Makati High School

Senior High School Unit

Grade 11 – Humanities and Social Sciences (B)
Philippine Politics and Governance

Integrative Paper

R.A. 11479 (Anti Terrorism Law)

Submitted to: Ms. Edna Pepito

Submitted by
Esmillo, Maria Samantha
Gozum, Rich Francis Xavier

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First and foremost, we would like to thank our Philippine Government teacher,
Miss Edna Pepito, for helping us get through this difficult project it wasn't an easy task
to complete this but glad we have somebody to look up to when we got stuck on certain
areas so we thank her for trusting us in our ability to complete this Integrative Paper and
for briefly explaining how to do so.

I would also like to formally thank Samantha Esmillo for her contributions. Given
that she was the only one who was dedicated to finish this task and she kept reminding
me. Within a short period of time just the two of us we were able to finish this Integrative
Paper. There are no words to express our gratitude.

2
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section: Page
Number:

Introduction
4

Rationale 5

Objectives 6

Overall Situation 6

Case Study 7-8

Critique of Policies and Strategies (Individual Task) 8

Conclusions (Individual Task) 8

References 9

3
I. INTRODUCTION

Have you heard of the sayings, "Activists are not Terrorists." a popular
misconception that is not addressed not taught in school on the difference between the
two. Here in the Philippines where there is a huge gap between the Rich and the Poor,
poverty lingers on every corner it is seen almost anywhere in the country. Activists
serves as the voices of those who cannot speak, they fight because there is inequality
in the system, the privileged are getting all of the advantages because they have wealth
and power, they are "prioritized" compared to the poor who suffer even from basic
human rights necessities such as food, clothing, shelter and education. There was an
existing law before the Republic Act No. 11479 (Anti Terrorism Law of 2020) which is
called the Republic Act No. 9372 (Human Security Act of 2007) which the aim is also to
minimize the terrorists, they are quite similar but the updated one is much more
terrifying. Anti-terror bill became a law within a short period of time although this law
trespasses the Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 2 and the fact that the
country is democratic, freedom of speech is the privilege of the people to criticize the
actions of the government especially if it's evident that the negativity outweighs its
advantages. The people whoe vote them have the ability to overthrow at any time. In a
country where wealth and power dominates the system, the certainty of the crime is
very low because it is prone to corruption. Officials especially the Military are able to
abuse their power to anyone they see especially those who are against or criticizing the
government especially activists, even without a warrant of arrest as long as this law is
active they are given the authority to detain individuals whenever they want.

4
II.RATIONALE

Anti-Terrorism Law's primary purpose is to lessen those who are against the
government, to establish "peace", to detterent terrorists, among it's provisions the law
punishes anyone, officials deem to have incited terrorism through "speeches (social
media and in public), proclamations, writings, emblems, banners and other
representations." The government maintains that it needs the anti-terrorism act to fight
"insurgencies."

Republic Act No. 11479 also known as Anti Terrorism Act of 2020 was signed
into law by President Rodrigo Roa Duterte at July, 2020. It is very alarming due to the
fact that this law could give a huge advantage to those in power to oppress anyone.
"Justice is only for the privileged." a quote that is common in the Philippines it specifies
there's discrimination even on basic human rights. A question arises, "How will the
Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Commission of Human Rights (CHR) be able to
confirm the certainty of the crime given that the Supreme Court itself admitted that there
were many false accusations, how will you establish peace when the country itself has a
history of corruption?"

Philippine rights advocates, lawyers, journalists and clerics have been jailed,
harassed and even worse for the past five and a half years under the leadership of
President Rodrigo Duterte. Human rights activists fear the legislation could spell further
suppression. Is it really to fight terrorism? or just to silence the voices of the people?

5
III. OBJECTIVES

1. Describe what Anti-Terrorism Law is.

2. Understand the standard and guidelines for implementing the Anti-Terrorism Law.
3. Identify strategies on how individuals are protected under the Anti-Terrorism Law.
4. Gain knowledge and understanding on the issues and concerns being faced by
individuals under the Anti-Terrorism Law today

IV. OVERALL SITUATION

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte signed into law the “Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020”,
which replaces the Human Security Act of 2007. Amnesty International has called on
the Philippine government to reject this legislation that contains dangerous provisions
and risks further undermining human rights in the country. This law endangers anyone
who are against the government's decision or even who are "suspected" to be against,
this law was declared due to Duterte's Administration goal which is to control the mass
especially activists since many human rights were violated during EJK, War on Drugs
and Martial Law in Mindanao, many innocent lives were lost, many were framed, the
military abused its power to the maximum capacity.

Amnesty International’s Asia-Pacific Regional Director, Nicholas Bequelin, said: “Under

Duterte’s presidency, even the mildest government critics can be labelled terrorists.
Progressive Activists such as the "Kabataan Partylist" - AnakBayan, AnakPawis and
many more are always red tagged which makes them prone to being targets. Since
power, prestige and wealth dominates the Philippines, this law is Anti- Poor due to the
fact that many cannot afford to get a lawyer. The old system before you detain someone
you must have a warrant of arrest and there should be a due process if the suspected
individual is guilty or not but right now what's happening is that the police are able to
detain without a warrant of arrest and even if the individual is a minor they can still be
detained. The law that protects the people is now threatening the people causing them to
hide and be afraid to voice out their own opinions.

6
V. CASE STUDY

Case Study 1: Philippines (constitutionality of declaration of martial law) The Lagman

Case. Petitioners in this case questioned the declaration of martial law by President Rodrigo R.
Duterte in Marawi City, in the Philippines. The facts are that on 4 September 2016 President
Duterte first declared a state of national emergency (Proclamation 55) on account of lawless
violence in Mindanao, triggered by the Maute terrorist group's attacks in February 2016 in Butig,
Lanao del Sur and the mass jailbreak in Marawi City in August 2016. On 23 May 2017, the
Maute group took over a hospital in Marawi City, Lanao de Sur, established check points, burned
down government facilities and inflicted casualties on government forces, and started flying the
flag of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). In response, President Duterte declared a
state of martial law (Proclamation 216) in the Mindanao group of islands for a period not
exceeding 60 days and the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus was also suspended. Pursuant to
the Constitution, the President submitted a report to Congress establishing the factual basis of
Proclamation 216.

Case study 2: Terror and Counter-terror. The immediate impact of the pandemic, i.e.
limits on movement, forced HIOs conducted by regional TGs to come to a standstill in the first
quarter of the year. As a result, they turned to the online world to expand communications and
recruitment operations. This in turn increased the number of low-intensity terror operations
(LIO) in the Philippines –beheadings, drive-by shootings, and kidnappings

7
 VI. CRITIQUE OF POLICIES AND STRATEGIES (INDIVIDUAL TASK):

The Department of Justice expressed confidence that the government will be able
to properly implement the controversial Anti-Terrorism Law after the Supreme Court (SC)
recently validated its constitutionality. In an interview, Justice Undersecretary Adrian
Sugay stated that the Supreme Court will no longer entertain any petitions or motions
relating to the Anti-Terror Law, after the high court determined definitively on the law's
validity.

Activism is part of a healthy, functional democracy where citizens can express and
demand redress for grievances. However, there are still provisions in the current Anti-
Terrorism Act that are cause for concern, including provisions on warrantless arrest,
extended detention without formal charge, possible invasions of privacy due to
surveillance, and the lack of adequate safeguards for the law's incorrect application. The
Commission on Human Rights (CHR) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) remain in
support, but activists, attorneys, and human rights defenders, in particular, continue to
battle since this contentious law can be abused.

The Anti-Terrorism Law of 2020, contradicts itself it is a title that says they are anti terror
but it is the opposite of what's happening and what they are doing, several cases were
found that the police threw false accusations into innocent lives. They clearly approved
this law to silence the protests who criticize their inefficiency, ineffectiveness, law-
dehumanizing abuse of power.

- RICH FRANCIS XAVIER B. GOZUM

VII.CONCLUSION (INDIVIDUAL TASK)

This Integrative Paper is all about the Anti-Terrorism Law of 2020 I disagree with the
implementation of the law, it needs to be junked, it is a law that will benifit the corrupt if

8
they see someone they believe to be against them, which makes them superior and
threatening. Many lives were taken during the Administration of Duterte, the government
is not to be trusted it is evident that those who have the wealth are exempted from the
power tripping of the authorities. It is Anti-Poor because it favors to wealthy people, it is
discrimatory because majority of the detainees are poor.

- RICH FRANCIS XAVIER B. GOZUM

9
VIII. REFERENCES

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/07/philippines-dangerous-antiterror-
law-yet-another-setback-for-human-rights/

https://www.unodc.org/e4j/en/terrorism/module-7/exercises.html
https://reliefweb.int/report/philippines/terrorism-philippines-2020

https://www.google.com/amp/s/chr.gov.ph/statement-of-chr-
spokesperson-atty-jacqueline-ann-de-guia-on-the-decision-of-the-
supreme-court-on-the-constitutionality-of-the-anti-terrorism-act/
amp/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.philstar.com/headlines/
2022/05/01/2177920/no-more-hindrance-terror-law-doj/amp/