Sunday, January 18, 2009

Human Security Act: A Reaction Paper by Russel S. Pernites

“To convert somebody go and take them by the hand and guide them.”

This paper focuses on giving a reaction to the recently implemented Republic Act 9372 otherwise known as the Human Security Act of 2007 using the perspective of the philosopher and theologian Saint Thomas Aquinas. This primarily uses his ideas and concepts about the necessity of governments and of law.
The Necessity of Governments

The Philippines as a state covers a territory which includes the three major islands of Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao with all its seas and space. It is home to a huge number of population grouped into different nations. It is sovereign and is recognized by the international community as such. It also has a government which legitimizes the actions and decisions of the state. Saint Aquinas following the Aristotelian line of thinking said that, “man is naturally a social being and so in the state of innocence he would lead a social life”. He contradicts Saint Augustines’ argument that a state emerges because of the sins committed by men but he reiterated that as a social being who are in need of a social life, governments emerges as the specific organ looking after the common good. The government of the Republic of the Philippines is specifically constituted in order for it to look after the common good of the people. It is the basic legal implementing entity which formulates policies, decides and allocates resources that ideally should be equitable if not equal.

He believed that secular governments are subject to the church because the former is concerned with intermediate ends, whereas the latter is concerned with the ultimate end—the salvation of the soul. I believe that in the present milieu this should not be the case. The principle of the separation of church and state-- a political and legal doctrine which states that government and religious institutions are to be kept separate and independent of one another should be upheld. There should not be a dominant entity between the two for they serve the same functions in different levels. The church should only guide the government in order for its actions to be in accordance with the law of God but it should not dictate it to do what they say is pleasing. They should be complementary without imposing upon each other to achieve their common goal for the majority of the people.

Like Aristotle he also believed that the best form of government will be that of Monarchy. He based his arguments on the religious view of the world, that: in the whole universe there is one God, Maker and ruler of all things. In the multitude of bodily members, the heart rules all the others; among the bees, there is “one king bee”, and generally “every natural government is government by one”. Since the Philippines is adopting democracy it still would be best for us to follow Aristotle's advice that for democracy to prosper there should be a dominant and a large number of middle class. This goal is to be addressed by the government in its policies and decisions.

Laws
In his famous work, Summa Theologica he pointed out the supremacy of law based on the custom of the community. He further divided laws into different forms namely:
Eternal Law- the idea existing in God as the principle of the universe and lying behind the governance if things has the force of law.
Natural Law- it is nothing else than the rational creatures’ participation of the eternal law and is discovered by reason.
Human Law- is a dictate of practical reason which are not naturally self-evident but discovered by the effort of reason.

I believe in Saint Aquinas' conception of the origin of the state because it is clear and free from abstract ideas. It is simple yet plausible. We are greatly organized at present because we have developed a universal consensus the social functions of different agencies. Yet it cannot be denied that in every group or organization there are certain individuals who go against the rules set by the organization. It is in this situation that Saint Aquinas' ideas on the importance of the laws take paramount importance.

A law is a system of social rules usually enforced through a set of structured institutions. It is derived from the Latin word which means to bind. It is an ordinance of reason for the common good of persons. It should be promulgated and it should be sufficiently announced and made known to those upon it lays obligation.

Republic Act 9372 otherwise known as the Human Security Act of 2007 (HSA) fits to saint Aquinas' conception of a Human Law. This law is intended to secure and to protect the people from terrorism. From the latter statement it is implied that it encompasses the welfare of all the people-- Filipino citizens or non-citizens alike. In short it was made for the common good.

This particular law has stirred up numerous criticisms and oppositions from different sectors of the society. First and foremost, HSA, according to Prof. Roque of the UP Law Center Institute of International Legal Studies, did not provided for a clear definition of what terrorism is or who the terrorists are. It only provided for a list of crimes which are already provided in the Revised Penal Code. The definitions given by the law are vague, eliciting different interpretations and translations from different people. Furthermore, it gave the law enforcers “unbridled direction” in carrying out its provisions without giving the public the faintest idea of what acts constitute terrorism. It allows the police or the military an unwarranted access to the suspects thereby increasing their exposure to torture and intimidation during the course of the investigation. Hence, the basic rights of the people to life, liberty and property are curtailed.

While reading the Human Security Act, I wondered why several criticisms about it surfaced. The law seems to cater to welfare and benefit of the majority as what Saint Aquinas described of a Human Law. It took effect last July 16 and it was well disseminated and discussed in the media as well as in different realms of the society.

The HSA's definition of terrorism was patterned after the United Nations'. Terrorism does not exist in a vacuum. It does not have a fixed outcome, its degree and strategies vary from one terrorist to another. That is why giving a specified definition of the acts of terrorism would mean that the law will lack flexibility and adaptability to different situations which can jeopardize the paramount objectives of the said law. This is a manifestation of the vehement efforts of the government to topple down and eliminate terrorism and achieve unity and lasting peace within the state.

Contrary to the criticisms, based on my personal opinion, I don't find the provisions of the law as a means to the suppression of the basic rights of the people. I find it even conducive to developing a sense of accountability among the law enforcers by holding them liable to every actions they will undertake. If not in accordance with the provisions these law enforcers may be legally sanctioned to the detriment of their work and themselves. It has also provided utmost consideration of the individual because all its provisions have provided for a safeguard against inappropriate measures of the law implementers.

The law is also a salient indication of the government's effort to consolidate the functions of its agencies. There is an integrated and concerted initiative by the different agencies. The state “recognizes that the fight against terrorism requires a comprehensive approach, comprising political, economic, diplomatic, military and legal means...with measures like conflict management and post-conflict peace-building, addressing the roots of conflict by building state capacity and promoting equitable economic development”.

It gives primacy to the individual rights of the citizens. The provisions took into consideration every violation against them like the human rights—against torture, illegal surveillance, seizure, etc. It provided for penalties to the law enforcers in cases where there are violations committed by the said officers. A grievance committee has also been created to accommodate the latter statement. It has representations from the major islands of the country to make it more accessible to the people.

The only loophole I can consider is the overarching power given to the Anti-Terrorism Council (ATC). It functions as a planning agency to adopt plans, programs and counter-measures against terrorism; coordinate all national efforts to suppress and eradicate acts of terrorism; direct the speedy investigation and prosecution of all persons accused or detained for the crime of terrorism; and more as enumerated by Section 54 of the said law. This Council is I think, the reason for all of the chasms against the law. Al the violations of the people's basic rights stems from the power of the ATC to declare anyone a terrorist. It has the authority to allow surveillance, arrest without warrant, freeze bank accounts to name a few. These powers when used in their discretion surely is problematic. The composition of the members of the Council is also questionable. It comprised of the executive secretary, secretary of justice, secretary of foreign affairs, secretary of National Defense, secretary of the DILG, secretary of finance and the National Security Adviser all but are members of the Cabinet, which means that there is a huge tendency for it to succumb to the influence of the chief executive. It can be riddled with bias. Since terrorism encompasses al the realms of the society, I suggest that people from the different sectors—civilian, academe, even the church should be represented in the Council so as to give it a neutral face in consideration of all the societal factors.

To end, the ideas of Saint Aquinas qualify the efforts of the Government of the Republic of the Philippines in forging cooperation, unity, and peace. It has created several human laws intended to address the problems of the people. It tries to give solutions to the social dilemmas for the common good. I should point out that the eternal/divine law rules supreme over the human law. Human laws should be compatible with eternal laws because it will be deemed null and void and continuously delegitimized by conscience if otherwise. The enactment of the law is an indication that it is but right, criticisms and oppositions arose, I think maybe of the unfair and humungous power given to the Anti-Terrorism Council to use the office in their discretion even to the point of violating the basic rights of the people. Furthermore, it should be remembered that a hazy decisions in convicting or arresting suspected terrorists will not be beneficial but will create a room for more criticisms. We should develop a strategy of securing a pile of prima faci evidence to be assured of a terrorists' conviction. This law is one way of guiding the people towards a single path—to accountability, respect, cooperation and peace.

No comments: