Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1
the ATC; ESPERON, General Hermogenes,
in his capacity as Chief of Staff of the Armed
Forces of the Philippines; and CALDERON,
General Oscar, in his capacity as Director General
of the Philippine National Police
Respondents.
x-----------------------------------------------------------------------x
PETITION
2
4. Petitioners Alcain to Torno, all of legal age, Filipino citizens, taxpayers,
Year 2007-2008. they belong to the evening class where the students are
working professionals.
3
7. They may be served with summons and other processes through the
the petitioners’ rights as provided by the Bill of Rights, Article III of the
disbursements of public funds for purposes provided for in the law are
illegal.
PREFATORY STATEMENT
10.As provided for by the 1987 Constitution and as a signatory of the United
duty-bound to uphold these rights and to ensure that any action of any
of the government and the citizens of the Republic ensures that the
latter’s rights are respected above all else. Sec. 5 of the Declaration of
4
Principles and State Policies, Article II of the 1987 Constitution states, to
wit:
12.This was reinforced by Sec. 1 of the Bill of Rights, Article III of the 1987
14. And the last arbiter of questions regarding this nature is vested on the
Marbury vs. Madison of the United States to the latest Supreme Court
decisions, the Court has remained steadfast in its role and duty as the last
15. On this aspect, the Supreme Court, in a line of decisions, has always
5
due to the rights of its citizens. This was what the Court, in a recent
16.At present, there exists a silent threat, one that has haunted the world
since the September 11, 2001 bombing of the World Trade Center in New
York City. Our country is not new to this kind of threat; we have always
faced the threat of violence and war with the insurgents of the New
17.These elements have sown discord, difficulty and even terror on our
were affected due to the displacement from their homes and lands due to
one singular event in the history of mankind that changed our socio- and
Trade Center in New York. Before millions of spectators from all over
6
the world who watched through television and the internet, terrorists,
hijacking and commanding two airplanes, crashed the said aircrafts into
the World Trade Center in New York City. There were two other
airplanes reportedly en route to their targets. One hit the Pentagon but
the other did not reach its destination due to the intervention of the
passengers. The latter crashed into a field near the town of Shanksville
19. The group, Al Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden, claimed responsibility for
the attacks. This was delivered through a taped statement where bin
Terror”. He called on all its allies to join the United States in this war. In
many human rights violations that the Taliban regime has committed
1
“September 11attacks,” <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11,_2001_attacks.html>.
2
“War in Afghanistan (2001-present),” http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/20/gen.bush.transcript.html>.
7
against the Afghan people and made demands against it or face military
22. The Taliban regime refused to negotiate and so, on October 7, 2001,
particularly Kabul.
3
Ibid.
8
23.On November 12, 2001, Kabul fell. This marked as the start of the fall of
Karzai.
24.In the meantime, as the “War of Terror” was being waged, Presidents and
25. After Afghanistan, the “War on Terror” turned towards Iraq where
Saddam Hussein is the dictator. The rationale for the Iraq War was that
This was offered by Pres. Bush and Prime Minister Blair to their allies.
26.On 2 March 2003, the US led the coalition forces in the war in Iraq.
After more than a month, Pres. Bush, in a visit to USS Abraham Lincoln,
proclaimed that Iraq has been freed from Saddam Hussein and therefore
4
“For or against the War on Iraq,” <http://www.time.com/time/asia/covers/501030324/poe/13.html>.
9
now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that
country.”5
27.Despite all these, Osama bin Laden remains at large with linkages all
over the world which includes Jemaah Islamiyah, of which the Abu
2001 or the USA Patriot Act of 2001. Similarly, other nations followed
Terrorism Act 2005 and Australia made the Anti-Terrorism Bill into law
in the year 2005. Other countries also passed their own anti-terror laws.
law.
30. On 30 June 2004, Sen. Manuel Villar, initially, filed Senate Bill No. 735,
Purposes. This was later on substituted along with other Senate Bills
5
“President Bush Announces Major Combat Operations in Iraq Have Ended,”
<http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/20030501-15.html>.
10
Estrada, Ramon B. Magsaysay, Jr. and Alfredo S. Lim sponsored the bill
in substitution.
31.On 11 October 2005, Rep. Imee Marcos, with several Congressmen and
32.On 12 October 2005, these bills were certified by the President of the
33.The two bills were submitted to Joint Conference Committee where the
34.On 06 March 2007, the President acted on the submitted bill and
approved and signed it into law which became Republic Act No. 9372.
35.The effectivity of RA 9372 was scheduled two (2) months after the May
14, 2007 elections as contained inn Sec. 63 of the law thereof. It states:
“xxx
11
Thereafter, the provisions of this Act shall be
automatically suspended one month before and two months
after the holding of any election.”
Justice, Raul Gonzalez, issued statements that sent chilling effects to the
he further stated:
(NUJP) called on the 14th Congress “to act posthaste on this potential
threat not just to press freedom but to democracy itself by reviewing or,
better still, repeal altogether this law that is worse than the disease it
purports to cure.”7
sufficient basis or if they are being suspected of co-mingling with terror suspects,"
to which chairman Jose Torres Jr. and secretary general Rowena Paraan, on behalf
“
6
DoJ can recommend wiretap on alleged terrorists – Gonzalez,” by Tetch Torres,
INQUIRER.net, July 04, 2007, < http://archive.inquirer.net/view.php?db=1&story_id=74741>.
7 “
Gonzalez ‘wiretap media’ statement slammed ,” by Nonoy Expina, INQUIRER.net, July 05,
2007, < http://archive.inquirer.net/view.php?db=1&story_id=74992>.
8
Ibid.
12
38. On the other hand, Ambassador Alistair MacDonald, head of delegation
history of our country that is reminiscent of the Martial Law days when
Left, and without due process, are killed by a pattern that is not unique to
40. Sec. Eduardo Ermita, in an interview with The Daily Tribune said that
42. As with any law, RA 9372 requires that Implementing Rules and
9
“Anti-terror law not a license for killings -- EU envoy,” by Carla Gomez, INQUIRER.net,
July 05, 2007, < http://archive.inquirer.net/view.php?db=1&story_id=74986>.
10
“Wiretap on journalists possible under anti-terror law — DoJ chief,” by Benjamin B. Pulta,
The Daily Tribune, July 5, 2007, < http://www.tribune.net.ph/headlines/20070705hed3.html>.
13
concerned agencies of the government and the Anti-Terrorism Council
have begun the preparation of the law’s IRR, as well as the publication of
43.However, due to the ambiguity of some of its provisions and given the
identification of terrorists to any and all citizens that commits acts within
44. This is a Petition for Declaratory Relief under Rule 63 of the Revised
11
Newspaper or online source?
14
“(b) The terms of said documents and the validity thereof
are doubtful and require judicial construction;
“(c) There must have been no breach of the documents in
question;
“(d) There must be an actual justiciable controversy or the
“ripening seeds” of one between persons whose interests are
adverse;
“(e) The issue must be ripe for judicial determination; and
“(f) Adequate relief is not available through other means or
other forms of action or proceeding.”
46. Letter (a) points to the subject matter of the action. The present petition’s
47.Letter (b) provides for the issue or cause of the action. In this petition,
construction.
48. Letter (c) of the requirements are applicable to contracts and therefore
law or contract; otherwise declaratory relief will no longer lie. The suit
49. Letter (d) requires ripeness. RA 9372 is already in full effect although
Regulations. In this regard, the Court declared in Ople vs. Torres, to wit:
15
“xxx [t]he ripeness for adjudication of the petition at bar
is not affected by the fact that the implementing rules of A.O.
No. 308 have yet to be promulgated. Petitioner Ople assails A.O.
No. 308 as invalid per se and as infirmed on its face. His action is
not premature for the rules yet to be promulgated cannot cure
its fatal defects. Moreover, the respondents themselves have
started the implementation of A.O. No. 308 without waiting for
the rules.” (emphasis supplied)
50. Letter (e) and (f) point to the exhaustion of any and all available
remedies for adequate relief. In the case when a law is involved, the
any questions concerning the (validity) of the law lies in the Judiciary.
waited for the assailed law to become effective before filing the suit;
petitioners herein similarly have done the same. Apart from filing the
herein petition for declaratory relief after the effectivity date as per
12
Gonzales v COMELEC, 9 SCRA 230 (1963).
16
53. Abbot Laboratories v Gardner, the leading case on the issue of ripeness,
54. This was reiterated in Gardner v. Toilet Goods Association, wherein the
Court observed that the assailed law “has an immediate and substantial
appropriate.14
55.The determination of the fitness of the issues for judicial decision, the
jurisprudence.
56. In U.S. Public Workers v. Mitchell, federal employees assailed the Hatch
17
engaging in politics. The employees' boss told them that they could not
threatened with fire; the other employees had not faced such a direct
57. Similarly in a later case, the US Supreme Court held that “In cases where
58. Echoing these standards, the Philippine Supreme Court, in Bayantel vs.
Republic, which was a petition for declaratory relief, stated that “[a]n
59. Due to the national scope of the law and its application dependent on the
on the procedural aspect of the law could lead to breach of rights of any
down in the US case Poe vs. Ullman [367 U.S. 497 (1961)], that for the
15
U.S. Public Workers v. Mitchell, 330 U.S. 75 (1947).
16
Poe vs. Ullman, 367 U.S. 497 (1961).
18
for the effect of the law extends to any citizen, irregardless of affiliation.
All could well be under the definition of terrorist as provided by the law
terrorism, two Filipino organizations were such listed: the Abu Sayyaf
(CPP-NPA).
the three-day Mindanao Peace and Security Summit at the Pryce Hotel in
Cagayan de Oro that “[i]f you are a communist terrorist, we will stop
you. If you are a religious terrorist, we will stop you. If you are a
17
“1st targets: Rogue AFP, red terrorists,” Paolo Romero, The Philippine Star, Vol. XXI, No.
346, Wednesday, July 11, 2007, p. 1.
19
62.Parenthetically, the Armed Forces of the Philippines has alleged that
opposition, as well as those who simply earned the ire of those in power,
of RA 9372, then the said law now in effect—with all its attendant
to new heights.
64.As stated, a petition for declaratory relief is the proper and only remedy
DISCUSSION
65. Sec. 3 of Republic Act 9372, or the Human Security Act of 2007, states,
to wit:
20
a. Article 122 (Piracy in General and Mutiny in the High
Seas or in the Philippine Waters);
or under
felonies provided for by the Revised Penal Code or special laws and
21
extraordinary fear and panic among the populace, in order to coerce the
inform those who are subject to it what conduct on their part will render
alike with ordinary notions of fair play and the settled rules of law; and a
meaning and differ as to its application violates the first essential of due
69.Section 3 fails in this respect. First, the definition of terrorism lies not in
the crimes enumerated but on the qualification. This simply expands the
22
70. Terrorism, as defined by Webster’s Dictionary, is “the use of or the threat
72. It can be gleaned from the two definitions that terrorism as defined is not
18
“Terrorism,” Webster’s English Dictionary with Pronunciation Guide, Geddes & Grosset, for
WS Pacific Publications, Inc., 2007.
19
<www.fbi.gov/publications/terror/terror2000_2001.html>.
23
73. By application, say that a supporter of a losing candidate murders the
elected mayor and threatens to murder each and every person who sits as
mayor until his candidate sits. This act will definitely cause a general
fear in the populace and according to Sec. 3, terroristic. The act is not
one that is extreme violence. For that matter, none of the crimes listed is
kidnapping” as the acts used that aggravate acts dangerous to human life
that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any
state.
74. In a line of cases, the US Supreme Court defined the line that separates a
clear and a vague law. In United States v. Harriss20, the Court States that
when is an act terroristic and who determines it? Can the average man
is terroristic?
20
United States v. Harriss, 347 U.S. 612, 617 (1954).
24
76.The answer is No. An average person can never immediately say that a
murder case is terroristic. He does not have all the information regarding
provides, to wit:
and the ruling in David v. Arroyo where the Supreme Court had the occasion to
“xxx
“xxx
“xxx
25
“P.D. No. 1835 was repealed by E.O. No. 167 (which outlaws
the Communist Party of the Philippines) enacted by President
Corazon Aquino on May 5, 1985. These two (2) laws, however, do
not define “acts of terrorism.” Since there is no law defining “acts of
terrorism,” it is President Arroyo alone, under G.O. No. 5, who has the
discretion to determine what acts constitute terrorism. Her judgment
on this aspect is absolute, without restrictions. Consequently, there
can be indiscriminate arrest without warrants, breaking into offices
and residences, taking over the media enterprises, prohibition and
dispersal of all assemblies and gatherings unfriendly to the
administration. All these can be effected in the name of G.O. No. 5.
These acts go far beyond the calling-out power of the President.
Certainly, they violate the due process clause of the Constitution.
Thus, this Court declares that the “acts of terrorism” portion of
G.O. No. 5 is unconstitutional.” (emphasis supplied)
78. What is more important is that Sec. 3 does not provide complete and
21
(Citation of Estrada case)
26
Section 7 violates the
Right to Privacy of Communication
which states:
81. It is clear that intrusion is allowable upon an order of the court or when
27
members of a judicially declared and outlawed terrorist organization,
cannot be established because the offenders and the offense are not
defined.
82.Petitioner Dizon avers that his rights as a priest as well as those of his
2007.
which provides:
Section 18 is violative
of the Due Process Clause
28
suspected of the crime of terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to
commit terrorism shall, without incurring any criminal liability for
delay in the delivery of charged or suspected person to the proper
judicial authority within a period of three days counted from the
moment the said charged or suspected person has been
apprehended or arrested, detained, and taken into custody by the
said police, or law enforcement personnel: Provided, That the
arrest of those suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy
must result from the surveillance xxx.”
86. Joaquin Bernas, S.J., in his book, The 1987 Consitution of the Republic
punishable under the existing RPC. It has repealed, in effect, Art. 125 of
22
Joaquin Bernas, S.J., The 1987 Consitution of the Republic of the Philippines: A Commentary,
(Quezon City: Rex Printing Compnay, Inc., 2003), p. 600 citing Mekin v. Wolfe, 2 Phil. 74, 78 (1903); US
v. Jueves, 23 Phil. 100, 105 (1912); Roman Cath. Bishop of Lipa v. Municipality of Taal, 38 Phil. 367
(1918); Province of Camarines Sur v. Director of Lands, 64 Phil. 600(1937); Ongsiako v. Gamboa, 86
Phil. 50, 54 (1950); Tolentino v. Angeles, 99 Phil. 309, 318 (1956); Phil. National Bank v. Ruperto , G.R.
No. L-13777, June 30, 1960; Snatos v. Secretary of Public Works and Communications, G.R. No. L-
16049, March 18, 1967.
29
88. Under Art 125, for crimes or offenses punishable by capital penalties, the
more than 36 hours would be liable for a felony. Under RA 9372, the
commit any of the acts of terrorism, which are not originally punished
30
“Article 1. All human beings are born free and equal in
degree and rights;
stating:
91. In view of Sec. 2, Article III of the Constitution, the rule is that no arrest
examining the complainant and the witnesses he may produce and after
committed the crime. The exceptions when an arrest may be made even
31
(b) When an offense has in fact just been committed, and he has
personal knowledge of the facts indicating that the person to
be arrested has committed it;
officers who will make the arrests is based on or must result from the
for the conduct of surveillance but not for the arrests to be made.
adopted the ICCPR on December 16, 1966. The Philippines signed the
32
2. Anyone who is arrested shall be informed, at the time
of arrest, of the reasons for his arrest and shall be
promptly informed of any charges against him;
94. In relation to this, in the case, Roger Posadas et. al., vs The Hon.
23
G.R. No. 131492 September 29, 2000.
33
Section 27 is violative of Right to
Property and the Right Against
Unreasonable Search and Seizure (incomplete)
transactions and the period the deposits, accounts and records are to be
PRAYER
exercise its power to determine the validity of the statute in question in relation to
34