Press Release
February 14, 2006
POLICE CANNOT THRASH PEOPLES RIGHT TO PEACEFUL ASSEMBLY -- PIMENTEL
Senate Minority Leader Aquilino Nene Q. Pimentel, Jr. (PDP-Laban)
today challenged the Arroyo government to prove its respect for the
rule of law, human rights and people power by upholding the
citizens constitutional right to peaceful assembly as a means of
settling their legitimate grievances.
The call was made amid reports that various opposition and sectoral
groups will stage a series of protest rallies that will coincide
with the 20th anniversary celebration of the 1986 EDSA People Power
Revolution on Feb. 22-25.
Pimentel assailed the administrations continued policy of
suppressing this basic right, as indicated by the policemens
violent dispersal of members of the cause-oriented group Akbayan as
they were marching on Recto Street in front of the San Sebastian
University on their way to Mendiola Bridge, Manila last week.
He said this is a flagrant violation of Batas Pambansa 880, enacted
during the martial law era, which implements the constitutional
mandate that the State shall ensure the free exercise or the
peoples right to peaceably assemble and petition the government for
redress of grievances without prejudice to the right of others to
life, liberty and equal protection of the law.
Under Batas Pambansa No. 880, it is now a part of State policy that
all peaceful assemblies of people for the redress of their
grievances are legal and could not, therefore, be stopped,
dispersed, dispensed or disbanded, the minority leader said in a
privilege speech at the Senate.
Pimentel argued that this law provides that:
1. A permit is not indispensable
for a peaceful activity to take place. 2. A permit is not necessary to make the activity legal. 3. A permit is necessary only to provide order to the activity
and security of its participants.
In fact, the lone senator from Mindanao said that if the authority
for issuing the rally permit does not act on the application for a
permit after two working days, the application is deemed approved.
Pimentel bewailed that law enforcement authorities, presumably
acting upon order of Malacañang
, did not have any qualm in
dispersing even a religious procession that was held in the
university belt on Oct. 14, 2005, and was led by three Catholic
bishops and prominent opposition leaders headed by former Vice
President Teofisto Guingona, Jr. and Sen. Jamby Madrigal.
Crowd dispersal policemen broke up the procession after the
participants left the San Sebastian Church and were about to proceed
to San Beda Church, despite the fact that the activity was legal,
being covered by a special permit issued by the City of Manilas
Mayors office.
Despite the fact that the participants in the procession were the
aggrieved parties, Pimentel said ironically the Manila Western
Police District charged that the respondents violated section 13 of
BP 880 by holding a public assembly without a permit because they
went beyond the area indicated in their special permit.
For people originally engaged in a peaceful procession in a
particular place to proceed to any other area also in a peaceful
manner cannot be deemed to have committed a crime, Pimentel said.
He said the procession participants would have violated the law if
they acted with aggression, violence or intimidation against anyone
in the course of their procession.
But not even the complaining police officers said so. It must
therefore, be taken as true that as far as the police are concerned,
the respondents did not act with aggression, violence or even
intimidation towards anyone in the course of their peaceful
activity, Pimentel said.
The M-WPD also charged the participants with violation of section
1119 the Revised Ordinances of the City of Manila by allegedly
causing obstruction of the public streets of Manila to the prejudice
of the public.
Pimentel said a reading of section 1119 of the said city ordinance
shows that it is intended to govern the use of public streets and
other public places for activities that are not a religious
nature.
Although such activities are placed within the jurisdiction of the
local governments, Pimentel said still BP 880 mandates that the
declaration of national policy as provided in section 2 of the Act
shall always prevail.
It stands to reason, then, that no ordinance of any local
government could curtail, amend, repeal, modify, reduce, rescind or
restrict any right that Batas Pambansa No. 880 confers upon our
citizens. That position is not only directed by reason. It is also
mandated by the rule of law. Otherwise, if local ordinances were to
supersede the requirements of national law or the Constitution,
there would be chaos in the land, Pimentel said. |