MANILA, Philippines — As the Supreme Court continues its debates on the petitions against the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020, Philippine journalists join the call to strike down the law for its chilling effect on media practice.
The Freedom for Media, Freedom for All network, and 17 news organizations and 79 journalists, on Monday lent their voices to the growing opposition to the anti-terrorism law, saying its provisions “trample upon fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of the press.”
Related Stories
“The ATA will not succeed in reducing the threat of terrorism with over-reaching prohibitions on expressive as well as political freedoms. It will reduce this country to a field of submissive and unquestioning individuals, to be herded like by sheep by the police and military,” they said.
The FMFA network is composed of the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility, MindaNews, National Union of Journalists of the Philippines, Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism and Philippine Press Institute.
The media coalition noted that Section 9 of the ATA, under inciting to terrorism, proscribes speech, proclamations, writings, emblems and banners and imposes a 12-year imprisonment.
“As the law fails to provide a clear definition of terrorism and is vague about what constitutes acts of terrorism, Section 9 could make media practitioners vulnerable to wrongful charges and arrests, producing a chilling effect on all media practice,” they said.
Journalists are among the petitioners against the anti-terrorism law. In their plea, assisted by the Free Legal Assistance Group, they told the court that the law may drive them to self-censorship due to fear of being labelled as terrorists.
They would have to toe the line not to write a story that may be misconstrued for intending to cause injury or endanger a person’s life or destruction to property or intimidate the public—all qualifiers of terrorist acts.
Due to the “sheer amount of guesswork, qualification, mincing and moderation,” a good number of journalists may opt to not write at all, the petitioners said.
Red-tagging
FMFA also pointed out that the government’s claims of assurances fly in the face of news organizations and journalists’ experience of being red-tagged and branded as terrorists.
“With the government’s anti-insurgency campaign causing a rise in killings of activists, we fear for the safety of our colleagues,” FMFA said.
“Many of us have seen how efforts to go after ‘enemies of the people’ have led to zealous securitization of the government’s response to the problems of the country,” they added.
In a separate petition of Filipino journalists and artists, they told the SC that even before the anti-terrorism law’s passage, National Task Force to End the Local Communist Armed Conflict officials have been red-tagging journalists and artists.
The petitioners, assisted by rights lawyer Evalyn Ursua, also said Section 9 should be struck down for being unconstitutional as it involve content-based restraint on speech and expression—and cannot pass the clear and present danger test.
FMFA called on the government to uphold the freedom of the press and protect the rights and safety of journalists at all times. “We reject the Anti-Terrorism Act,” they also said.
The SC will resume its oral arguments on Tuesday. Justices will continue their interpellation of lawyers from the Office of the Solicitor General.