The Law is Made For Evil Men...

THE LAW IS MADE FOR EVIL MEN…

(Commentary On The Republic Act No. 9372, otherwise known as the Human Security Act of 2007)

History speaks of the events that unfold in humankind.  For the believers of the Good Book, that is – the Bible, Adam and Eve, endowed with free will and intellect, committed an act which is in violation of a direct order promulgated by the Divine, and as a consequence of such transgression, punishment followed, destierro, exile, or eviction from the Perfect Place – Paradise or the Garden of Eden, which is even by reason of logic, anything or anyone imperfect does not deserve a place in a Perfect Place for it will disrupt the harmony of things! 

What happened next?   Since then, everyday is a constant struggle.  A struggle of choice between doing what is good or the contrary.  Cain murdered Abel, his own brother; wars waged against countries; tribes wiped out for the vain reason of ethnic cleansing; the Twin Towers attacked and collapsed; the Operation Anaconda: Search for Osama followed leaving collateral damages; the London incident and the Madrid incident left innocent civilians wasted.  How about here in the Philippines?  October 17, 2002: Zamboanga bombings in the Philippines kill six and wounds about 150. October 18: A bus bomb in Manila kills three people and wounds 22.  February 27, 2004: Superferry 14 is bombed in the Philippines by Abu Sayyaf, killing 116, the world's deadliest terrorist attack at sea to date.  December 12, 2004: A bombing at the Christmas market in General Santos, Philippines, kills 15.  January 10, 2007:  Three bombs kill six and injure twenty seven in the southern part of the Philippines. Muslim militants trying to disrupt ASEAN Summit suspected. 

Those are just the recent pages of what can be termed as “The Chronicles of Evil Acts”  that leaves only questions which offer an obscure answer, “What’s next?  When’s the next?  Who’s next?”

The Republic Act No. 9372, otherwise known as the Human Security Act of 2007 is effected last July 15, 2007 here in the Philippines.  In its Declaration of Policy, it states that, “It is declared a policy of the State to protect life, liberty, and property from acts of terrorism, to condemn terrorism as inimical and dangerous to the national security of the country and to the welfare of the people, and to make terrorism a crime against the Filipino people, against humanity, and against the law of nations.”  Is there a need for this Act?  The series of global and man-made (or evil men-made) events that took innocent lives would certainly call for an affirmative answer.  The waiting game is becoming fearful each day and becoming a growing paranoia.

Under Section 3 of the Human Security Act of 2007, terrorism is an act of sowing and creating a condition of widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the populace in order to coerce the government to give in to an unlawful demand.  It is but worthy to create counter-measures to, if not eradicate, create a deterrent for such group who are contemplating of doing such acts.  It provides the law enforcement agencies the needed power to better do their duties in upholding peace and order.  But people are skeptical on its implementation.  It can be noted that the law itself provides for penalty for the law enforcer who would be found guilty for such abuses.  Again, skeptics would ask, “Who will police the police?”  Are we not a government of the people, by the people and for the people?  The power still rests upon the people and the newly implemented act shall in no way stand against every man’s right duly recognized by the Constitution.  In fact, it provides for better security in this evolving, ever becoming dangerous world.  The worst thing shall happen when good men do nothing against evil men.  How can the country attract more foreign nationals to invest in our country when violence is rampant?  It is but one of the duties and powers of the state to protect the people and uphold its interests.

Under Section 50 of the Human Security Act of 2007, the accused who is acquitted from the charge shall be entitled to damages in the amount of P500,000 for each day that he has been detained. The Human Security Act also provides for detailed mechanism on how the damages should be paid. The pertinent provision of the Human Security Act reads:

SEC. 50. Damages for Unproven Charge of Terrorism. – Upon acquittal, any person who is accused of terrorism shall be entitled to the payment of damages in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P500,000.00) for every day that he or she has been detained or deprived of liberty or arrested without a warrant as a result of such an accusation. The amount of damages shall be automatically charged against the appropriations of the police agency or the Anti-Terrorism Council that brought or sanctioned the filing of the charges against the accused. It shall also be released within fifteen (15) days from the date of the acquittal of the accused. The award of damages mentioned above shall be without prejudice to the right of the acquitted accused to file criminal or administrative charges against those responsible for charging him with the case of terrorism.

Any officer, employee, personnel, or person who delays the release or refuses to release the amounts awarded to the individual acquitted of the crime of terrorism as directed in the paragraph immediately preceding shall suffer the penalty of six (6) months of imprisonment.

If the deductions are less than the amounts due to the detained persons, the amount needed to complete the compensation shall be taken from the current appropriations for intelligence, emergency, social or other funds of the Office of the President.

In the event that the amount cannot be covered by the current budget of the police or law enforcement agency concerned, the amount shall be automatically included in the appropriations of the said agency for the coming year.

Does this mean that suspected and charged terrorists who are acquitted will become richer by half-a-million pesos per day considering that terrorists are known to be highly intellectual, well trained and well-financed to afford even the most expensive and highly competent legal counsels just to evade the penalties of the law?   Does the State, in this case, give its consent to be sued? 

A public officer shall not be personally liable for damages for acts done in the performance of official duties, unless there is a clear showing of bad faith, malice or gross negligence. The Human Security Act follows the general rule that official duties are regularly performed. The police officers, in enforcing the Human Security Act, are acting as mere agents of the State. The State, on the other hand, cannot be sued without its consent.

Consent may be express or implied. Express consent may be embodied in a general law or a special law. Consent is implied when the state enters into a contract or it itself commences litigation. However, not all contracts entered into by the government will operate as an implied consent; distinction must be made between its sovereign and proprietary acts. Stated differently, a State may be deemed to have tacitly given its consent to be sued only when it enters into business contracts.

In instances where the State may not be sued, the only legal remedy is to file the claim under Act No. 3083 (1923), the general law expressly waiving the immunity of the state from suit. The claim must first be filed with the Commission on Audit (COA), which must decide the claim within sixty days from the date of its submission for decision or resolution. If the COA fails to decide the matter within said period, the appropriate action may then be filed with the regular courts. If the COA decides within the said period and denies the claim, the decision may be brought to the Supreme Court on certiorari.

Assuming that the party succeeds in asserting its claim, it cannot execute the judgment may like ordinary civil cases. Within five days from the finality of the judgment, the clerk of court will forward a copy of the decision to the President of the Philippines, who will transmit the same to the Congress at the commencement of each regular session for appropriate action. This will be considered by Congress in preparing the annual national budget. Funds should be appropriated by Congress for the specific purpose of satisfying the judgment before the same may be paid.

Because of the procedures in claims against the State or its agents, it would be easier for victims of malicious prosecution under this new law to get compensation.

             If one is good and follows what is generally accepted as true and good, then there is beauty, harmony and peace, then there shall be no need for the Human Security Act of 2007.  The law is made to put everything to order.  The law is made for evil men...

(by:  Dennis A. Gonzales, Michael T. Velasco, Jesus O. Pado, and Joel Enrile)

References:

Philippine Political Law by Isagani A. Cruz, 2002 Edition, Published by Central   Lawbook Publishing Co., Inc.

Wikipedia Foundation Incorporated.  http://www.wikipedia.org

The Philippines Supreme Court.  http://www.supremecourt.gov.ph

"Terror In The Name Of God", CBS News, 2003-08-20. Retrieved on 2007-05-11.

Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism: Croatian Freedom Fighters, Terrorism Knowledge Base, 04/03/2001

The Philadelphia Inquirer, August 25, 1989, Page A01

CNN: Bomb rocks Moscow subway, June 11, 1996

AsiaNews.it: Massacre of Christians in Jolo deals heavy blow to hopes for peace, February 3, 2006

"Prophet drawings motivated by suspects behind failed German train bombings, investigator says", September 2, 2006.

Newsday.com: Bombs kill 6 as Philippines prepares for Asian summit, January 11,2007

Anthony Vargas:Cotabato bomb blast hurts 10, Manila Times, 9 June 2007