The Supreme Court on Sunday said it approved the set of procedural rules on all petitions and applications regarding issuances concerning the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020, which will take effect in two weeks.
According to the high court, the rules on anti-terrorism cases — covering petitions and applications regarding detentions without judicial warrants of arrest, surveillance and freeze orders, restrictions on travel, designations, and prescriptions, and other court issuances — will take effect on January 15, 2024.
Under the rules, a petitioner is required to establish that the respondent is a terrorist and outlawed organization or association, and the order is necessary to prevent terrorism through the existence of probable cause.
The CA was given the authority to issue an ex parte preliminary order of proscription which declares the respondents as terrorists, and proceed to conduct continuous hearings on the petition, with a decision mandated to be made within three months from submission for resolution.
They also mandated the issuance of a written order from the Court of Appeals for any law enforcement agency or military personnel to secretly wiretap, overhear and listen to, intercept, screen, read, surveil, record, or collect any private communications.
Persons suspected of committing any acts defined in the Anti-Terrorism Act and any member of a group, organization, or association can be arrested or detained by any law enforcement agent or military personnel without judicial warrant of arrest, provided that the period prescribed in the Revised Penal Code should be followed.
Violation of any provision of the rules will then be grounds for contempt, the SC said.
The Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 was signed into law by former President Rodrigo Duterte in July 2020, with a total of 37 petitions filed before the Supreme Court seeking to nullify the measure, making it one of the most challenged laws.
The Supreme Court published its full decision and the separate opinions on the Anti-Terrorism Act in February 2022, months after it declared only two parts of the measure unconstitutional. — DVM, GMA Integrated News
