Anti-terror bill: Makakasuhan pwedeng i-house arrest kapag pinayagang magpiyansa

KINONDENA ng Bayan Muna ang ginawa umanong pagsisingit ng Senado sa probisyon sa Anti-Terrorism bill na nagbabawal sa isang tao na pinayagang makapagpiyansa ng korte na makalabas ng bayan o lungsod kung nasaan ito.

Ayon kay Bayan Muna chairman Neri Colmenares malinaw na ang probisyong ito ay lumalabag sa Konstitusyon.

“Clearly, Sec. 34 violates the right to bail under Article III, Sec. 13 of the 1987 Constitution when it restricted the travel of a person within the  municipality where the government filed the case and, worse, allowed the house arrest of a person who has already posted bail,” ani Colmenares.

Nakasaad sa Section 34 Restriction on Travel. – “xxx  In cases where evidence of guilt is not strong, and the person charged is entitled to bail and is granted the same, the court, upon application by the prosecutor, SHALL limit the right to travel of the accused to within the municipality or city where the case is pending, xxx”

“He/she may also be placed under house arrest by order of the court at his or her usual place of residence. While under house arrest, he or she may not use telephones, cellphones, e-mails, computers, the internet, or other means of communication with people outside the residence until otherwise ordered by the court.  The restrictions above mentioned shall be terminated upon the acquittal of the accused or the dismissal of the case xxx “

Sinabi ni Colmenares na sampahan ng otoridad ng kaso ang isang tao kahit na walang ebidensya para lamang mapigilan siya na tumigil sa isang lugar at hindi makagamit ng mga gadget na pangkomunikasyon.

“Sec. 34 in fact, encourages the filing of false charges against opponents of government because even if the evidence is weak [because the charges are false and trumped up for example], the accused may still be confined. In fact, the travel restriction is not regulated by any standard or quantum of evidence, since, the Court simply restricts the right to travel of the accused upon the mere “application” of the Prosecution,” dagdag pa ni Colmenares

Sinabi naman ni Bayan Muna Rep. Carlos Zarate na maaaring gamitin ng sinumang Pangulo ang batas na ito kung kontrolin ang kanyang mga kaaway.

“This is compounded when the Senate took out the safeguard under the current Human Security Act that suspends the terror law one month before and two months after an election.  This safeguard was contained in the already draconian Human Security Act so that it cannot be abused by the incumbent President against his political opponents,” dagdag pa ni Zarate.

Nais din ng Bayan Muna na ilabas ng Senado ang mga sinasabi nitong resource persons na tutol sa panukala na kanilang inimbita nang magsagawa ito ng pagdinig.

“On the other hand, the House of Representatives invited oppositors, who attended all the hearings,  In fact, the House Committee considered the inputs of the oppositors and deleted the Travel Restrictions under the New Terror bill which unjustly provides for the house arrest of those accused under the terror law, even if they have been granted bail because the evidence of guilt is not strong.  The Senate, however, inserted Sec. 34  which is not only unconstitutional but violates the basic precepts of fairness and justice.”