<div class="image-550">
<img loading="lazy" src="https://cdn.kahimyang.com/resources-9/mendoza-anti-terror-sm.webp" alt="Former solicitor general Estelito Mendoza" />
<div>
(Former Solicitor General Estelito Mendoza)
</div>
</div>
<p>
The SC is considering to hold oral arguments on the petitions assailing the constitutionality of Republic Act 11479, or the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020, anytime this month.
</p>
<p>
Critics of President Rodrigo Duterte who are always on the lookout for an opportunity to bash the President had latched on his signing of the law, which both chambers of Congress had passed, to press on their criticisms of a despotic administration, which they failed to prove in the past four years that they have been mouthing the same allegations.
</p>


<p>
Former solicitor general Estelito Mendoza said in a submission to the tribunal that all the petitions are premature and should be dismissed.
</p>
<p>
The complaints do not involve an actual case where the parties invoke the challenged legislation, he noted in his SC petition, to be allowed to comment in the suits. He presented himself as an amicus curiae or friend of the court.
</p>
<p>
The term refers to a lawyer who may be asked by the court to shed light on matters where he has extensive expertise.
</p>
<p>
In his petition, Mendoza cited <i>"more than 500 instances"</i> during martial law when he personally attended hearings of petitions for habeas corpus filed by those arrested and detained to challenge the legality of their arrest, since the constitutional right is on top of the agenda of those opposing the anti-terror law.
</p>
<p>
Mendoza said in his 39-page comment the complaints <i>"do not sufficiently allege, much less show that the petitioners have committed any act in violation of the Anti-Terrorism Act, thereby creating an actual controversy involving a legally demandable and enforceable right for the exercise of judicial power."</i>
</p>
<p>
Mendoza added:
</p>
<div class="article-comment">
<p>
"Where what is involved is a penal law which may not exist without the commission of any act, and no act is alleged to have been committed, there can be no actual controversy involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable, nor a determination of whether the enactment of the law or any power conferred therein amounts to grave abuse of discretion on the part of any branch or instrumentality of government warranting the exercise of judicial power." 
</p>
</div>
<p>
He also raised the possibility of friction among branches of government, particularly the Legislative and the Judiciary, if the SC will act on the petitions.
</p>
<p>
Citing precedents, Mendoza said:
</p>
<div class="article-comment">
<p>
 <i>"Repeated and essentially head-on confrontations between the ... branches of government will not, in the long run, be beneficial to either. The public confidence ... may well erode if we do not exercise self-restraint in the utilization of our power to negate the actions of the other branches."</i>
</p>
</div>
<p>
Solicitor General Jose Calida shared Mendoza's sentiment, adding that the ongoing health emergency militates against the holding of a proceeding where people will converge.
</p>
<p>
Instead, he said the SC should consider the submission of pleadings or for the High Court to issue a resolution containing justices' clarificatory questions and written opening statements.
</p>
<p>
The detractors, who are well-represented in the suits, are merely after top-notch publicity considering their fantastic allegations contained in the suits, including the alleged targeting of opposition parties.
</p>


All the petitions against Anti-Terrorism Act are premature and should be dismissed