Ducky Paredes

Malaya (03.17.07)

“The danger is that whatever crimes are committed will carry a higher penalty just because of political considerations that would instantly make a simple criminal act the criminal act of a terrorist.”

Listen to Schenin

by Ducky Paredes

Let us hope that some legislators will listen to Martin Scheinin, UN special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms who says that the recently passed Human Security Act, which is actually an anti-Terrorist law “could have a negative impact on human rights in the country and undermine the rule of law.”
Said Sheinin: “During this interim period, I encourage the legislative branch… to reconsider this new counter-terrorism law… It is my hope that there will be further debate which may result in the introduction of specific amendments or repeal of the entire act by the new Congress.”
What the UN rapporteur finds objectionable in the new law is its “overly broad definition (of terrorism) which is seen to be at variance with the principle of legality and thus incompatible with Article 15 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).”
What does this article the international covenant say? Article 15 states: “No one shall be held guilty of any criminal offense on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a criminal offense, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time when the criminal offense was committed. If, subsequent to the commission of the offense, provision is made by law for the imposition of the lighter penalty, the offender shall benefit thereby.”
It further states: “Nothing in this article shall prejudice the trial and punishment of any person for any act or omission which, at the time when it was committed, was criminal according to the general principles of law recognized by the community of nations.”
By imposing a graver penalty on, say, the crime of arson, jusr because this arson is now considered a terrorist act, we would be in violation of Article 15. The danger is that whatever crimes are committed will carry a higher penalty just because of political considerations that would instantly make a simple criminal act the criminal act of a terrorist.
That is the real danger to giving an anti-terrorist law to an administration that goes out of its way to terrorize its own people
* * *
We have a letter: “Please remind the older and wiser man that in every national election, local officials especially those running for re-election will think first of their election victory than those of the candidates running for senators and president and vice-president. Don’t believe what these local candidates and local officials say or promise to support on election day. In most cases, they will declare their support to the administration candidates and would love to run under the administration tickets so they can get and use the political machinery of the administration. PERA para sa kanilang kampanya at bulsa lang ang habol ng mga local candidates! If they openly declare that they are supporting the opposition candidates, walang grasya babagsak sa kanila, baka ipitin pa sila ng administration. Mas wise ang mga nasa local!
A very clear example is Joe De Venecia, when he was running for president under Lakas and supported heavily by the administration of Ramos. He kept boasting and bragging that almost all the councilors, mayors, provincial board members, governors, congressmen, (most of them are running for re-election), business organizations, non-civic organizations, religious sect and organizations were on his side. Their own surveys also said that Joe will win easily. But come election day, Erap won a landslide – milya-milya ang lamang sa kanya. Lesson to learn: don’t trust local officials and local candidates that they can deliver votes for the national candidates.
“What happened in 1998 will surely happen again in this year’s elections.” — Manny Mortel
* * *
This is the first report of my anonymous correspondent in Washington, D.C.:
“California Senator Barbara Boxer today unequivocally lectured to two State Department representatives that US assistance to the Philippines must be used to leverage the stop to the extrajudicial killings in the Philippines. She also asked them to stay and listen to the testimonies of Amnesty International, the United Christian Churches in the Philippines, Karapatan and an organization for peace, all of whom pointed at the Philippine security forces as the main culprit. Shae also debated State department’s assessments that Philippine economy is helathy and well. The lady senator did not minch words and asked for verifiable results from the Philippine government. She said she is directly responsible to making sure reforms in this aspect flies, to 1 million Filipinos in her constituency in the state of California. She also ordered the report of UN Rapporteur Alston be accepted in toto to the records of the Senate.
“Virginia Senator Tim Webb also sought from the witness reopresenting Karapatan clarification of the statistics they have documented from their 15 regional offices. When the lady appeared cocksure about her position, she asked two more clarifications before he banged the gavel ending the hearing conducted by the Asia SubCommittee on Foreign Relations. Webb, being a former Secretary of the Navy recalled fond memories of his presence in Asia and especially the Philippines.
“I felt it was a consensus on the floor that the person posing as president in the Philippines is not a lady but a butcher.
“We started 2:40 pm and were off before 5pm.
“Expect sanctions soon.”
* * *
No additional comment needed from me on these two items..
* * *
Readers who missed a column can access www.duckyparedes.com,/blogs. This is updated daily. Your reactions are welcome at duckyparedes@yahoo.com

# # # #
hvp (03.16.07)

—–