Terrorism in Guise of Faith

A terrorist group, as designated by Security Council of the United Nations under Resolution 2170, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has become synonymous with extreme violence directed against civilians and captured fighters.[1]

ISIS can trace its roots back to 2002, when Abu Musab al-Zarqawi – a Jordanian who was to gain notoriety in the Iraqi insurgency from 2003-2006 – founded a jihadi organization called Tawhid wal-Jihad in the north of Iraq.[2] On June 29, 2014 - ISIS announces the creation of a caliphate (Islamic state) that erases all state borders, making al-Baghdadi the self-declared authority over the world's estimated 1.5 billion Muslims.[3]

The United Nation’s Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic came up with a report on November 2014 entitled: Rule of Terror: Living under ISIS in Syria. The report enumerated a long list of violence that ISIS had perpetrated to civilian population.  The public execution of 15-year-old Mohammed Qatta, a coffee seller in Aleppo on 9 June 2013 was an early demonstration of the brutal way in which ISIS punishes and uses terror to ensure discipline among children, in particular boys. ISIS has beheaded, shot and stoned men, women and children in public spaces in towns and villages across northeastern Syria.

In a video posted on YouTube, U.S. journalist James Foley, missing in Syria since 2012, is decapitated by ISIS militants.[4] The mutilated bodies of male victims are often placed on display, a warning to the local population of the consequences of failure to submit to the armed group’s authority. A group of boys in Yemen reportedly burned their friend in a reenactment of the Islamic State murder of Jordanian pilot Lt. Muath al-Kaseasbeh.[5]

The use of force in the territory of another state is prohibited under the UN charter and customary international law.[6] Among the universally recognized exceptions is a UN Security Council authorization. In international law, an armed attack implies more than isolated criminal acts against a state’s citizens, however brutal. Rather, it implies hostilities of a certain magnitude that have a cross-border element.

There are several states that have begun sustained military measures to counter ISIS “terroristic” acts. In a letter dated 23 September to the UN secretary general, the US noted that “states must be able to defend themselves, in accordance with the inherent right of individual and collective self-defence, as reflected in article 51 of the UN charter, when, as is the case here, the government of the state where the threat is located is unwilling or unable to prevent the use of its territory for such attacks”.[7]

On the basis of its legal findings, the UN Security Council makes the recommendations[8]  to all parties to the conflict: (1) Take immediate steps to de-escalate the violence and to increase the protection of civilians; (2) End all human rights abuses and violations of international humanitarian law; (3) Comply with international humanitarian law and prioritize the protection of civilians and children recruited into ISIS; and (5) Comply effectively with Security Council Resolution 2139 including through facilitating the expansion of humanitarian relief operations and allow rapid, safe and unhindered humanitarian access for United Nations humanitarian agencies and their implementing partners.

Expression of religious belief is an internationally respected practice. However, terrorism in guise of the faith should not be tolerated and must be addressed with the firm stance of justice.

---

[1]United Nation’s Independent International Commission of

Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic Report (November 2014)  http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/CoISyria/HRC_CRP_ISIS_14Nov2014.pdf

[2] Tony Blair Foundation’s Website - http://tonyblairfaithfoundation.org/religion-geopolitics/commentaries/backgrounder/what-isis?gclid=CjwKEAiAmuCnBRCLj4D7nMWqp1USJABcT4dfLrgVybko37uXr7hjwWxDtHddEZlmMlaV-dRtDf6N9xoCigXw_wcB

[3] CNN - http://edition.cnn.com/2014/08/08/world/isis-fast-facts/

[4] CNN - http://edition.cnn.com/2014/08/08/world/isis-fast-facts/

[5] Fox News: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/03/05/yemeni-boys-reportedly-reenact-isis-burning-death-jordanian-pilot/

[6] United Kingdom’s The Guardian - http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/06/legal-basis-war-isis-syria-islamic-state

[7] United Kingdom’s The Guardian - http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/06/legal-basis-war-isis-syria-islamic-state

[8] http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/CoISyria/HRC_CRP_ISIS_14Nov2014.pdf

ISIS a Religious Group?

ISIS A RELIGIOUS GROUP?

There is no crime named terrorism in the Philippine statute books, although some acts which are considered terroristic are independently punished by the Revised Penal Code. The U.S. has its municipal Anti-Terrorism Law (International Crime Control Act of 1998) and the UK has the Terrorism Act of 2000. In the British law, what come under the Terrorism Act are violent moves against person or property or against public health and safety which have for their purpose to influence the government or to intimidate a section of the public or to advance a political, religious or ideological cause. The taking of hostages, indiscriminate killings or destruction of property for the enumerated purposes comes under the law. But these can also be prosecuted as individual crimes in domestic law. In international, part of the problem in criminalizing terrorism is the difficulty in defining the prohibited act. [1] 

The Islamic State, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS), follows a distinctive variety of Islam whose beliefs about the path to the Day of Judgment matter to its strategy, and can help the West know its enemy and predict its behavior. Its rise to power is less like the triumph of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt (a group whose leaders the Islamic State considers apostates) than like the realization of a dystopian alternate reality in which David Koresh or Jim Jones survived to wield absolute power over not just a few hundred people, but some 8 million. [2]

ISIS is part of and similar to Al-Qaeda? No, it is significantly worse. Al-Qaeda has been the touchstone for the Western understanding of terrorism ever since 9/11, but ISIS differs from it philosophically, organizationally, and even officially, as it has declared itself an entirely separate body. If anything the two organizations – though both espousing Sunni Islam – are currently more rivals than allies.

While Al-Qaeda, in its most well-known forms, is a terrorist organization, with sleeper cells, training camps and terrorist attacks, ISIS as of now is more a militia and a rogue territory with its own infrastructure, more similar to Boko Haram and other localized fiefdoms that have spawned in lawless or failed African states. Al-Qaeda has become more conscious of avoiding acts of indiscriminate or counter-productive brutality since the demise of Osama Bin Laden, but ISIS revels in it, espousing a religious philosophy so uncompromising it appears almost nihilistic.

The areas it has secured have been kept under control by an endless stream of floggings, mutilations, beheadings and crucifixions. The targets can be well-chosen or arbitrary, but no one is spared. However, one also has to realize that ISIS is no bunch of poorly-trained extremist thugs. With years of experience on the Syrian battlefield, the group boasts training camps producing well-prepared fighters, and it has been joined by scores of professionally trained overseas mercenaries. [3]

The Islamic State is no mere collection of psychopaths. It is a religious group with carefully considered beliefs, among them that it is a key agent of the coming apocalypse. Here’s what that means for its strategy and for how to stop it. But the reality is that the Islamic State is Islamic. Very Islamic. Yes, it has attracted psychopaths and adventure seekers, drawn largely from the disaffected populations of the Middle East and Europe. But the religion preached by its most ardent followers derives from coherent and even learned interpretations of Islam.

It remains unclear for how long the brutal and repressive policies of ISIS will guarantee their support on the ground in Iraq, while they are trying to win the locals’ hearts with religious propaganda and dreams of a huge cross-border caliphate.

[1] Introduction to International Law, Chapter 15, S.J Bernas, 2009 Edition

[2]http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

[3] http://rt.com/news/166836-isis-isil-al-qaeda-iraq/

RHEA M. CURAMEN

JD4102

The Constitutionality of BBL

Senator Miriam Santiago raised two clear issues on the passing of BBL. One is a procedural issue, while the other is a substantial issue. The procedural issue tackles the authority of the government to approve treaties. Based on our Constitution, treaties can be negotiated by the executive branch, but its passing requires the approval of the Senate. The Constitution is very clear on this area. Any lawyer, including Mr. Aquino’s lawyer on this issue, knows this basic requirement from our Constitution. Hence, this might be more of a warning to the executive branch not to be so brazen or self-assured that the BBL will be passed. No matter how good the BBL is in the eyes of the President. The Senate may not see the BBL in the same light with the President and they have the power to effect that view.

On the substantial issue, Senator Miriam Santiago raised whether the MILF has the authority to represent the Moro people. We should consider the modern history of our peace treaties with the Moro brothers. When former President Ramos entered a peace treaty with the Misuari faction of the MNLF, one faction abandoned the MNLF and formed the MILF. This faction may be bigger than the Nur’s MNLF in terms of person count and land area. Now, a faction of the MILF abandoned the MILF and formed the BIFF. Thankfully, this faction is relatively small in size. Coming from Senator Santiago’s statement, how can a Moro faction have a authority in our laws to negotiate for a sub-state? What about the other Moro or Christian brothers? Can the non-violent Moros organized themselves and petition for a sub-state? Can a certain segment of our Christian brothers organized and petition for a sub-state as well? This issue will likely be raised in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court should issue a clear doctrine on this issue. if we will allow groups to petition for a sub-state, then the Philippines will become a country of sub-state with minimal national authority. The Philippines will no longer be a Republic with a central national government.

With the Constitutional issues aside, the peace in Mindanao should happen now. The generations of Filipinos killing fellow Filipinos should stop.   

FINAL PAPER topic: Disqualification case of Joseph Estrada

A public office is a public trust and therefore rules governing election and administration are strict in nature as to prevent fraud and malpractice in the government. A pardoned offender of a grave offense is burdened with the proof not to commit any overt acts or to violate any penal laws as to maintain the affectivity of the pardon. Joseph Estrada was convicted for the crime of plunder and sentenced with reclusion perpetua.

In relation to the crime committed, one may be prohibited from running to a public position after the final judgment. The effects of pardon as to eligibility to run for a public office is provided in Article 36 of the revised penal code while the power of clemency of the President is provided in Article IV Section XIX 1987 Constitution.

A pardon may be a conditional pardon or an absolute pardon; both kinds have different effects. The sole issue to be solved in the case of Estrada’s disqualification is whether the pardon he received is a conditional or an absolute one. Upon lifting the case to the Court upon petition for review, the high court ruled that Estrada should not be disqualified from his office on the ground that the pardon granted to him by former president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo is an absolute pardon therefore he is not barred by any condition like to run for a public office.

Fruit of a poisonous tree: E.R. Ejercito disqualification case

 On May 1, 2014 by a resolution of the COMELEC En Banc, Governor E.R. Ejercito, nephew of former president and now Manila governor Joseph Ejercito Estrada, disqualified from his electoral position. The resolution is based on the alleged overspending of Ejercito in his 2013-midterm polls. Ejercito allegedly spent P 16 million pesos for an advertising contract while the only allowable spending for the poll is P 4.5 million.

In post electoral disputes, the COMELEC has the jurisdiction of the proceedings. Defeated Rep. San Luis challenges the governor’s win. On the other hand, Ejercito assails that the resolution of the COMELEC should be declared as null and void because according to him, the initiation of the complaint is only for a criminal proceeding for violating election laws. The Court ruled on the contrary upholding the ruling of the COMELEC.

The Court ruled that Ejercito violated Section 68 of the Omnibus Election code. The particular provision in the section provides that a candidate shall be subjected for disqualification if in case he spent in his election campaign an amount in excess of that allowed by the code.

It cannot be accepted that even though election is valid that the electorate prior to his win did then and there willfully and unlawfully spent in excess of his allowable expenditure for campaigning. How can we trust a public official who at first is in conflict with the law? The office of governor ER Ejercito is a fruit of a poisonous tree that the judiciary ought to prevent and invalidate.

Politics and Divinity

 The battle between good and the evil is somewhat as old as the battle between separation of the Church and the State, I being exaggerated. These two groups run the society itself and their influence greatly affects the lives of the people. While the laws of religion bind the church, the government is bound to the laws of the land. Each having own rules tends to clash having been situated in one society.

None other than the Constitution grants the freedom of religion to every citizen of the State. As a constitutional right, the government respects the discretion of every person in associating himself in the society where he lives in. In due respect to this right, the judiciary gives relief to those citizens whose right to freedom of religion has been infringed by the State.

In Estrada v. Escritor, the Court has upheld the Right to Freedom of religion.  In the case, a woman’s morality has been challenged because of her relationship with another man while both of them are still legally married. The petitioners assailed that their religion granted them a valid marital relationship with respect to their legal impediments as set by the laws. The Court said that the law recognizes actions, which are in accordance to religious beliefs and held that the conjugal agreement between the plaintiffs is valid.

The strict scrutiny test is a test whether the State has intruded to the right of freedom of religion requires such compelling state interest in order for the State to have a valid intrusion on the right to freedom of religion. Even if granted a constitutional safeguard, the right is not exempted from political processes. As Justice Scalia once said and feared that if anyone with a religious objection to a law could simply refuse to obey it and demand an exemption as a constitutional right; the result would be anarchy. In the Philippines that is a religiously plural society, every legislation without differentiation of purpose could potentially burden the religious interests of some faith. The Court provides a relief to clashing interests and give everyone a chance to be heard so as to protect each constitutional right and to uphold the laws of the land.

Who is the real terrorist?

 The quest for peace will not end if we fight war with war. The Islamic State has been grossly transparent with their persecution of various private individuals recording the event in video and publishing the same in social media. It has caused chaos in the minds of the people around the world on what is really happening and who shall be accountable for it.

The UN charter and international laws prohibit the initiation of military force in the territory of another state. Just like any other rules, there are prohibitions. The United Nations Security Council may approve the application of force in other state provided. The application of force may also be valid upon consent of the state where the force shall be applied and with consideration also to self-defense. As one world and United Nations, the international organization also recognizes certain humanitarian intervention provided that there is a necessity to do so.

The United States leads the operations to fight against the IS and to validate there intrusion to other states, the requisites for a valid initiation of military operation in another state should be met. Although no consent has been given by either state, the silence that the affected states are giving implies that they approve with the US intervention.

The violence inflicted by the IS concentrates in the Middle East nations. Since only a part of the world is affected, so far the fifth requirement has not been substantially met. The validity of the United States’ intrusion lies upon the affected states in the Middle East. What can be prohibited if no one asked to prohibit such?