Catherine C.

Paner JD 1-f
Saturday 6:30-8:30
LEGAL WRITING

1. Passage of Anti-Terror Bill

- Constitutional Supremacy. It is the Principle that provides that
all laws must be in consonance and does not violate the
provisions in the 1987 Constitution thus if it is, it will be
consider unconstitutional. There are so many provisions of the
said Bill/ Law that is being challenge of legal luminaries and
other groups and organizations. One of which is the provision
of that creates the Anti-Terrorism Council (ATC) and granting
enormous power to the said council like determining who are
terrorist and they can detain them within 24 hours without
court warrants. Article 25 and 29 of the ATB Legitimize the
based on mere suspicion. This contradicts and violates the
Constitutional provision in our Bill of Rights Section 1 and 2
which provides for due process, proper warrant is needed in
order for a person to be detained except for the cases for valid
warrantless arrest as provided by Section 5 Rule 113 of the
Rules of Court and Court can only determine who is guilty of
the charges against him.
Moreover, this Bill allows law enforcers or military personnel
unbridled discretion to arbitrarily flex their muscles in
carrying out its provisions merely on the basis of their own
suspicions. It also violates the provision of Arbitrary detention
as provided in Revised Penal Code Article 124. In this article, it
provides for the punishment of public officer, agents or
personnel that detain a person without warrant however, the
Bill provides that the ATC, law enforcers or military personnel
can detain a person without warrant within 14 days and can be
extended for additional 10 days without punishment. Further,
section 5 and 12of the ATB that definition of Terrorism and
how a terrorism is committed is broad contrary as to what it
defines in Human Security Act of 2007. It also violates the
constitutional provision of Void for Vagueness Rule that the
law must be clear and specific to let not the accused be denied
of his right to be informed of the charges against him and to
 now violate his right to due process. Freedom of speech and
freedom to associate in Bill of Rights is also violated by the ATB
for its broad discerption and meaning making red-tagging be
more rampant with this administration. These are only some of
the provisions that are being questioned before the Supreme
Court. Lastly, if we let this Anti-Terror Law to exist, this will
open the flood gates of abuse with our Fundamental rights.

2. Economic rights of Health-care workers prohibited by the

government from seeking employment abroad.
- The President being the highest officer of the land excises the
power to control over its citizen and territory as provided in
the constitution. The President and its government may
prohibit the deployment of healthcare workers abroad if it
desires to with proper reason of course, just like the nation is
under state of emergency due to Covid-19. With this being said,
the nation is in need of healthcare workers so it may prohibit
the workers in seeking work abroad in order to sustain the
needs here in our country. However, the health institution and
system here in the Philippines not good and it’s not a secret.
Healthcare workers in the public and government sectors are
treated differently, in terms of security of tenure and wages.
Thus, almost all of the healthcare workers and job that is
connected thereto seeks employment abroad for greener
pasture. If the Government wants to retain its healthcare
workers it must pass a bill/ law that will address their
problem. Furthermore, the main reason of their employment
abroad is the difference of wage here and in abroad, so if the
government can match or even just close the difference of
wages, the healthcare workers will surely not opt to go out of
the country. In addition to, no one wants to be away from their
family working.

3. Shutdown of ABS-CBN, one of the country’s largest network

company.
- Franchise is a privilege that can only be granted or given and
be revoke by the Legislative Branch specifically the Congress.
Thus, the shutdown of the ABS-CBN can be said that it was
 according to our existing laws and constitution. As provided by
the 1987 Constitution, 2/3 or majority votes of congress is
needed before a media entity will be granted with a franchise.
With this, the grant of franchise to the said media entity even if
it comply with the requisites laid down by the Constitution is
still in the hands of the Congressmen. Moreover, a corporation
o media entity can’t compel the Legislators to issue a franchise
in their favor. Furthermore, Mandamus will not apply to the
Congress as to the principle of separation of powers. Lastly,
ABS-CBN as a corporation had an option to process or apply for
the renewal of their franchise 5years before it expires, thus,
they had a sufficient amount of time to process such franchise
however they failed to do so.

4. The grant of absolute pardon by the President to US Marine Lance

Cpl. Joseph Scott Pemberton
- Pardon is an executive clemency that is granted post-
conviction and define as an act of grace from the Chief
Executive absolving a person from a punishment prescribe for
the crime committed. Thus, absolute pardon can only be given
by the President as provided in Section 9, Article VII of the
1987 Constitution with the recommendation of Boards of
Pardon and Parole (BPP) with the certain limitation with those
who violated election laws in which case any petition for
pardon has to be approved by Commission on Election. With
this, the grant of Pardon to the convicted US Marine Pemberton
was with the scope of Power of the President. If Pemberton
was recommended by the BPP to receive pardon, Presidents
act in giving him a Pardon was lawful and can’t be reviewed by
other branches of the Government. Pemberton was tried and
convicted with the crime against him and he was
recommended by the BPP, thus he qualify to received pardon
or executive clemency making all his criminal liability be
extinguish.

5. The Call to Mass promotion in the College of Law in the Light of

the Covid-19 pandemic.
- Pursuant to R.A. No. 7662 also known as Legal Education
reform Act of 1993, the Legal Education Board (LEB) has the
sole power to permit such call for mass promotion. Some of its
function is to 1) administer the Legal Educational Reform, 2)
supervise the Law Schools xxxxx and 3) to perform such
functions and prescribe such rules and regulation necessary
for the attainment of the policies and objectives of Educational
Reform Act. Thus, if the LEB does not see it necessary and
advantageous to permit mass promotion in the College of Law
even in time of pandemic, it cannot be force by the Laws
Students and Law Schools. As for learning, it’s not only limited
within the four corners of the classroom, with this the Law
schools can apply, or implements new modes and ways of
learning like online class or modular learning method in order
for law students to continue their education without holding a
face-to-face class and avoid the spread of the contagious
disease. Lastly, the LEB institution is mandated to implement
reforms and see to it that students, graduates and practitioners
of law well prepared for the next stage they will be taking. So
the institution or the body that can only be permit mass
promotion is the LEB.