<div class="image-full-width">
<img loading="lazy" src="https://cdn.kahimyang.com/resources-8/SC-court.webp" alt="Supreme Court" />
</div>

<p>
While we respect the right of all people to form an opinion on the anti-terror law, we cannot help but notice that the arguments against that controversial legislation seem incongruent with what it actually says. In some cases, the arguments are illogical.
</p>

<p>
Assertions that this law will curtail free speech and political activism seem unfounded, at least in our reading and appreciation of that recently signed act. Others have charged that the definitions of terrorism and terrorist acts are too broad, but again, those arguments do not square with what is written in the law.
</p>
<h3>
<a href="https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/downloads/2020/06jun/20200703-RA-11479-RRD.pdf" class="news_link" target="_blank" title="">READ: The Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020</a>
</h3>
<p>
Others in government have been defending the measure, saying those who oppose the anti-terror law should read it first. That may be ineffective, given the fact that many critics are prone to interpret it according to their own political bias. Ultimately, the Supreme Court will rule on that law's constitutionality, even though we suspect that its decision will unlikely end the debate.
</p>

<p>
If the Supreme Court finds this law constitutional, the debate will continue because the opposition to it is not grounded on legal merits but on political opposition to President Rodrigo Duterte. In fact, an argument we heard from a professor at the Ateneo de Manila University opines that the law may be acceptable, but the Duterte government could not be trusted not to abuse it.
</p>
<p>
If we accept that argument, then no law is ever worthy of passing. It is ludicrous to think that laws are acceptable only when the government is deemed trustworthy. If President Duterte, who continues to fare very well in national surveys, does not cut it, what then is the threshold for popularity and approval ratings? Surely, the critics of the law are not suggesting that it should be enacted after 2022. What if the next president is not to their liking? On the contrary, laws help make those in government accountable.
</p>
<h3>
Railroading and the Reds
</h3>
<p>
Moreover, the debate over this law will continue even if the Supreme Court thumbs it down. Law or no law, terrorism exists. And that leads us to the argument by the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines (CBCP), which alleges that this law was being “railroaded” amid the coronavirus pandemic.
</p>
<p>
Indeed, people have short memories. The anti-terror law was conceived in the aftermath of the Marawi siege in 2017. It has taken this long to craft and pass legislation. Apparently, the wheels of democracy grind slowly.
</p>
<p>
Remember Marawi? For about five months, local and some foreign extremists loyal to Abu Sayyaf and sympathetic to al-Qaida and Islamic State (IS) terrorist groups attempted to plant a fundamentalist state in Lanao del Sur. About 100 people died, including civilians. A Catholic priest there, Fr. Teresito Soganub, was held captive for 117 days. He died recently, but the people in Marawi are still struggling to rebuild.
</p>
<p>
Curiously, the Leftists have hijacked the public discourse on anti-terrorism. They continue to peddle a narrative that the government, especially under President Duterte, will “Red tag” them. Their concerns seem misplaced. Simply put, it's not about them.
</p>
<p>
Meanwhile, danger lurks in parts of Mindanao as it does elsewhere in Southeast Asia. Some of the extremists who clashed with Philippine authorities included locals and foreigners who were veterans of the fighting in the Middle East. In fact, the jihad returnees are problematic not only for the Philippines, but also for Indonesia, Australia and the United Kingdom, among others.
</p>
<p>
It would be a mistake to think that the local sympathizers of al-Qaida and IS have been vanquished. Instead, they have only retreated from Marawi and are likely regrouping elsewhere in Mindanao. They may be silent for now, but they are there, probably laughing as the rest of the country debates the anti-terror law.
</p>
<p>
<strong>Sources</strong>: 
</p>
<ol class="article-sources">
<li>
Opposition to anti-terror law unjustified, all about politics, Editorial, July 26, 2020, <a href="https://www.manilatimes.net/" class="news_link" target="_blank" title="Source">The Manila Times</a>
</li>
</ol>

<div class="source-notes">
<p>
(We are unable to grant permission for any kind of reproduction of this article other than social media shares.  Please visit the source listed above for more information.)
</p>
</div>




Opposition to anti-terror law not grounded on legal merits but on political opposition to Duterte