WESTERN MINDANAO STATE UNIVERSITY

Research Proposal

The Effect of Anti-Terrorism

Law in the Community

Submitted by: TEJERO, EZRA MAE P.

Submitted to: PROF. ESNAEN CATONG

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract
Chapter I
INTRODUCTION

 Background of the study

 Statement of the problem
 Objective of the study
 Significance of study

Chapter II
REVIEW RELATED LITERATURE

Chapter III
METHODOLOGY

 Research Design
 Research Locale
Abstract
Definition of terrorism

The Act defines terrorism as:

 Engaging in acts intended to cause death or serious bodily injury to any person or endangers a
person's life;
 Engaging in acts intended to cause extensive damage or destruction to a government or public
facility, public place, or private property;
 Engaging in acts intended to cause extensive interference with, damage, or destruction to
critical infrastructure;
 Developing, manufacturing, possessing, acquiring, transporting, supplying, or using weapons;
and
 Releasing dangerous substances or causing fire, floods or explosions when the purpose is to
intimidate the general public, create an atmosphere to spread a message of fear, provoke or
influence by intimidation the government or any international organization, seriously destabilize
or destroy the fundamental political, economic, or social structures in the country, or create a
public emergency or seriously undermine public safety [1]
 Chapter I
Introduction

The Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020, officially designated as Republic Act No. 11479, is a Philippine law whose
intent is to prevent, prohibit, and penalize terrorism in the Philippines. [1] The law was signed by
President Rodrigo Duterte on July 3, 2020 and replaced the Human Security Act of 2007 on July 18,
2020.[2][3]

The Anti-Terrorism Bill was first pursued during the previous 17th Congress as a replacement to the
Human Security Act of 2007, but it didn’t prosper.

The law’s purpose is to prevent, prohibit, and penalize terrorism in the country in a way that the Human
Security Act.

Anti-terrorism Act allows the detention of suspects without a judicial warrant of arrest for 14 days,
which can be extended by 10 more days. The same can be placed under surveillance for 60 days, which
can also be extended by up to 30 days, by the police or military

On the pretext of amending the Human Security Act of 2007 to make it more effective in the fight
against terrorism, this new anti-terror law has expanded and overly broadened the definition of
terrorism to make it easier for authorities to declare legitimate acts of expression, collective action, and
dissent protected by the Constitution as terrorism,” claimed Zarate on June 4, a day after the measure
gained final approval in the House of Representatives.

Not against suppression of terrorism

In his counter-speech to President Duterte’s State of the Nation Address (SoNA) last July 28, opposition
congressman Lagman said: “Those of us opposing the Anti-Terror Act are not against the suppression of
terrorism. What we are protesting against is using the fear of terrorism as a pretext to curtail civil
liberties.”

Statement of the problem

1| Suspected 'terrorists' can be arrested without a warrant.

2| Cabinet officials can order arrests.

3| Government can spy on people.

4| There is a broad definition of 'terror.

Objective of the study
You could get arrested and detained for 14 days if you were suspected of being a terrorist. Your
detention can be extended for another 10 days in the name of preserving evidence and preventing
terrorist attacks by you.

 An Anti-Terror Council will be formed and will have the power to tag people as terrorists and
order arrests. This power is typically reserved for the courts.
 The government can surveil and wiretap anyone for 60 days, as long as it informs the courts and
files charges. People under surveillance will have already been arrested and detained for 14 days
if they were tagged as suspected terrorists, but will be further surveilled after their release. As a
result, everyone in contact with the suspected person will also have their right to privacy
infringed on.
 Anyone who provokes or intimidates the government can be tagged as a terrorist. By this
definition, anyone who expresses dissent to the government could be labeled as a terrorist.
Under the Anti-Terrorism Act, terrorism is committed when you engage in certain acts,
regardless of the stage of execution, for the purpose of intimidating the whole or a segment of
the general public and creating an "atmosphere of fear" to:

 Provoke or influence [through] intimidation the government or any of its international

organizations;
 Seriously destabilize or destroy the fundamental political, economic, or social structures of the
country;
 Create a public emergency; or,
 Seriously undermine public safety.

Significance of study
In Section 25 says that you can be arrested even if you’re simply a suspect as determined by the Anti-
terrorist council.

Why is it significant?

Because under the constitution and under the law you can only be arrested if they have a warrant of
arrest issued by a judge, now if they don’t have a warrant of arrest issued by a judge warrant of arrest
can only be affected under three circumstances

1. If you are in the act of committing a crime

2. They are in hot pursuit but it requires that the crime should have been committed fairly recently
3. If you’re an escape or you escape from the prison

Outside of those three they cannot arrest you without a warrant so that’s what makes the law in a way
problematic.

. [1] "Republic Act No. 11479". Philippine Gazette. July 3, 2020. Retrieved July 3, 2020.   This article incorporates text from this source, which is in
the public domain. [2] "Statement On Republic Act No. 11479". Office of the Presidential Spokesperson – Republic of the Philippines. July 3, 2020.
Retrieved July 3, 2020.[3] Esguerra, Darryl John (July 3, 2020). "BREAKING: Duterte signs anti-terror bill into law". INQUIRER.net. Retrieved July
4, 2020.
 Chapter II
Review Related Literature

Terrorism and organized crime have always been considered two separate entities of
consideration in the addressing of government securities issues either locally or internationally.
In fact, in the 1960s, during the humble beginnings of the Federal Bureau of investigation, the
United States government considered terrorism and organized crime so separate that while
there were hundreds of agents dedicated to addressing the issues of communism and various
terrorist activities that threaten the borders of the United States, only five police officers — and
those officers were low ranking individuals without any specific tasks and duties — that were
responsible for addressing the issue of organized crime.

Therefore, from here, we immediately observed at history has taught us the progression of
terrorism and organized crime to its modern derivatives — that the two significantly different in
exclusive individuals have now merged into various avenues. Although they could not be
conceptually considered as one — separate agencies are still responsible for addressing issues
separately terrorism and organized crime, literature and evidence showed that such do
operational procedures have intersections all over their operations.

the history of terrorism and organized crime are considered to be so separate in nature that
individuals who had specialized and studied those two derivatives and be suddenly transported
to the present will find it surprising that the two actually intersect. Terrorism are international
movements or threats to use violence against civilians to achieve certain goals — often political
in nature. The word itself, driving from the roots of terror, comes from the fact that fear is the
main weapon that was used by terrorists — although conventional wisdom may come to point
towards terrorist threats having weapons of destruction as their most essential tools. However,
in the history of terrorism, the most essential aspect is its ability — either successful or
unsuccessful — to be able to influence governments and political decision-makers. In order to
be able to achieve this, terrorist activities use various means and methods. However, in today’s
modern economy where the most powerful and influential decision-making tool is monetary
assets and financial control, an essential aspect of terrorist activities is the financial control and
financial manipulation of assets in order to be able to continuously find such terrorist goals.
This is an essential aspect of terrorism which must be remembered especially when comparing
it to the integration of modern organized crime to this movement. Basically, the number one
highlights of terrorism both in historical and modern context, is the desire to influence public
opinion and political decision-making.
Organized crime, on the other hand, being a criminal element that started in the United States
only in the early 1960s, is criminal activity that has transformed from this aggregated activities
and operations into an agglomeration form and focuses on highly centralized operations run by
criminals for the purpose of engaging in illegal activity. Although the literature that has been
used points toward many purposes of organized crime, they at least agree with each other that
organized crime as the purpose of being able to raise monetary profit. In order to do this,
various criminal activities such as drug trafficking, gambling, bribing, institution of violence, and
even the molding of political and public opinions are use. Therefore, in understanding
organized crime, the most important factor to consider is that it uses various tools in order to
be able to gain monetary profit.
In a study published in 1996, researchers have tried to analyze the intersections between
terrorism and organized crime to understanding the nature, methods, structural dynamics, and
danger of each form of terrorism as well as each form of criminal activity. Here, the study has
identified that terrorist groups are usually ideologically motivated while organized crime groups
have no ideological foundation but rather have the sole purpose of being able to raise large
monetary assets [1]. Also, an economics part of approaching the difference, organized crime
groups usually want bigger shares of illegal markets rather than being able to have a long-
running ideological system or political purpose in mind — and these activities are usually not
based on market principles. Another interesting fact that their research has identified is that
political terrorists brought to trial usually immediately admit their deeds and use the courtroom
as a forum for political declarations in the public sphere, where in members of organized crime
groups typically try to downplay the degree of operations and involvement in the crime.
However, at least approaching the issue from economics, the true groups are rational actors
that have intersections with regard to how they are able to find their operations through
intimidation, violence, and illegal to the peace such as drug trafficking and weapons distribution
in the population [2].
In another study that was published in 2004, researchers again tried to find similarities between
international terrorism activities as well as organized crime because of continuous interest on
the war on terror — especially their manipulations of the various financial flows and the ways
that these two separate groups are able to raise financial assets [3]. In this study, researchers
have identified that because these two groups, although having separate ideologies and
separate and goals, must have the same market of financial distribution in order to be fully
successful at least from the point of view of being able to build their financial base. In this
respect, because illegal markets especially in first world countries like the United States have
typical segregationist and geographic locations, activities of terrorist financing and organized
crime financing usually intersect with one another in order to generate significantly larger
monetary profits as compared to acting alone. Furthermore, criminal activities such as drug
dealing and weapons distribution usually have high-level individuals which control them in the
final decision-making process — individuals that either belong to a terrorist organization or a
organized crime element. And because such illegal markets must be able to interact with one
another in order to maximize the profits of certain markets, terrorism and organized crime
eventually intersect at least from the perspective of financial flow and manipulation [4].
another study was earlier published in 2002 discussing that it is methods and not go to this
which are the most important implications as the convergence and intersection of international
organized crime and local terrorism [5]. This reference effectively captures the earlier
hypothesis that methodologies are the most important intersections of the two groups.
However, in this study, an essential highlighting fact is that terrorist activities, having ideological
basis, usually have a certain kind of moral code that they follow even in the operations of
raising financial assets. On the other hand, in their interactions with organized crime —
interactions that have already been highlighted by the previous literature that the research has
indicated — organized crime leaders do not necessarily have ideological spectrum’s to consider.
Therefore, the study points out that although these two are equally important issues that must
be addressed by local and international policing agencies and government, organized crime has
shown significant foothold and power over terrorist financial activities because of their lack of
ideological beliefs and the sole purpose of being able to raise financial assets and money for
local consumption. In fact, studies have pointed out, financial assets that have been raised by
terrorist activities are usually flushed right back into such terrorist actions while organized
crime assets remain within certain groups and families and usually even enter back into the
economy through consumer purchase and financial institutions[6].

[1] A. P. Schmid, “The links between transnational organized crime and terrorist crimes,” No.: 2, no. 4 (1996): 43
[2] Ibid.
[3] T. M. Sanderson, “Transnational Terror and Organized Crime,” SAIS Review 24, no. 1 (2004)
[4] Ibid.
[5] L. I. Shelley and J. T. Picarelli, “Methods not motives: Implications of the convergence of international organized crime and terrorism,” Police Practice and
Research 3, no. 4 (2002): 305-318
[6] Ibid.

Chapter III
 Research Design

We need to do a Quantitative analysis of this problem of how many people will be affect of this
Anti-Terrorist law.
Of how the Anti-Terror law will shrink democratic space because of fear. This will affect the lives
of many people and only weaken democracy in our country. Anyone who dares to speak in
dissent or organize for positive community development will be affected by the possible threats
of the Anti-Terror Law,

The Terror Law poses a valid threat to women and the rest of the Filipino people. Its ambiguous
definition of terrorism could harm anyone who dare speak against the injustices in society and
assert their rights as women and citizens.

Research Locale

The study can conduct in Barangay knowing the efficiency of the said study among political
science student and for them to know the human rights of this law. This study has to be
implemented on the 4th year bachelor of political science students. These studies are testing the
effectiveness of this anti-terrorism law.