Ex-Duterte's corporate counsel petitions SC against Anti-Terrorism Law

By Eugene Uy July 13, 2020 Atty. Rudolf Philip Jurado, former chief of the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel. MANILA, P...

By Eugene Uy
July 13, 2020

Atty. Rudolf Philip Jurado, former chief of the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel.

MANILA, Philippines - Atty. Rudolf Philip Jurado, former head of the Office of the Government of the Corporate Counsel, who was fired last May, accused the House of Representatives of conniving with the administration of passing a bill and of wiping out the functions of the judiciary.

He also said that the Anti-Terrorism Law was unconstitutional and even asked the Supreme Court to issue a temporary restraining order to stop its implementation.





He claimed that the House of Representatives had not complied with the rules by passing the bill. Several readings should follow in order for the bill to be passed. If the bill passes by a simple majority, it moves to the Senate. The bill is assigned to another committee in the Senate and, if it is released, discussed and voted on. Again, the bill is passed by a simple majority. The documents will then be forwarded to the President for signature or veto within 10 days.









In his petition, he said that the bill had been labeled and certified as urgent and had been transferred directly to the President's Office for signature without proper reading.

Jurado argued that, as a result, some Members of the House were not given the opportunity to withdraw the "YES" votes than they had previously agreed to.





He also claimed that the members of the House had not even provided copies of the final bill and had waited 3 days after the second reading, which was a direct abuse of discretion that gave the Anti-Terrorism Council the power to waive the constitutional rights of a person to freedom, presumption of innocence and consent by speeding up the disposition of a case filed against him.

In particular, it stated that Congress should not amend the provisions of the Rules of Court on a warrant for less arrest by allowing the Anti-Terrorism Council to authorize the arrest without a warrant of persons suspected of committing acts of terrorism because it is the competence of the Supreme Court.

This he said, is a complete violation of the separation of powers between the Legislature and the Judiciary.