Recall of anti-terror bill unlikely but DOJ can interfere —Lacson

Recalling the proposed Anti-Terrorism Act from President Rodrigo Duterte's table is unlikely, according to bill author Senator Panfilo Lacson, although he admitted that the Department of Justice "can interfere."

"I don't think so because they (lawmakers) voted on it. It was passed on third and final reading, and I believe today it's going to be an enrolled bill to be transmitted to Malacanang for the President to either veto or approve or just make it lapse into law after 30 days," Lacson said in an interview on ANC on Monday.

Last week, the House of Representatives approved on third and final reading the version of the bill that the Senate approved in February.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) on Saturday said it will start reviewing the controversial bill which has been feared by many to be an instrument to silence political dissent in the country.

"The DOJ can interfere by advising the President to veto the bill altogether because, remember, this is not a revenue measure nor it is a budget measure, so there is no line item veto here," Lacson said.

"It's either the President vetoes the bill in whole, not in part, or he approves it," he added.

Retired Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio also said the measure may immediately be challenged before the Supreme Court once it becomes a law.

Lacson remained firm that the anti-terror bill went through careful scrutiny in the Senate and was anchored on the Bill of Rights.

"Hindi tayo puwedeng lumabas doon sa enumerated sections under Article 3, 'yung Bill of Rights because masasayang 'yung pagod namin na nag-aral kami, nag-debate kami sa floor tapos made-declare lang na unconstitutional ng Korte Suprema," he said.

A former Philippine National Police chief, Lacson said he is confident the bill can withstand the review of the Supreme Court if it is questioned after enactment.

"I am confident and I am hopeful... For the sake of country and our people, I just hope the Supreme Court will see wisdom in not declaring this bill or this measure as unconstitutional," he said.

"After all, the Supreme Court is also an establishment of the state. Pag sila naman ang nabomba eh problema rin 'yun." --KBK, GMA News