SC taps ex-CJ Puno as 'friend of court' in anti-terror law oral arguments

The Supreme Court has appointed retired Chief Justice Reynato Puno as amicus curiae in the oral arguments on the petitions against the Anti-Terrorism Act.

In a resolution dated February 9 but made public only on Thursday, the SC en banc appointed Puno as amicus curiae or "friend of the court." He will be joining retired SC Justice Francis Jardaleza.

An amicus curiae is an "experienced and impartial" lawyer who may be invited by the SC to help in the resolution of pending issues, according to the Rules of Court.

In the same resolution, the SC denied a petition for intervention from two Aetas due to their pending case before the Olongapo Regional Trial Court.

Meanwhile, the SC also took note of the manifestation of retired Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio and his co-petitioners regarding the social media posts of Southern Luzon Command chief Lieutenant General Antonio Parlade, Jr. against a journalist.

Earlier, in a manifestation submitted to the high court, Carpio’s group said that a social media account under the name “Antonio Parlade” had published a post directed against Inquirer.net’s Tetch Torres-Tupas claiming that her story on the two members of the Aeta community seeking help from the SC after being allegedly tortured by state forces was “FAKE.”

Based on Parlade’s comment on his post, when asked by a netizen if charges could be filed against Torres-Tupas, he replied: "Aiding the terrorists by spreading lies? Puede."

The Carpio group manifestation also cited another post by Parlade dated February 4, 2021,  claiming Torres-Tupas’ sources were “[a]ll propaganda machines of the CPP.” CPP refers to Communist Party of the Philippines.

In another comment, the military general even said, “Hindi kita titigilan Tetch Tupas hanggang hindi mo sinasagot ang tanong ko. Inquirer.net kasama ka sa sasagot nito. Nakakahiya kayo sa mga kasamahan niyo sa media.”

With this, the petitioners said Parlade’s posts were “clear threats” against Torres-Tupas and the Philippine Daily Inquirer, “both members of the Free Press protected by Section 4 of the Bill of Rights.”

Carpio and his co-petitioners emphasized that Parlade’s threats show that “obvious invasion of protected expressive rights is possible only because the language of the ATA is vague and overboard, casting a wide net of possibilities.”

Oral arguments will resume on Tuesday, February 16.

At least 37 petitions were filed before the high court assailing the Anti-Terrorism Law, making it one of the most challenged Philippine laws.

Retired SC justices, lawmakers, activists, students, artists, journalists, labor groups, and many others raised concerns that the law could legitimize alleged state attacks against government critics.

Earlier, the SC instructed lawyers involved in the legal challenge against the measure to refrain from discussing the merits of the petitions in media. 

Chief Justice Diosdado Peralta issued the appeal as he noted that several lawyers were interviewed on television about the matter.

The sub judice rule restricts comments and disclosures on judicial proceedings to avoid prejudging the issue, influencing the court, or obstructing the administration of justice.

Those who violate the rule may be held liable for indirect contempt under the Rules of Court. -MDM, GMA News