LEONEN - JUSTIFICATION
2.a. a. Section 4 of ATA that states “ which are not intended to cause death or serious physical harm
to a person, to endanger a person's life, or to create serious risk to public safety.(“Not Intended
Clause”)
- In the overbroad language of the clause, terrorist acts now
cover all expressions of civil and political rights. It has unnecessarily expanded a law
enforcer's reach into protected freedoms. This clause gives law enforcers the unbridled
license to construe these exercises of civil and political rights as acts of terrorism punishable
under the law. In adding the clause, the safeguard provision has become impermissable
vague.
b. Section 25 which provides the three modes of designating terrorist individuals, group of
person, organization or association.
I. The automatic adaptation by the Ant-Terrorism Council of the designation in the
United Nations Security Council Consolidated List.
II. Through the Anti-Terrorism Council's adaptation of request for designation made by
other jurisdiction or supranational jurisdictions should the criteria under United
Nations Security Council Resolution No.1373 be met.
III. Through designation by the Anti-Terrorism Council itself, upon its finding of
probable cause that one commits or is attempting, or conspires to commit the acts
defined and penalized under Section 4 to 12 of the Anti-Terrorism Act.
-
c. Section 29, which provides for:
I. The warrantless arrest and detention of persons suspected of committing acts of
terrorism under Section 4 to 12.
II. The authority of the Anti-Terrorism Council to issue written authorization to extend
the periods of detention for a person suspected of committing any of the acts under
Section 4 to 1
2.b. - In parco-Song v. Parcon, this court held that a case may still be resolved when the statute being
assailed is susceptible of a facial challenge, or when it involes violation of constitutional rights. Though
lacking an actual case, a facial challenge is allowed to prevent the possibilty of yhe law from harming
persons that did not come to court It is distinguished from an”as applied “ challenge, which only
considers”extant facts affecting real litigants.” None theless, precisely due to its lack of an actual case,
and it being a “manifest strong medicine,” a facial challenge is only used as a last resort, and only
applicable to free speech.
2.c. Section 1. The judicial power shall be vestedin one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may
be established by law. Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual
controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceabl, and to determine wghether
or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part
of any branch or instrumentality of the government.
2.d. *It violates Article III Section 4 of the Constitution states: No law shall be passed abridging the
freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of people peaceably to assemble and
petition the government for redress of grievances.
2.e. Section 4 - “Not Intended Clause”for being vague and overboard. Section 25 – Violation of Article III
Section 14 of the Constitution states : No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without
due process of law. Section 29 - Violation of Article III Section 2 of the Constitution states : The right of
the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and
seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of
arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge after
examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and
particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized
