MANILA, Philippines — The Department of Justice on Saturday published on their website the Implementing Rules and Regulations of Republic Act 11479 otherwise known as “The Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020.”
“Ipa-publish today (Saturday) into newspapers of general circulation, ito ay ipapalathala ng Anti-Terror Council Secretariat today,” DOJ undersecretary Adrian Sugay said in a Dobol B sa News TV interview.
“Ito ay naka-upload na sa DOJ website kagabi (Friday) pa,” he added.
The IRR serve to clarify and detail the laws of the Anti-Terror act, especially the controversial draconian provisions, including the crime of terrorism and all related activities.
The measure defines terrorism as an act committed by a person within or outside the Philippines who engages in activities intended to cause death or serious bodily injury to any person or endangers a person’s life, and to cause extensive damage or destruction to a government or public facility, public place or private property.
Terrorism is likewise committed by a person who engages in acts intended to cause extensive interference with, damage or destruction to critical infrastructure, and develops, manufactures, possesses, acquires, transports, supplies, or uses weapons, explosives or of biological, nuclear, radiological or chemical weapons or is someone who releases dangerous substances or causes fire, floods or explosions.
Sugay clarified that the highly-opposed law already took effect in July, and was used in the case of the recent bombing in Mindanao.
The Department of Justice started their review of the controversial law early June.
In a statement, Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra said that the Justice Department will be looking at whether the bill’s provisions encroach the 1987 Philippine Constitution.
“The Congress has not sent the enrolled bill for the president’s signature. So our comments have not yet been requested by the Office of the President. Nonetheless, the DOJ will already start its own review of the bill.”JUSTICE SECRETARY MENARDO GUEVARRA
A total of 37 petitions have been filed against the new law before the Supreme Court as critics claimed that it endangers basic rights and could legitimize alleged attacks against activists.