An Ethiopian counterterrorism law passed in 2009 mirrors Manila`s legislation: it criminalizes acts (such as writing, publishing, publishing, or disseminating statements) that directly or indirectly “promote” terrorism and gives police the power to detain suspects without a warrant for forty-eight hours. For years, this law has been used to imprison peaceful political activists, opposition members and journalists. Since the summer of 2011, at least thirty-three dissidents have been charged with terrorism. In Kafkaesque fashion, a famous journalist was arrested as a terrorist for publishing an article criticizing the Ethiopian government, which used the law to imprison journalists. He was sentenced to eighteen years in prison and his newspaper was forced to shut it down. In the Philippines, politically motivated arrests were terribly common even before this new law was passed. Duterte`s two biggest critics in the Senate have been behind bars for more than a year. Police arrested people protesting against the anti-terrorism law, while pro-government protesters were allowed to gather. If Duterte`s record is any indication, the effects of the anti-terrorism law will be a deterrent. The ATA enacted the Charities Registration (Security Information) Act (SASRC) to remove and prevent support for terrorism and to protect the integrity of the charities registration system under the Income Tax Act. The ACAI allows the Minister of Public Safety and the Minister of National Revenue to issue a certificate attesting that, on the basis of security or criminal police information in their possession, they consider that there are reasonable grounds to believe that an organization has, produced or will make available its resources, directly or indirectly.
are at the disposal of a terrorist group. Once signed, the certificate is automatically subject to judicial review before the Federal Court, the organisation concerned receiving from that court a summary of the available information and the right to defend itself at a hearing before the Federal Court. Many Filipinos, whose mass protests toppled a dictator three decades ago, are wary of such interference with their rights. And the court essentially said that activism is not terrorism. The Philippines faces terrorism in the south of the country, which authorities say has been a hotbed of local and international terrorist activity. The preamble to the bill states that Canadians and people around the world have the right to live their lives in peace, but that terrorism poses a significant threat to international peace and security, as well as to Canada and Canadian institutions. He recognized that Canada must act in concert with other countries to combat the scourge of terrorism, but he recognized that terrorism is also an issue of national importance. He underscored the commitment to take comprehensive measures to protect Canadians from terrorist activity while continuing to respect and promote the Charter and its values. Nine judges ruled unconstitutional that the Counter-Terrorism Council designates individuals and groups as terrorists at the request of other countries or international organizations such as ASEAN or the EU. The applicants described it as a flagrant violation of due process because it deprived an accused of the opportunity to hold a hearing in the Philippines before being classified as a terrorist. Like this year`s Anti-terrorism Act, the Anti-terrorism Act and the effective death penalty of 1996 gave the government new powers while isolating certain law enforcement measures – particularly death sentences – from meaningful oversight by federal judges. Cristina Palabay, secretary-general of the human rights group Karapatan, a petitioner to the law, said the long-awaited decision was a “partial victory” but also a huge disappointment as it reinforces the climate of fear that envelops the country.
After 9/11, the government conducted an assessment of existing federal laws, including the Criminal Code, the Canadian Evidence Act and the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) Act.