel Bordado votes no: We do need a very strong anti terrorism bill. Unfortunately, certain provisions of HB 6875 threaten to put our countrymen in peril, practically squashing their civil liberties and putting their freedom in virtual jeopardy. | via @maracepeda

@maracepeda Gabriela Rep Arlene Brosas votes no: Mga ordinaryong mamamayang galit sa gobyerno ang unang maaaresto kapag pinirmahan ito. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Brosas: Terorismo laban sa mga nagtatanggol ng demokratikong karapatan [ito]. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Brosas: Kung di ka raw terorista, wala ka raw dapat ikatakot sa panukalang ito… Pero klaro sa mga probisyon ng anti-terror bill na kahit ordinaryong mamamayan ay puwedeng maakusahan na terorista by mere association of a terrorist act. | via @maracepeda

@maracepeda Brosas: Gusto ng gobyerno na matakot at manahimik na lang tayo. Tanggapin na lang ang gutom, kalbaryo ng paglalakad at problema sa transportasyon at kainutilan sa pagbibigay ng ayuda sa hikahos na mamamayan. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Magsasaka Rep Argel Cabatbat also votes no to the anti-terror bill. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda ACT Teachers Rep France Castro, on voting no: Ang basic justice principle [ay] "You are innocent until proven guilty." Pero dito sa anti-terror bill, "you are guilty until you prove yourself innocent." | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Bayan Muna Rep Eufemia Cullamat: Ang terror bill ay laban sa ating Saligang Batas. Walang anumang panukalang batas ang dapat lumusot kung ito ay lumalabag sa ating Konstitusyon. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

APEC Representative Sergio Dagooc voted "yes with great reservations": I support our effort na masupil natin ang terorismo, but much has been said about the constitutionality of some of the provisions.

LIVE:

Lanao del Norte 1st District Representative Khalid Dimaporo, who abstained: We were not allowed to ask any questions. There were some clarificatory questions I wanted answered so I can understand how important this bill is for our country.

LIVE:

PBA Rep Jericho Nograles, a co-author of the bill, says the anti-terror bill no longer needs to pass through the bicam since the House and the Senate passed similar versions. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Nograles: No need for bicameral conference committee since there are no disagreeing provisions. When approved in 3rd reading, it will be an enrolled bill for the action of the President. He may sign, veto any or all provisions, or not act on the measure for it to lapse into law.

Kabataan Representative Sarah Elago: We are in the midst of a public health crisis. We have persistently called for a comprehensive, humane, participatory approach to COVID-19 but we are met with this draconian, disproportionate, discriminatory response.

Elago: It is not helping our fight against COVID-19. Transparency and openness are what we need the most now.

LIVE:

Elago: Certifying an anti-terror bill as urgent, the Duterte regime reveals itself to be desperately targeting not the coronavirus, but criticism and dissent to its response to this public health emergency.

LIVE:

Elago: The anti-terror bill is not intended to target real terrorists... The anti-terror bill will just perpetrate abuse and human rights violations. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Elago: We must push back. Ang mga kabataan po ay hindi papayag na pagpapatuloy ang ganitong pang-aabuso. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

Agusan del Norte D1 Rep Lawrence Fortun says he did not withdraw as co-author of the anti-terror bill: Hindi naman po ako naging author ng panukalang ito kahit kailan. Inclusion of my name was a mistake.

He voted no today. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

Bayan Muna Representative Ferdinand Gaite: Seriously, anti-terror bill in the time of COVID? Ang anti-terror bill ay direktong lumalabag sa ating konstitusyon at madaling maabuso ng nasa kapangyarihan para labagin ang ating mga batayang karapatan.

LIVE:

Gaite: Instead, seriously, we must address the problems brought about by the COVID pandemic, and address the socioeconomic, political, psychological, and other impacts on the people, especially the poor.

LIVE:

Iloilo 1st District Representative Janette Garin: I am definitely against terrorism. However, the proposed measures seem to have taken a rather fast pace. A thorough discussion to avoid abuses has not been exhausted.

LIVE:

Janette Garin: We have a pandemic. People are losing jobs, uncertainty lies in the air, people are hungry, clamoring for directions. Certainly, the timing is bad, very bad. Certainly, there is no reason to rush this proposed bill.

LIVE:

Deputy Speaker and Basilan Rep Mujiv Hataman on opposing the anti-terror bill: Inilagay ng batas na ito sa kamay ng isang Anti-Terrorism Council ang kapangyarihan na magtalaga kung sino ang terorista. Dapat nasa kamay ng korte ito, at hindi ng mga appointee sa politikal na pwesto

Hataman: Gusto kong linawin sa lahat: ayoko ng terorismo, mali ang terorismo. Ito mismo ang nagpapahirap sa marami nating kababayan at gumatong sa walang hanggang Siklo ng karahansa, pang-aabuso at kahirapan. Walang puwang ang banta ng terorismo sa isang sibilisadong bayan.

Hataman: Coming from Basilan, malinaw sa akin ang pangangailangan na masugpo ang terorismo at violent extremism. Sa Basilan napundar ang Abu Sayyaf. Sa Basilan din ang operason ng Abu Sayyaf. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Hataman: Kami ang nakikidnap, nasusunugan, namamatayan ng kamag-anak kapag may terrorist attack. Sa kabila nito, noong nakipag-ugnayan at nakipagtulungan sa iba’t ibang sektor para sugpuin ang Abu Sayyaf, nakita namin...may paraan para makumbinsi sila na talikuran ang terorismo.

@maracepeda Hataman: At hindi laging barilan at pag-aaresto ang paraan nito. Puwedeng daanin sa development, sa dialogue, sa pag-aaruga sa mga komunidad, maayos na pamamahala at maayos na edukasyon para umangat ang antas ng pag-iisip at hindi mahulog sa kamay ng mga recruiter ang kabataan.

@maracepeda Hataman: I would hazard to say, Mr Speaker, na ayon sa mahaba kong karanasan sa paglaban sa terorismo, natutunan ko ang pinaka-epektibong pamamaraan ay higit pa sa pagdidigma, pagpaparusa o hagupit ng dahas. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Hataman: Nasa tamang pakikipag-usap, pakikipag-ugnayan, pagbubukas ng loob at pag-aaruga ang susi sa pagtigil sa terrosimo. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Hataman: This law is not meant to combat terrorism. It is meant to give the state to power to tag whomever they please as a terrorist. Hindi pa ba tayo natuto? | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Hataman: Sa pageechapuwera, pagpapabaya, pang-aapi, pang-aabuso, paniniil sa karapatan at kalayaan – ito ang tunay nagtulak sa ilan patungo sa violent extremism. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Hataman: Kung ganitong kadaling ma-misinterpret o maabuso ang nakasaad sa batas, baka lalo lang mapalala ng batas na ito kaysa maampat at mapigilan ang terorismo. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Rappler reporter @maracepeda being told by a source in the House secretariat that some lawmakers are moving to have their yes votes or abstention changed to no. The final vote count will still be changed, but the yes votes will still far outnumber the negative votes.

@maracepeda Albay D1 Rep Edcel Lagman votes no: I vote an emphatic “No” to this new Anti-Terror Act for the following overriding reasons: It institutes draconian measures of utmost severity hitherto unknown to penal legislation. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Lagman: The fundamental law sets the standard of 3 days even in the severest of circumstances when the writ of habeas corpus is suspended. The 24-day maximum provided for in House Bill No. 6875 is 8 times longer than the standard set by the Constitution. | via @maracepeda

@maracepeda Lagman: It is no excuse that other countries prescribe longer periods of detention because we should not follow these other countries who have less democratic history and do not have similar provisions in their constitutions. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Lagman: Ninety days is inordinately long to authorize police and military authorities to eavesdrop against privacy when exemption to the Anti-Wiretapping Law must be sparingly made, even if the same is not warranted in the first place. | @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Lagman: [It authorizes] the Anti-Money Laundering Council to pry into the bank accounts of suspected terrorist groups and persons without a court order by freezing such accounts for 20 days, which period can be extended to six months by the Court of Appeals. | via @maracepeda

@maracepeda Lagman: This amendment to the “Law of Secrecy of Bank Deposits” is similarly repugnant. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Lagman: A preliminary order of proscription of alleged terrorist organizations has no terminal duration during the pendency of the proceedings before the Court of Appeals. Even a temporary restraining order (TRO) issued by the Court of Appeals is only effective for 60 days.

@maracepeda Lagman: Red-tagging of groups or persons is encouraged, facilitated, and legalized. The penalties imposed are utterly severe and disproportionate to the lighter offenses provided for in the proposed new Anti-Terror Act. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Lagman: Safeguards for the protection of human rights and civil liberties enshrined in the Human Security Act of 2007 have been deleted or diluted. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Anak Mindanao Rep Amihilda Sancopan: We in Anak Mindanao party-list are against terrorism and support any govt efforts to put an end to any act of terror. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Sancopan: However, we vote no to HB 6875… because of the unimaginable sufferings this piece of legislation may cause to individuals, groups, communities, and ethnicities out of sheer terrorist tagging. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Sancopan: For years after the 9/11 attacks, Islamophobia worsened. Muslims have been negatively stereotyped as terrorists that has resulted in bias, discrimination and marginalization. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Sancopan: It is a brand that we Muslims strive to change each day, hoping that someday, we shall walk this earth with you as equals. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Sancopan: But with the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020, this monstrous and evil legislation not only violates constitutional guarantees but it also tramples on every known article under the universal declaration of human rights. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Sancopan: This bill will unjustifyingly broaden the influence of the already heavy-handed military and police forces through the extension of their surveillance power, including wiretapping and recording our conversations, effecting warrantless arrests. | via @maracepeda

@maracepeda Sancopan: Kaming mga Moro at Lumad ang madalas na unang biktima ng tunay na terorismo, hindi lamang sa bansa ito kundi sa iba’t ibang panig ng mundo. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Sancopan: At sa pagpapatupad ng batas na ito, naniniwala po kaming madadagdagan lang nito ang pagpapahirap at pang-aabuso sa katulad naming nahuhusgahan ng mga terorista bago pa man malaman ang aming mga panglaan o makita ang aming mga mukha.

LIVE:

@maracepeda Sancopan: This law is not the way to combat terrorism, but a way to further incite people to resort to violence. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Lanao del Norte D2 Rep Abdullah Dimaporo on abstaining: I fear that the bill, rather than reducing the number of terrorists & their supporters, it may challenge them & their numbers might increase, esp if the police mishandled the suspected supporters and terrorists.

@maracepeda Dimaporo: It is better, Mr Speaker, for us to give us more budget to Sec Dar of the Department of Agriculture to develop agri-business in the rural areas where the majority of the terrorists and their supporters are. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

@maracepeda Dimaporo: Let us fight poverty more intensively, Mr Speaker, to reduce the number of the terrorists and their supporters. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

Muntinlupa Rep Ruffy Biazon, who sponsored the anti-terror bill during the debates last night, withdraws his authorship of the bill and also votes no. | via @maracepeda

Biazon: I defended the bill with all my mind. But my heart was divided.

LIVE:

Biazon reiterates that they should come up with laws that are truly the work of the House, and not just a mere adoption of the Senate.

LIVE:

Biazon: We should stand up for the House. And because of this, my vote is no to the bill.... So, my withdrawal as author of the measure is another thing that I would like to present to the House.

LIVE:

Biazon says he is withdrawing support to this bill because House members were not allowed to introduce amendments to the anti-terror bill, an adopted version of the one from the Senate. | via @maracepeda

LIVE:

Deputy Speaker Raneo Abu says House members who want to explain their votes on the anti-terror bill may still do so in writing to be submitted to Office of the Secretary General. These will then become part of the official House records. | via @maracepeda