JOURNALIST EXEMPTED FROM MANDATORY DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION UNDER ANTI-TERRORISM ACT

The Senate has approved an amendment in the proposed Anti-Terrorism Act that will exempt journalists, lawyers and doctors from being compelled to reveal to law enforcement authorities their communications with their sources of information, as well as with their clients and patients.

This is one of the 89 amendments to the controversial measure (Senate Bill 2137) proposed by Minority Leader Aquilino Q. Pimentel, Jr. (PDP-Laban). About 95 percent of these amendments were accepted by Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile, sponsor of the administration-initiated bill.

Explaining why media practitioners should not be required to reveal their sources of information, Pimentel invoked section 4 of Article III (Bill of Rights) of the Constitution which provides: No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people to peaceably assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.

He said the amendment means that information furnished to journalists about the whereabouts of terrorists in connection with stories they have written could not be a subject to compulsory disclosure.

In fact, there is more reason to exempt the correspondences, messages and records of journalists from being monitored, bugged and recorded or subpoenaed for use under legal compunction in investigation or terrorist trials that the communications between doctors and patients, Pimentel said.

The minority leader also cited the concern of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the United States that if any journalist strongly and legitimately suspects that his or her communications with a source are being intercepted by a third party, that journalist simply cannot promise confidentiality in good faith to an international source when that source could face torture or death if the communications is revealed

Another major amendment to SB 2137 already adopted by the Senate is the reduction of the period of detention of terror suspects without court warrants of arrests to not more than 3 days in conformity with the Constitution.

Originally, the maximum period for detaining terrorist suspects without court warrant was for 15 days. This was later reduced to 5 days upon the recommendation of Senators Frank Drilon and Miriam Santiago.

Justifying this amendment, Pimentel pointed out that the Constitution, under Article VII section 18 provides that during the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus, any person arrested or detained for rebellion shall be judicially charged within three days, otherwise he shall be released.

The 3-day period during which a person may be detained without charges even during a rebellion or invasion, is a constitutional demarcation line that must not be breached, he said.

Pimentel said that a related amendment would require law enforcers to immediately bring before any judge, Commission on Human Rights official or justice of the Sanidganbayan or Court of Appeals any person arrested by them on charges or suspicion of terrorism before he or she is detained.

He said the requirement of immediately bringing an arrested terrorist suspect to the presence of a judicial magistrate will discourage abuse or physical maltreatment of the suspect.

Other major amendments:

1. Compensating persons wrongfully arrested and detained on anti-terrorism charges in the amount of P500,000 for every day of detention.

2. Creating a grievance committee headed by the Ombudsman before which people harassed by law enforcers on charges of terrorism may complain and get redress for their grievances. The grievance committee will have their divisions one each in Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao.

Pimentel said he has introduced 89 pieces of amendments to the Anti-Terrorism Act, backed by some 200 pages of studies, to make sure that the bill will not be used as an instrument of terror against the people.

We worked on the Anti-Terrorism Bill very assiduously and meticulously because I think in all honesty, that is the most terrifying piece of legislation ever submitted to the hall of Congress, he said.

In fairness to Sen. Enrile, he adopted about 95 percent of the amendments I have proposed, making this legislation a little more humane.