Ping Lacson to Carpio: Designation, proscription two different things in anti-terror bill

Senator Panfilo Lacson on Wednesday said retired Supreme Court justice Antonio Carpio may have confused "designation" with "proscription" of terrorists under the proposed Anti-Terrorism Act.

During a webinar, the principal sponsor of the controversial anti-terror bill, said Carpio was wrong when he argued that an individual "designated" as terrorist can be arrested upon the order of the Anti-Terrorism Council (ATC).

"This is not only inaccurate. This is plain and simple wrong. Arrests, same as detention, are not intended consequences of designation," Lacson said.

"Designation is purely an executive and administrative process intended to trigger the issuance of a 'freeze order' of properties and assets of designated terrorist individuals or terrorist organizations or associations," he added.

Only the Anti Money Laundering Council can order the said financial sanction which will be triggered by ATC's designation, according to Lacson.

Section 25 of bill states that "the designation shall be without prejudice to the proscription of terrorist organizations, associations, or groups of persons."

"With respect to Justice Carpio, he must have confused 'designation' with 'proscription' of terrorist groups, organizations or associations," Lacson said.

"Proscription under Section 26 requires court intervention where a full-blown hearing will take place before a group or organization may be considered a terrorist organization," he added.

Carpio previously said the ATC's power to "designate" an individual as a terrorist under the bill violated a constitutional right.

“Once so designated, the individual can now be arrested upon order of the Anti-Terrorism Council. Under the Anti-Terrorism Act, the penalty is life imprisonment. You will be imprisoned throughout your physical life," Carpio warned.

"'The question is, how will the Anti-Terrorism Council make such designation? How will it designate you a terrorist or [determine that] your organization is engaged in terrorism? Is a hearing required where the individual or organization is represented? The only requirement under Section 25 is upon probable cause. Probable cause doesn’t require a hearing," he added.

Lacson reiterated that the ATC does not have any judicial or quasi-judicial authority to order arrests.

"Proscription requires court intervention. It is not discretionary on the part of the ATC to proscribe an organization or association as a terrorist organization," he said.

Further, Lacson said that the "written authority" to be issued by the ATC, as provided in the bill, is not an authority to order an arrest.

"In actual fact, the written authority issued by the ATC under Section 29 of the ATB is to be directed to its duly designated deputies such as law enforcement agents and military personnel specially tasked and trained to handle the custodial investigation involving violations of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 as proposed, considering the complexities and nature of terrorism," Lacson said.

"These specially trained law enforcement officers and military personnel shall need a written authority to be deputized by the ATC to perform such tasks," he added.

Lacson said it may seem stupid for him to lock horns with a recently retired SC justice, whom he respects and admires, as he is not even a lawyer.

But he added that he has a habit of standing his ground when he is "backed by hard facts" to argue his case.

The anti-terror bill is still awaiting President Rodrigo Duterte's approval or veto after it has been transmitted to Malacanang on June 9. It may also lapse into law within 30 days from the Palace's receipt if left untouched. -NB, GMA News