NEW COUNTERTERRORISM LEGISLATION NOT PERFECT, BUT

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 MANILA 000599 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/22/2017 TAGS: PTER PREL PHUM RP SUBJECT: NEW COUNTERTERRORISM LEGISLATION NOT PERFECT, BUT WORTHWHILE REF: A. MANILA 560 ¶B. MANILA 465 Classified By: Ambassador Kristie A. Kenney, reason 1.4 (d) ¶1. (C) The "Human Security Act of 2007," which President Arroyo will soon sign into law following its recent passage by the Philippine Congress (ref a),reflects the Philippine government's determination to improve its arsenal of tools in going after terrorists who continue to inhabit or transit the Philippines. Various versions had been under consideration in each house of Congress over the past decade, usually facing stiff opposition from the Commission on Human Rights and NGOs, all with vivid memories of the excess of the Marcos-era martial law era. The final version addressed most of these concerns at the insistence of Senate Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel, Jr.; the safeguards he introduced into the bill (detailed in ref b) were sufficient to win a quick stamp of approval from the bicameral committee and then the lower house. We believe the bill is a step in the right direction and we will monitor its implementation closely. ¶2. (C) Senior Philippine government contacts as well as House Speaker Jose de Venecia freely admit that the final legislation is not perfect, but have commented that it is nonetheless a welcome expansion of powers. In many cases, the bill merely legalizes activities -- notably, electronic surveillance -- in which government agencies had long covertly engaged. (Or, as the "Hello, Garci" wiretapping scandal from the 2004 elections demonstrated, not so successfully covert.) The result has been that contents of such surveillance have been inadmissible in court, which the new legislation will now make possible and which should lead to stronger legal cases for the prosecutors to pursue. ¶3. (C) Senator Pimentel, in a discussion with Pol/C on February 12, admitted that the provisions for compensation in cases that did not end in conviction would require fixes in the new Congress that will form after the May 2007 elections. He said that he had not even contemplated that people who likely were truly guilty of terrorism might get off due to faulty prosecutions or other legal loopholes, and thus would be theoretically eligible for compensation. He added that he intended in the next session to set caps on the total amount of compensation that would be available, noting that the sums could get very high very quickly. He predicted, however, that such cases of compensation would be extremely rare, pointing to the Marcos-era human rights victims who have still never received the compensation promised to them by successive Congresses. ¶4. (C) Experts have noted that the Philippine legal system provides opportunities to sue for compensation and/or civil damages in cases of wrongful arrest or mistreatment by law enforcement authorities. While the provisions in the new legislation go beyond this by making compensation virtually automatic in all cases not ending in conviction, the likelihood that government agencies will ever truly pay such compensation is questionable. Nor is it genuinely likely that law enforcers or prosecutors will refrain from pursuing cases in fear their agencies' budgets might eventually suffer. Probably more intimidating are various provisions with penalties against law enforcers for alleged "malicious" use of the provisions, for abuse, or even for failing to meet some reporting requirements. However, on the whole, we believe government officials will nonetheless seek to bring successful terrorism cases under the new law despite these apparent disincentives given the high visibility of such cases and the government's high priority in prosecuting terrorists. ¶5. (C) One unfortunate omission in the legislation is the lack of provisions related to combating terrorist financing. The failure to include such provisions may jeopardize the Philippine's participation (since 2005) in the Egmont Group, which has been more-or-less provisional in light of an active Philippine Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) and promises that counterterrorism legislation would eventually address this issue directly. The U.S. Treasury advisor to the AMLC as well as Embassy's Justice Attache believe that the Egmont Group will nonetheless continue to welcome Philippine participation in light of good cooperation, but the AMLC executive director is less confident. We will urge the Philippine Congress and government to rectify this omission in subsequent legislation quickly. ¶6. (C) Embassy has offered to continue to work with Philippine legislators and officials to examine ways to MANILA 00000599 002 OF 002 improve and further strengthen counterterrorism legislation and implementation, which our Philippine contacts have welcomed. Our public and private remarks have been supportive of the legislation as a positive step, and we will continue to encourage the Philippine government to use its powers carefully but effectively, even as we jointly seek additional improvements in the Philippine legal arsenal against terrorists. Visit Embassy Manila's Classified website: http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/eap/manila/index. cfm KENNEY