.jpg "e01fc_sc_big(1)"){kind=small}
The Supreme Court is set to resume on April 27 the oral arguments on the petitions seeking to declare as unconstitutional Republic Act 11479 or the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 after a month-long suspension due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Meanwhile, the Commission on Human Rights on Thursday raised concern over “some pieces of legislation, such as the Cybercrime Prevention Law and the Anti-Terrorism Act that pose legitimate threats to further threaten freedoms of speech and expression, particularly in articulating political sentiments or dissent.
“This is an overt way of silencing criticisms toward government actions, or the lack thereof, in matters affecting public interest.
Moreover, the government has afforded to shut down a major broadcasting network last year in the midst of a national health crisis, depriving people access to timely and relevant information,” group spokesperson Jacqueline Ann de Guia said.
In an advisory, the high court said the continuation of the oral arguments on the petitions against the anti-terrorism law will be held online, but only for this case.
“This arrangement shall be pro hac vice [for this occasion only] vis-a-vis these consolidated cases. Personal appearance before the Court En Banc remains to be the primary mode of conducting oral arguments,” the high court said.
The tribunal earlier announced that the next hearing would take place two weeks after the lifting of the enhanced community quarantine in the National Capital Region, which shifted to the less restrictive modified ECQ on April 12.
The high court had allowed a limited number of lawyers from both parties to physically attend the session in compliance with COVID-19 safety protocols.
After conducting four days of oral arguments, Solicitor General Jose Calida is expected to start his defense of the law on April 27 before the 15-member bench led by new Chief Justice Alexander Gesmundo, who succeeded Chief Justice Diosdado Peralta who optionally retired on March 27.