GraySpectrum Opines

Wednesday, April 05, 2006

BTDATDBS

Now that the Lower House has approved the Anti-terrorism Bill, the Senate will have to choose between two things that they may both not like, to say the least.

1. Give extra teeth to the already abusive Arroyo administration, by passing the same bill themselves (or a similar one)

This administration has already proven that it will use any means, no matter how far out or excessive, to get its way, especially when it comes to the interpretation of the law (i dont remember, was it BP 880?). The problem i can forsee with the legislation passed is that it is worded in such an ambiguous manner that it will come in handy if time comes again that the incumbents want some people silenced but need a legal basis for it. (Rule of law, they'll cry!)

Consider the thought of the anti-terrorism bill being already in place during the time of the 20th anniversary of the EDSA Revolution. The administration might have easily been able to brand the renegade soldiers as terrorists for "sow[ing] a state of danger, panic, fear or chaos to the general public, group of persons or segments thereof, or of coercing or intimidating the government to do or abstain from doing an act." And what about the Magdalo group's takeover of the Oakwood apartments, demanding the resignation of President(?) Arroyo? Terrorists, for "coercing or intimidating the government to do or abstain from doing an act"? This may seem like pushing the reasoning too far beyond what is logical or common sensical. But it is exactly the kind of reasoning the current administration has proven to be very capable of. And very willing. The president was already dropping words like "economic sabotage" a few months ago. And this, she said was to be counted as a form of terrorism. So when a big rally happens, touching investors' nerves and making the peso drop a few percentage points, guess who the economic saboteur terrorists will be?

Just like a great many things in our world today, this anti-terrorism bill might do much good. But in the hands of a manipulative power such as that of Gloria Arroyo and her cohorts, it takes on a very dark form. Just as it might be true that a shift in a form of government MIGHT do some good, but i dont trust her to make good with it. No real debate on it ever even took place.


-or-

2. Block the bill, and be seen as mere legislative roadblocks. (This is by the way, becoming a very convenient excuse for Charter Change / Parliamentarism)

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home