The Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020

Dear PAO,

My brother has been actively participating in community activities and peaceful demonstrations concerning issues affecting our local community. Recently, he attended a public assembly where the participants criticized certain government policies. Some of the participants also posted statements online encouraging people to join future demonstrations.

A few days ago, my brother became worried after hearing that some people who participated in similar activities were being accused of violating the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020. He is now afraid that merely joining a protest or expressing opposition to government policies may be considered terrorism under the law. I would like to know what acts are actually considered terrorism under the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020. Can a person be arrested and prosecuted simply for expressing dissent or participating in a peaceful protest? Thank you.

Prim

Dear Prim,

Republic Act (RA) 11479, otherwise known as the “Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020,” was enacted to prevent, prohibit, and penalize terrorism and related offenses, while recognizing the need to protect the fundamental rights and liberties guaranteed by the Constitution.

Under the law, terrorism is committed by a person who engages in acts intended to cause death or serious bodily injury to any person or endangers a person’s life; cause extensive damage or destruction to government or public facilities, public places or private property; cause extensive interference or damage to critical infrastructures; or when a person develops, manufactures, possesses, acquires, transports, supplies or uses certain weapons or explosives; or releases dangerous substances or causes fire, floods or explosions, “when the purpose of such act, by its nature and context, is to intimidate the general public or a segment thereof, create an atmosphere or spread a message of fear, to provoke or influence by intimidation the government or any international organization, or seriously destabilize or destroy the fundamental political, economic or social structures of the country, or create a public emergency or seriously undermine public safety.” (Section 4, RA 11479)

The law likewise identifies and penalizes other acts related to terrorism, including threats to commit terrorism; planning, training, facilitating the commission of terrorism; conspiracy, proposal, and/or inciting to commit terrorism; recruitment to and membership in a terrorist organization; and providing material support to terrorists, subject to the respective elements of each offense. (Sections 5 to 14, RA 11479)

To answer your question, mere expression of dissent or participation in a peaceful protest, or the mere exercise of constitutionally protected rights should not, by itself, be equated with terrorism. In Calleja, et al. vs. Executive Secretary, et al., (GR 252578, et al., Dec. 7, 2021) the Supreme Court, speaking through Associate Justice Rosmari Carandang, emphasized that terrorism shall not include certain exercises of civil and political rights — specifically, “advocacy, protest, dissent, stoppage of work, industrial or mass action, and other similar exercises of civil and political rights, which are not intended to cause death or serious physical harm to a person, to endanger a person’s life or to create a serious risk to public safety.”

Clearly, while RA 11479 provides the government with legal mechanisms to prevent and punish terrorism and related offenses, its provisions must still be applied consistently with the Constitution and the limitations recognized by the Supreme Court. After all, our Constitution protects freedom of speech and expression, as well as the right of the people to peaceably assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances. Thus, a person should not be considered a terrorist merely because he or she criticizes the government, expresses an unpopular opinion or participates in a peaceful assembly. The specific acts committed, their circumstances and the elements of the offense charged must be examined.

Thus, in your brother’s case, his mere participation in a peaceful assembly and his expression of disagreement with certain government policies do not, by these facts alone, establish the commission of terrorism. There must be sufficient factual basis to establish the elements of the particular offense charged under RA 11479.

We hope that we were able to answer your queries. This advice is solely based on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated.

Thank you for your continued trust and support.