Instructions Affidavit In Support Of Application To Restrict Public Access To Person: Fill & Download for Free

From the USCIS Policy Manual, regarding Requests for Evidence:10.5 Requesting Additional Information. [Chapter 10.5 update effective September 11, 2018.](a) General .(1) Reasons for Requesting Additional Information .USCIS issues written notices in the form of a request for evidence (RFE) to request missing initial or additional evidence from applicants or petitioners who filed for immigration benefits.(2) Considerations Prior to Issuing RFEs .Initial case review should be thorough. Although the burden of proof is on the applicant, petitioner, or requestor, before issuing an RFE or NOID, an officer may assess whether the information needed is available in USCIS databases or systems. Occasionally, certain evidence or information not submitted with the application, petition, or request may be readily accessible in other USCIS records or otherwise available from external sources. If such information is available in USCIS databases or systems, an officer may obtain the information from these sources rather than issuing an RFE or a NOID. Adjudicators have the discretion to validate assertions or corroborate evidence and information by consulting USCIS or other governmental files, systems, and databases, or by obtaining publicly available information. 8 USC 1357(b).An officer should not request evidence that is outside the scope of the adjudication or otherwise irrelevant to an identified deficiency. In general, officers may, but are not required to, issue RFEs or NOIDs, and they retain the discretion to deny a request for ineligibility without issuing an RFE or NOID.When an RFE is appropriate, it should:(1) identify the eligibility requirement(s) that has not been established and why the evidence submitted was not sufficient;(2) identify any missing evidence specifically required by the applicable statute, regulation, or form instruction;(3) identify examples of other evidence that may be submitted to establish eligibility; and(4) request that evidence.The RFE should ask for all of the additional evidence the officer anticipates having to request and state the deadline for response. The officer’s careful consideration of all the apparent gaps in the evidence will minimize the issuance of multiple RFEs or denials for failure to establish eligibility for the benefit sought. In certain instances the evidence provided in response to an RFE may raise eligibility questions that the adjudicator did not identify during initial case review or open up new lines of inquiry. In such a case, a follow-up RFE or a NOID might be warranted. Failure to submit requested evidence which precludes a material line of inquiry, however, will be grounds for denying the request. 8 CFR 103.2(b)(14).Statutory DenialsStatutory denials should generally be issued without prior issuance of an RFE or a NOID on any application, petition, or request that does not have any basis upon which the applicant, petitioner, or requestor may be approved. This would include any filing in which the applicant, petitioner, or requestor has no legal basis for the benefit/request sought, or a request for a program that has been terminated. Other examples include, but are not limited to:Waiver applications that require a showing of extreme hardship to a qualifying relative but the applicant is claiming extreme hardship to someone else and there is no evidence of any qualifying relative;Family-based visa petitions filed for family members under categories that are not provided by statute based on the claimed family relationship.Officers should check the applicable policy and operating procedures for additional guidance, as applicable to the particular application, petition, or request. Additionally, cases in any type of litigation or that are subject to any court order or injunction must be addressed under the protocols governing the litigation.[1]Furthermore, certain form instructions or regulations may permit applicants, petitioners, or requestors to file a form before all required initial evidence is available, or may restrict USCIS’ ability to deny based solely on the submission of limited evidence.Denials Based on Lack of Sufficient Initial EvidenceIn the case of a filing that lacks initial evidence, the application, petition, or request may be denied without issuing an RFE or NOID. Examples of filings in which the issuance of a denial may be appropriate without prior issuance of an RFE or a NOID include, but are not limited to:Waiver applications submitted with little to no supporting evidence; orCases where the regulations, the statute, or form instructions require the submission of an official document or other form or evidence establishing eligibility at the time of filing and there is no submission. For example, family-based or employment-based categories where an Affidavit of Support (Form I-864), if required, was not submitted with the Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (Form I-485).(3) Options in Cases Where Insufficient Evidence Is Submitted .Whenever a case is received with all required initial evidence and the adjudicator cannot decide the case based on the information submitted, there are five options. Each option requires varying degrees of USCIS resources. Thus, adjudicators should carefully evaluate each option. The available options are:· Perform research using such internal sources as those described in Chapter 14 of this manual;· Request that the applicant or petitioner submit additional documentary evidence;· Interview the petitioner, beneficiary, applicant, or other witnesses;· Conduct – if local office policy allows a field examination (see Chapter 17 ); and· Execute an investigation.(b) Flexible Response Times Permitted When Requesting Additional Evidence .(1) New RFE Regulations .On April 17, 2007, USCIS published “Removal of the Standardized Request for Evidence Processing Timeframe” in the Federal Register . The rule became effective on June 18, 2007.(2) Flexible Response Times .Initial case review should be thorough. Although the burden of proof is on the applicant, petitioner, or requestor, before issuing an RFE or NOID, an officer may assess whether the information needed is available in USCIS databases or systems. Occasionally, certain evidence or information not submitted with the application, petition, or request may be readily accessible in other USCIS records or otherwise available from external sources. If such information is available in USCIS databases or systems, an officer may obtain the information from these sources rather than issuing an RFE or a NOID. Adjudicators have the discretion to validate assertions or corroborate evidence and information by consulting USCIS or other governmental files, systems, and databases, or by obtaining publicly available information. 8 USC 1357(b).An officer should not request evidence that is outside the scope of the adjudication or otherwiseirrelevant to an identified deficiency. In general, officers may, but are not required to, issue RFEs or NOIDs, and they retain the discretion to deny a request for ineligibility without issuing an RFE or NOID.When an RFE is appropriate, it should:(1) identify the eligibility requirement(s) that has not been established and why the evidence submitted was not sufficient;(2) identify any missing evidence specifically required by the applicable statute, regulation, or form instruction;(3) identify examples of other evidence that may be submitted to establish eligibility; and(4) request that evidence.The RFE should ask for all of the additional evidence the officer anticipates having to request and state the deadline for response. The officer’s careful consideration of all the apparent gaps in the evidence will minimize the issuance of multiple RFEs or denials for failure to establish eligibility for the benefit sought. In certain instances the evidence provided in response to an RFE may raise eligibility questions that the adjudicator did not identify during initial case review or open up new lines of inquiry. In such a case, a follow-up RFE or a NOID might be warranted. Failure to submit requested evidence which precludes a material line of inquiry, however, will be grounds for denying the request. 8 CFR 103.2(b)(14).Statutory DenialsStatutory denials should generally be issued without prior issuance of an RFE or a NOID on any application, petition, or request that does not have any basis upon which the applicant, petitioner, or requestor may be approved. This would include any filing in which the applicant, petitioner, or requestor has no legal basis for the benefit/request sought, or a request for a program that has been terminated. Other examples include, but are not limited to:Waiver applications that require a showing of extreme hardship to a qualifying relative but the applicant is claiming extreme hardship to someone else and there is no evidence of any qualifying relative;Family-based visa petitions filed for family members under categories that are not provided by statute based on the claimed family relationship.Officers should check the applicable policy and operating procedures for additional guidance, as applicable to the particular application, petition, or request. Additionally, cases in any type of litigation or that are subject to any court order or injunction must be addressed under the protocols governing the litigation.[1]Furthermore, certain form instructions or regulations may permit applicants, petitioners, or requestors to file a form before all required initial evidence is available, or may restrict USCIS’ ability to deny based solely on the submission of limited evidence.Denials Based on Lack of Sufficient Initial EvidenceIn the case of a filing that lacks initial evidence, the application, petition, or request may be denied without issuing an RFE or NOID. Examples of filings in which the issuance of a denial may be appropriate without prior issuance of an RFE or a NOID include, but are not limited to:Waiver applications submitted with little to no supporting evidence; orCases where the regulations, the statute, or form instructions require the submission of an official document or other form or evidence establishing eligibility at the time of filing and there is no submission. For example, family-based or employment-based categories where an Affidavit of Support (Form I-864), if required, was not submitted with the Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (Form I-485).(3) Maximum Response Times .The maximum response time is 12 weeks for an RFE. The regulations state that when an RFE is served by mail, the response is timely filed if it is received no more than three days after the due date. 8 CFR 103.5a(b) . USCIS has determined that as a matter of policy that additional mailing time should be given to applicants/petitioners residing outside the United States. See Appendix 10-9 for standard mailing times.(4) Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID) .A NOID may be based on evidence of ineligibility or on derogatory information known to USCIS, but the applicant, petitioner, or requestor is either unaware of the information or may be unaware of its impact on eligibility. When an adverse decision is based on derogatory information that is unknown to the applicant, petitioner, or requestor, generally, an opportunity to rebut that information shall be provided in accordance with 8 CFR 103.2(b)(16)(i). In that situation, a NOID provides an applicant, petitioner, or requestor with adequate notice and sufficient opportunity to respond and the opportunity to review and rebut derogatory information of which he/she/it is unaware. While not required in other situations, a NOID also provides an applicant, petitioner, or requestor with adequate notice and sufficient opportunity to respond to an intended denial on other substantive grounds.[2]When a preliminary decision has been made to deny an application or petition and the denial is not based on lack of initial evidence or a statutory denial as discussed in Chapter 10.5(b), and 8 CFR 103.2(b)(16)(i) applies, the adjudicator must issue a written NOID to the applicant, petitioner, or requestor providing up to a maximum of 30 days to respond to the NOID. The NOID must include the required response date.(5) Eligibility and Ineligibility Procedures .(i) General .· If evidence establishes eligibility, USCIS can approve the application or petition.· If the Immigration and Nationality Act or regulations require an exercise of discretion, USCIS can approve the application or petition only if the evidence establishes eligibility and warrants favorable discretion.· If the evidence establishes ineligibility, USCIS must deny the application or petition.(ii) Initial Evidence Submitted But Does Not Establish Eligibility .In this situation, USCIS can deny the application or petition for ineligibility. Alternatively, in its sole discretion, USCIS may request more evidence to be submitted in the established timeframe, which can be no more than 12 weeks. AFM Appendix 10-9 sets general timeframes for applicants or petitioners to respond RFEs.(iii) Initial Evidence Not Submitted .USCIS can deny the application or petition. Alternatively, in its sole discretion, USCIS may request that the missing evidence be submitted within the established timeframe, which can be no more than 12 weeks. AFM Appendix 10-9 sets general timeframes for applicants or petitioners to respond to RFEs.(6) Applicant or Petitioner Responses to RFEs or NOIDs .(i) Options .Within the time specified, applicants and petitioners may respond to an RFE or a NOID in one of three ways:· Submit a complete response containing all requested evidence; or· Submit a partial response; or· Withdraw the application or petition.(ii) Requested Materials Must Be Submitted Together .Applicants or petitioners must submit all requested materials together at one time, along with the original RFE or NOID. However, if an applicant or petitioner submits only some of the requested evidence, USCIS will treat such submissions as a request for a decision on the record.(iii) Failure to Respond to an RFE or NOID .If an applicant or petitioner does not respond to an RFE or a NOID by the required date, USCIS may:· Deny the application or petition as abandoned; or· Deny the application or petition on the record; or· Deny the application or petition for both reasons.(iv) Failure to Appear for In-Person Processes .If an applicant or petitioner does not appear for any required in-person process such as an interview or biometrics capture, USCIS shall summarily deny the application as abandoned.However, USCIS will not deny the application or petition if, by the appointment time, the applicant or petitioner has submitted an address change notification or a rescheduling request, provided that USCIS concludes that the reason for the request justifies the failure to appear.

Republic of the PhilippinesCongress of the PhilippinesMetro ManilaEighteenth CongressFirst Regular SessionBegun and held in Metro Manila, on Monday, the twenty-second day of July, two thousand nineteen.REPUBLIC ACT NO. 11479AN ACT TO PREVENT, PROHIBIT AND PENALIZE TERRORISM, THEREBY REPEALING REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9372, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE “HUMAN SECURITY ACT OF 2007.”Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled:SECTION 1. Short Title. This Act shall henceforth be known as “The Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020”.SEC. 2. Declaration of Policy. It is declared a policy of the State to protect life, liberty, and property from terrorism, to condemn terrorism as inimical and dangerous to the national security of the country and to the welfare of the people, and to make terrorism a crime against the Filipino people, against humanity, and against The Law of Nations.In the implementation of the policy stated above, the State shall uphold the basic rights and fundamental liberties of the people as enshrined in the Constitution.The State recognizes that the fight against terrorism requires a comprehensive approach, comprising political, economic, diplomatic, military, and legal means duly taking into account the root causes of terrorism without acknowledging these as justifications for terrorist and/or criminal activities. Such measures shall include conflict management and post-conflict peacebuilding, addressing the roots of conflict by building state capacity and promoting equitable economic development.Nothing in this Act shall be interpreted as a curtailment, restriction or diminution of constitutionally recognized powers of the executive branch of the government. It is to be understood, however, that the exercise of the constitutionally recognized powers of the executive department of the government shall not prejudice respect for human rights which shall be absolute and protected at all times.SEC. 3. Definition of Terms. – as used in this Act:(a) Critical Infrastructure shall refer to an asset or system, whether physical or virtual, so essential to the maintenance of vital societal functions or to the delivery of essential public services that the incapacity or destruction of such systems and assets would have a debilitating impact on national defense and security, national economy, public health or safety, the administration of justice, and other functions analogous thereto. It may include, but is not limited to, an asset or system affecting telecommunications, water and energy supply, emergency services, food security, fuel supply, banking and finance, transportation, radio and television, information systems and technology, chemical and nuclear sectors;(b) Designated Person shall refer to: Any individual, group of persons, organizations, or associations designated and/or identified by the United Nations Security Council, or another jurisdiction, or supranational jurisdiction as a terrorist, one who finances terrorism, or a terrorist organization or group; orAny person, organization, association, or group of persons designated under paragraph 3 of Section 25 of this Act.For purposes of this Act, the above definition shall be in addition to the definition of designated persons under Section3(e) of Republic Act No. 10168, otherwise known as the “Terrorism Financing Prevention and Suppression Act of 2012”.(c) Extraordinary Rendition shall refer to the transfer of a person, suspected of being a terrorist or supporter of a terrorist organization, association, or group of persons to a foreign nation for imprisonment and interrogation on behalf of the transferring nation. The extraordinary rendition may be done without framing any formal charges, trial, or approval of the court.(d) International Organization shall refer to an organization established by a treaty or other instrument governed by international law and possessing its own international legal personality;(e) Material Support shall refer to any property, tangible or intangible, or service, including currency or monetary instruments or financial securities, financial services, lodging, training, expert advice or assistance, safehouses, false documentation or identification, communications equipment, facilities, weapons, lethal substances, explosives, personnel (one or more individuals who may be or include oneself), and transportation;(i) Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction shall refer to the transfer and export of chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapons, their means of delivery and related materials;(g) Proposal to Commit Terrorism is committed when a person who has decided to commit any of the crimes defined and penalized under the provisions of this Act proposes its execution to some other person or persons;(h) Recruit shall refer to any act to encourage other people to join a terrorist individual or organization, association or group of persons proscribed under Section 26 of this Act, or designated by the United Nations Security Council as a terrorist organization, or organized for the purpose of engaging in terrorism;(i) Surveillance Activities shall refer to the act of tracking down, following, or investigating individuals or organizations; or the tapping, listening, intercepting, and recording of messages conversations, discussions, spoken or written words, including computer and network surveillance, and other communications of individuals engaged in terrorism as defined hereunder;(j) Supranational Jurisdiction shall refer to an international organization or union in which the power and influence of member states transcend national boundaries or interests to share in decision-making and vote on issues concerning the collective body, i.e. the European Union;(k) Training shall refer to the giving of instruction or teaching designed to impart a specific skill in relation to terrorism as defined hereunder, as opposed to general knowledge;(1) Terrorist Individual shall refer to any natural person who commits any of the acts defined and penalized under Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10,11 and 12 of this Act;(m) Terrorist Organization, Association or Group of Persons shall refer to any entity organized for the purpose of engaging in terrorism, or those proscribed under Section 26hereof or the United Nations Security Council-designatedterrorist organization; and(n) Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) shall refer to chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapons which are capable of a high order of destruction or causing mass casualties. It excludes the means of transporting or propelling the weapon where such means is a separable and divisible part from the weapon.SEC. 4. Terrorism. – Subject to Section 49 of this Act, terrorism is committed by any person who, within or outside the Philippines, regardless of the stage of execution:(a) Engages in acts intended to cause death or serious bodily injury to any person, or endangers a person’s life;(b) Engages in acts intended to cause extensive damage or destruction to a government or public facility, public place or private property;(c) Engages in acts intended to cause extensive interference with, damage or destruction to critical infrastructure;(d) Develops, manufactures, possesses, acquires, transports, supplies or uses weapons, explosives or of biological, nuclear, radiological or chemical weapons; and(e) Release of’ dangerous substances, or causing fire, floods or explosionswhen the purpose of such act, by its nature and context, is to intimidate the general public or a segment thereof, create an atmosphere or spread a message of fear, to provoke or influence by intimidation the government or any international organization, or seriously destabilize or destroy the fundamental political, economic, or social structures of the country, or create a public emergency or seriously undermine public safety, shall be guilty of committing terrorism and shall suffer the penalty of life imprisonment without the benefit of parole and the benefits of Republic Act No. 10592, otherwise known as “An Act Amending Articles 29, 94, 97, 98 and 99 of Act No. 3815, as amended, otherwise known as the Revised Penal Code”: Provided, That, terrorism as defined in this section shall not include advocacy, protest, dissent, stoppage of work, industrial or mass action, and other similar exercises of civil and political rights, which are not intended to cause death or serious physical harm to a person, to endanger a person’s life, or to create a serious risk to public safety.SEC. 5. Threat to Commit Terrorism. – Any person who shall threaten to commit any of the acts mentioned in Section 4 hereof shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment of twelve (12) years.SEC. 6. Planning, Training, Preparing, and Facilitating the Commission of Terrorism. – It shall be unlawful for anyperson to participate in the planning, training, preparation and facilitation in the commission of terrorism, possessing objectsconnected with the preparation for the commission of terrorism,or collecting or making documents connected with thepreparation of terrorism. Any person found guilty of theprovisions of this Act shall suffer the penalty of lifeimprisonment without the benefit of parole and the benefitsof Republic Act No. 10592.SEC. 7. Conspiracy to Commit Terrorism. – Any conspiracy to commit terrorism as defined and penalized under Section 4 of this Act shall suffer the penalty of life imprisonment without the benefit of parole and the benefits of Republic Act No. 10592.There is conspiracy when two (2) or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of terrorism as defined in Section 4 hereof and decide to commit the same.SEC. 8. Proposal to Commit Terrorism. – Any person who proposes to commit terrorism as defined in Section 4 hereof shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment of twelve (12) years.SEC. 9. Inciting to Commit Terrorism. – Any person who, without taking any direct part in the commission of terrorism, shall incite others to the execution of any of the acts specified in Section 4 hereof by means of speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems, banners or other representations tending to the same end, shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment of twelve (12) years.SEC. 10. Recruitment to and Membership in a Terrorist Organization. – Any person who shall recruit another to participate in, join, commit or support terrorism or a terrorist individual or any terrorist organization, association or group of persons proscribed under Section 26 of this Act, or designated by the United Nations Security Council as a terrorist organization, or organized for the purpose of engaging in terrorism, shall suffer the penalty of life imprisonment without the benefit of parole and the benefits of Republic Act No. 10592.The same penalty shall be imposed on any person who organizes or facilitates the travel of individuals to a state other than their state of residence or nationality for the purpose of recruitment which may be committed through any of the following means:(a) Recruiting another person to serve in any capacity in or with an armed force in a foreign state, whether the armed force forms part of the armed forces of the government of that foreign state or otherwise;(b) Publishing an advertisement or propaganda for the purpose of recruiting persons to serve in any capacity in or with such an armed force;(c) Publishing an advertisement or propaganda containing any information relating to the place at which or the manner in which persons may make applications to serve or obtain information relating to service in any capacity in or with such armed force or relating to the manner in which persons may travel to a foreign state for the purpose of serving in any capacity in or with such armed force; or(d) Performing any other act with the intention of facilitating or promoting the recruitment of persons to serve in any capacity in or with such armed force.Any person who shall voluntarily and knowingly join any organization, association or group of persons knowing that such organization, association or group of persons is proscribed under Section 26 of this Act, or designated by the United Nations Security Council as a terrorist organization, or organized for the purpose of engaging in terrorism, shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment of twelve (12) years.SEC. 11. Foreign Terrorist. – The following acts are unlawful and shall suffer the penalty of life imprisonment without the benefit of parole and the benefits of Republic Act No. 10592:(a) For any person to travel or attempt to travel to a state other than his/her state of residence or nationality, for the purpose of perpetrating, planning, or preparing for, or participating in terrorism, or providing or receiving terrorist training;(b) For any person to organize or facilitate the travel of individuals who travel to a state other than their states of residence or nationality knowing that such travel is for the purpose of perpetrating, planning, training, or preparing for, or participating in terrorism or providing or receiving terrorist training; or(c) For any person residing abroad who comes to the Philippines to participate in perpetrating, planning, training, or preparing for, or participating in terrorism or provide support for or facilitate or receive terrorist training here or abroad.SEC. 12. Providing Material Support to Terrorists. – Any person who provides material support to any terrorist individual or terrorist organization, association or group of persons committing any of the acts punishable under Section 4 hereof, knowing that such individual or organization, association, or group of persons is committing or planning to commit such acts, shall be liable as principal to any and all terrorist activities committed by said individuals or organizations, in addition to other criminal liabilities he/she or they may have incurred in relation thereto.SEC. 13. Humanitarian Exemption. – Humanitarian activities undertaken by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), the Philippine Red Cross (PRC), and other state-recognized impartial humanitarian partners or organizations in conformity with the International Humanitarian Law (IHL), do not fall within the scope of Section 12 of this Act.SEC. 14. Accessory. – Any person who, having knowledge of the commission of any of the crimes defined and penalized under Section 4 of this Act, without having participated therein, takes part subsequent to its commission in any of the following manner: (a) by profiting himself/herself or assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the crime; (b) by concealing or destroying the body of the crime, or the effects, or instruments thereof, in order to prevent its discovery; or (o) by harboring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of the principal or conspirator of the crime, shall be liable as an accessory and shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment of twelve (12) years.No person, regardless of relationship or affinity, shall be exempt from liability under this section.SEC. 15. Penalty for Public Official. – If the offender found guilty of any of the acts defined and penalized under any of the provisions of this Act is a public official or employee, he/she shall be charged with the administrative offense of grave misconduct and/or disloyalty to the Republic of the Philippines and the Filipino people, and be meted with the penalty of dismissal from the service, with the accessory penalties of cancellation of civil service eligibility, forfeiture of retirement benefits and perpetual absolute disqualification from running for any elective office or holding any public office.SEC. 16. Surveillance of Suspects and Interception and Recording of Communications. – The provisions of RepublicAct No. 4200, otherwise known as the “Anti-Wire TappingLaw” to the contrary notwithstanding, a law enforcementagent or military personnel may, upon a written order of theCourt of Appeals secretly wiretap, overhear and listen to,intercept, screen, read, surveil, record or collect, with the useof any mode, form, kind or type of electronic, mechanical orother equipment or device or technology now known or mayhereafter be known to science or with the use of any othersuitable ways and means for the above purposes, any privatecommunications, conversation, discussion/s, data, information,messages in whatever form, kind or nature, spoken or writtenwords (a) between members of a judicially declared andoutlawed terrorist organization, as provided in Section 26 of this Act; (b) between members of a designated person as defined in Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 10168; or (c) any person charged with or suspected of committing any of the crimes defined and penalized under the provisions of this Act: Provided, That, surveillance, interception and recording of communications between lawyers and clients, doctors and patients, journalists and their sources and confidential business correspondence shall not be authorized.The law enforcement agent or military personnel shall likewise be obligated to (1) file an ex-parte application with the Court of Appeals for the issuance of an order, to compel telecommunications service providers (TSP) and internet service providers (ISP) to produce all customer information and identification records as well as call and text data records, content and other cellular or internet metadata of any person suspected of any of the crimes defined and penalized under the provisions of this Act; and (2) furnish the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) a copy of said application. The NTC shall likewise be notified upon the issuance of the order for the purpose of ensuring immediate compliance.SEC. 17. Judicial Authorization, Requisites. – The authorizing division of the Court of Appeals shall issue a written order to conduct the acts mentioned in Section 16 of this Act upon:(a) Filing of an ex parte written application by a law enforcement agent or military personnel, who has been duly authorized in writing by the Anti-Terrorism Council (ATC); and(b) After examination under oath or affirmation of the applicant and the witnesses he/slie may produce, the issuing court determines:(1) that there is probable cause to believe based on of facts or circumstances that the crimes defined and penalized under Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of this Act has been committed, or is being committed, or is about to be committed; and(2) that there is probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances that evidence, which is essential to the conviction of any charged or suspected person for, or to the solution or prevention of, any such crimes, will be obtainedSEC. 18. Classification and Contents of the Order of the Court. – The written order granted by the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals as well as the application for such order, shall be deemed and are hereby declared as classified information. Being classified information, access to the said documents and any information contained in the said documents shall be limited to the applicants, duly authorized personnel of the ATC, the hearing justices, the clerk of court and duly authorized personnel of the hearing or issuing court. The written order of the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals shall specify the following: (a) the identity, such as name and address, if known, of the person or persons whose communications, messages, conversations, discussions, or spoken or written ‘words are to be tracked down, tapped, listened to, intercepted, and recorded; and, in the case of radio, electronic, or telephonic (whether wireless or otherwise) communications, messages, conversations, discussions, or spoken or written words, the electronic transmission systems or the telephone numbers to be tracked down, tapped, listened to, intercepted, and recorded and their locations or if the person or persons suspected of committing any of the crimes defined and penalized under the provisions of this Act are not fully known, such person or persons shall be the subject of continuous surveillance; (b) the identity of the law enforcement agent or military personnel, including the individual identity of the members of his team, judicially authorized to undertake surveillance activities; (c) the offense or offenses committed, or being committed, or sought to be prevented; and, (d) the length of time within which the authorization shall be used or carried out.SEC. 19. Effective Period of Judicial Authorization. – Any authorization granted by the Court of Appeals, pursuant to Section 17 of this Act, shall only be effective for the length of time specified in the written order of the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals which shall not exceed a period of sixty (60) days from the date of receipt of the written order by the applicant law enforcement agent or military personnel.The authorizing division of the Court of Appeals may extend or renew the said authorization to a non-extendible period, which shall not exceed thirty (30) days from the expiration of the original period: Provided, That the issuing court is satisfied that such extension or renewal is in the public interest: and Provided, further, That the ex parte application for extension or renewal, which must be filed by the original applicant, has been duly authorized in writing by the ATC.In case of death of the original applicant or in case he/she is physically disabled to file the application for extension or renewal, the one next in rank to the original applicant among the members of the team named in the original written order shall file the application for extension or renewal: Provided, finally, That, the applicant law enforcement agent or military personnel shall have thirty (30) days after the termination of the period granted by the Court of Appeals as provided in the preceding paragraphs within which to file the appropriate case before the Public Prosecutor’s Office for any violation of this Act.For purposes of this provision, the issuing court shall require the applicant law enforcement or military official to inform the court, after the lapse of the thirty (30)-day period of the fact that an appropriate case for violation of this Act has been filed with the Public Prosecutor’s Office.SEC. 20. Custody of Intercepted and Recorded Communications. – All tapes, discs, other storage devices,recordings, notes, memoranda, summaries, excerpts and all copies thereof obtained under the judicial authorization granted by the Court of Appeals shall, within forty-eight (48) hours after the expiration of the period fixed in the written order or the extension or renewal granted thereafter, be deposited with the issuing court in a sealed envelope or sealed package, as the case may be, and shall be accompanied by a joint affidavit of the applicant law enforcement agent or military personnel and the members of his/her team.In case of death of the applicant or in case he/she is physically disabled to execute the required affidavit, the one next in rank to the applicant among the members of the team named in the written order of the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals shall execute with the members of the team that required affidavit.It shall be unlawful for any person, law enforcement agent or military personnel or any custodian of the tapes, discs, other storage devices recordings, notes, memoranda, summaries, excerpts and all copies thereof to remove, delete, expunge, incinerate, shred or destroy in any manner the items enumerated above in whole or in part under any pretext whatsoever.Any person who removes, deletes, expunges, incinerates, shreds or destroys the items enumerated above shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment of ten (10) years.SEC. 21. Contents of Joint Affidavit. – The joint affidavit of the law enforcement agent or military personnel shall state: (a) the number of tapes, discs, and recordings that have been made; (b) the dates and times covered by each of such tapes, discs, and recordings; and (c) the chain of custody or the list of persons who had possession or custody over the tapes, discs and recordings.The joint affidavit shall also certify under oath that no duplicates or copies of the whole or any part of any of such tapes, discs, other storage devices, recordings, notes, memoranda, summaries, or excerpts have been made, or, if made, that all such duplicates and copies are included in the sealed envelope or sealed package, as the case may be, deposited with the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals.It shall be unlawful for any person, law enforcement agent or military personnel to omit or exclude from the joint affidavit any item or portion thereof mentioned in this section.Any person, law enforcement agent or military officer who violates any of the acts proscribed in the preceding paragraph shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment of ten (10) years.SEC. 22. Disposition of Deposited Materials. – The sealed envelope or sealed package and the contents thereof, referred to in Section 20 of this Act, shall be deemed and are hereby declared classified information. The sealed envelope or sealed package shall not be opened, disclosed, or used as evidence unless authorized by a written order of the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals which written order shall be granted only upon a written application of the Department of Justice (DOJ) duly authorized in writing by the ATC to file the application with proper written notice to the person whose conversation, communication, message, discussion or spoken or written words have been the subject of surveillance, monitoring, recording and interception to open, reveal, divulge, and use the contents of the sealed envelope or sealed package as evidence.The written application, with notice to the party concerned, for the opening, replaying, disclosing, or using as evidence of the sealed package or the contents thereof, shall clearly state the purpose or reason for its opening, replaying, disclosing, or its being used as evidence.Violation of this section shall be penalized by imprisonment of ten (10) years.SEC. 23. Evidentiary Value of Deposited Materials. – Any listened to, intercepted, and recorded communications, messages, conversations, discussions, or spoken or written words, or any part or parts thereof, or any information or fact contained therein, including their existence, content, substance, purport, effect, or meaning, which have been secured in violation of the pertinent provisions of this Act, shall be inadmissible and cannot be used as evidence against anybody in any judicial, quasi-judicial, legislative, or administrative investigation, inquiry, proceeding, or hearing.SEC. 24. Unauthorized or Malicious Interceptions and/or Recordings. – Any law enforcement agent or military personnel who conducts surveillance activities without a valid judicial authorization pursuant to Section 17 of this Act shall be guilty of this offense and shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment of ten (10) years. All information that have been maliciously procured should be made available to the aggrieved party.SEC. 25. Designation of Terrorist Individual, Groups of Persons, Organizations or Associations. – Pursuant to our obligations under United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) No. 1373, the ATC shall automatically adopt the United Nations Security Council Consolidated List of designated individuals, group of persons, organizations, or associations designated and/or identified as a terrorist, one who finances terrorism, or a terrorist organization or group.Request for designations by other jurisdictions or supranational jurisdictions may be adopted by the ATC after determination that the proposed designee meets the criteria for designation of UNSCR No.1373.The ATC may designate an individual, groups of persons, organization, or association, whether domestic or foreign, upon a finding of probable cause that the individual, groups of persons, organization, or association commit, or attempt to commit, or conspire in the commission of the acts defined and penalized under Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of this Act.The assets of the designated individual, groups of persons, organization or association above-mentioned shall be subject to the authority of the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) to freeze pursuant to Section 11 of Republic Act No. 10168.The designation shall be without prejudice to the prescription of terrorist organizations, associations, or groups of persons under Section 26 of this Act.SEC. 26. Proscription of Terrorist Organizations, Association, or Group of Persons. – Any group of persons, organization, or association, which commits any of the acts defined and penalized under Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of this Act, or organized for the purpose of engaging in terrorism shall, upon application of the DOJ before the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals with due notice and opportunity to be heard given to the group of persons, organization or association, be declared as a terrorist and outlawed group of persons, organization or association, by the said Court.The application shall be filed with an urgent prayer for the issuance of a preliminary order of prescription. No application for prescription shall be filed without the authority of the ATC upon the recommendation of the National Intelligence Coordinating Agency (NICA).SEC. 27. Preliminary Order of Prescription. – Where the Court has determined that probable cause exists on the basis of the verified application which is sufficient in form and substance, that the issuance of an order of prescription is necessary to prevent the commission of terrorism, he/she shall, within seventy-two (72) hours from the filing of the application, issue a preliminary order of prescription declaring that the respondent is a terrorist and an outlawed organization or association within the meaning of Section 26 of this Act.The court shall immediately commence and conduct continuous hearings, which should be completed within six (6) months from the time the application has been filed, to determine whether:(a) The preliminary order of prescription should he made permanent;(b) A permanent order of prescription should be issued in case no preliminary order was issued; or(c) A preliminary order of prescription should be lifted. It shall be the burden of the applicant to prove that the respondent is a terrorist and an outlawed organization or association within the meaning of Section 26 of this Act before the court issues an order of prescription whether preliminary or permanent.The permanent order of prescription herein granted shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation. It shall be valid for a period of three (3) years after which, a review of such order shall be made and if circumstances warrant, the same shall be lifted.SEC. 28. Request to Proscribe from Foreign Jurisdictions and Supranational Jurisdictions. – Consistent with the national interest, all requests for proscription made by anotherjurisdiction or supranational jurisdiction shall be referred bythe Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) to the ATC todetermine, with the assistance of the NICA, if prescriptionunder Section 26 of this Act is warranted. If the request forproscription is granted, the ATC shall correspondinglycommence proscription proceedings through the DOJ.SEC. 29. Detention Without Judicial Warrant of Arrest. – The provisions of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code to the contrary notwithstanding, any law enforcement agent or military personnel, who, having been duly authorized in writing by the ATC has taken custody of a person suspected of committing any of the acts defined and penalized under Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of this Act, shall, without incurring any criminal liability for delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial authorities, deliver said suspected person to the proper judicial authority within a period of fourteen (14) calendar days counted from the moment the said suspected person has been apprehended or arrested, detained, and taken into custody by the law enforcement agent or military personnel. The period of detention may be extended to a maximum period of ten (10) calendar days if it is established that (1) further detention of the person/s is necessary to preserve evidence related to terrorism or complete the investigation; (2) further detention of the person/s is necessary to prevent the commission of another terrorism; and (3) the investigation is being conducted properly and without delay.Immediately after taking custody of a person suspected of committing terrorism or any member of a group of persons, organization or association proscribed under Section 26 hereof, the law enforcement agent or military personnel shall notify in writing the judge of the court nearest the place of apprehension or arrest of the following facts: (a) the time, date, and manner of arrest; (b) the location or locations of the detained suspect/s and (c) the physical and mental condition of the detained suspect/s. The law enforcement agent or military personnel shall likewise furnish the ATC and the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) of the written notice given to the judge.The head of the detaining facility shall ensure that the detained suspect is informed of his/her rights as a detainee and shall ensure access to the detainee by his/her counsel or agencies and entities authorized by law to exercise visitorial powers over detention facilities.The penalty of imprisonment of ten (10) years shall be imposed upon the police or law enforcement agent or military personnel who fails to notify any judge as provided in the preceding paragraph.SEC. 30. Rights of a Person under Custodial Detention. – The moment a person charged with or suspected of committing any of the acts defined and penalized under Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of this Act is apprehended or arrested and detained, he/she shall forthwith be informed, by the arresting law enforcement agent or military personnel to whose custody the person concerned is brought, of his/her right: (a) to be informed of the nature and cause of his/her arrest, to remain silent and to have competent and independent counsel preferably of his/her choice. If the person cannot afford the services of counsel of his/her choice, the law enforcement agent or military personnel concerned shall immediately contact the free legal assistance unit of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) or the Public Attorney’s Office (PAO). It shall be the duty of the free legal assistance unit of the IBP or the PAO thus contacted to immediately visit the person/s detained and provide him/her with legal assistance. These rights cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence of his/her counsel of choice; (b) informed of the cause or causes of his/her detention in the presence of his legal counsel; (c) allowed to communicate freely with his/her legal counsel and to confer with them at any time without restriction; (d) allowed to communicate freely and privately without restrictions with the members of his/her family or with his/her nearest relatives and to be visited by them; and, (e) allowed freely to avail of the service of a physician or physicians of choice.SEC. 31. Violation of the Rights of a Detainee. – The penalty of imprisonment of ten (10) years shall be imposed upon any law enforcement agent or military personnel who has violated the rights of persons under their custody, as provided for in Sections 29 and 30 of this Act.Unless the law enforcement agent or military personnel who violated the rights of a detainee or detainees as stated above is duly identified, the same penalty shall be imposed on the head of the law enforcement unit or military unit having custody of the detainee at the time the violation was done.SEC. 32. Official Custodial Logbook and Its Contents. – The law enforcement custodial,unit in whose care and control the person suspected of committing any of the acts defined and penalized under Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of this Act has been placed under custodial arrest and detention shall keep a securely and orderly maintained official logbook, which is hereby declared as a public document and opened to and made available for the inspection and scrutiny of the lawyer of the person under custody or any member of his/her family or relative by consanguinity or affinity within the fourth civil degree or his/her physician at any time of the day or night subject to reasonable restrictions by the custodial facility. The logbook shall contain a clear and concise record of: (a) the name, description, and address of the detained person; (b) the date and exact time of his/her initial admission for custodial arrest and detention; (c) the name and address of the physician or physicians who examined him/her physically and medically; (d) the state of his/her health and physical condition at the time of his/her initial admission for custodial detention; (e) the date and time of each removal of the detained person from his/her cell for interrogation or for any purpose; (f) the date and time of his/her return to his/her cell; (g) the name and address of the physician or physicians who physically and medically examined him/her after each interrogation; (h) a summary of the physical and medical findings on the detained person after each of such interrogation; (i) the names and addresses of his/her family members and nearest relatives, if any and if available; (j) the names and addresses of persons, who visit the detained person; (k) the date and time of each of such visit; (l) the date and time of each request of the detained person to communicate and confer with his/her legal counsel or counsels; (m) the date and time of each visit, and date and time of each departure of his/her legal counsel or counsels; and (n) all other important events bearing on and all relevant details regarding the treatment of the detained person while under custodial arrest and detention.The said law enforcement custodial unit shall, upon demand of the aforementioned lawyer or members of the family or relatives within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity of the person under custody or his/her physician, issue a certified true copy of the entries of the logbook relative to the concerned detained person subject to reasonable restrictions by the custodial facility. This certified true copy may be attested by the person who has custody of the logbook or who allowed the party concerned to scrutinize it at the time the demand for the certified true copy is made.The law enforcement custodial unit who fails to comply with the preceding paragraphs to keep an official logbook shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment of ten (10) years.SEC. 33. No Torture or Coercion in Investigation and Interrogation. – The use of torture and other cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment or punishment, as defined in Sections 4 and 5 of Republic Act No. 9745 otherwise known as the “Anti-Torture Act of 2009,” at any time during the investigation or interrogation of a detained suspected terrorist is absolutely prohibited and shall be penalized under said law. Any evidence obtained from said detained person resulting from such treatment shall be, in its entirety, inadmissible and cannot be used as evidence in any judicial, quasi-judicial, legislative, or administrative investigation, inquiry, proceeding, or hearing.SEC. 34. Restriction on the Right to Travel. – Prior to the filing of an information for any violation of Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of this Act, the investigating prosecutor shall apply for the issuance of a precautionary hold departure order (PHDO) against the respondent upon a preliminary determination of probable cause in the proper Regional Trial Court.Upon the filing of the information regarding the commission of any acts defined and penalized under the provisions of this Act, the prosecutor shall apply with the court having jurisdiction for the issuance of a hold departure order (HDO) against the accused. The said application shall be accompanied by the complaint-affidavit and its attachments, personal details, passport number, and a photograph of the accused, if available.In cases where evidence of guilt is not strong, and the person charged is entitled to bail and is granted the same, the court, upon application by the prosecutor, shall limit the right of travel of the accused to within the municipality or city where he/she resides or where the case is pending, in the interest of national security and public safety, consistent with Article III, Section 6 of the Constitution. The court shall immediately furnish the DOJ and the Bureau of Immigration (Bl) with the copy of said order. Travel outside of said municipality or city, without the authorization of the court, shall be deemed a violation of the terms and conditions of his/her bail, which shall be forfeited as provided under the Rules of Court.He/she may also be placed under house arrest by order of the court at his/her usual place of residence.While under house arrest, he/she may not use telephones, cellphones, e-mails, computers, the internet, or other means of communications with people outside the residence until otherwise ordered by the court.If the evidence of guilt is strong, the court shall immediately issue an HBO and direct the DFA to initiate the procedure for the cancellation of the passport of the accused.The restrictions above-mentioned shall be terminated upon the acquittal of the accused or of the dismissal of the case filed against him/her or earlier upon the discretion of the court on motion of the prosecutor or of the accused.SEC. 35. Anti-Money Laundering Council Authority to Investigate, Inquire into and Examine Bank Deposits. – Upon the issuance by the court of a preliminary order of prescription or in case of designation under Section 25 of this Act, the AMLC, either upon its own initiative or at the request of the ATO, is hereby authorized to investigate: (a) any property or funds that are in any way related to financing of terrorism as defined and penalized under Republic Act No. 10168, or violation of Sections 4, 6, 7, 10, 11 or 12 of this Act; and (b) property or funds of any person or persons in relation to whom there is probable cause to believe that such person or persons are committing or attempting or conspiring to commit, or participating in or facilitating the financing of the aforementioned sections of this Act.The AMLC may also enlist the assistance of any branch, department, bureau, office, agency or instrumentality of the government, including government-owned and -controlled corporations in undertaking measures to counter the financing of terrorism, which may include the use of its personnel, facilities and resources.For purposes of this section and notwithstanding the provisions of Republic Act No. 1405, otherwise known as the “Law on Secrecy of Bank Deposits”, as amended; Republic Act No. 6426, otherwise known as the “Foreign Currency Deposit Act of the Philippines”, as amended; Republic Act No. 8791, otherwise known as “The General Banking Law of 2000” and other laws, the AMLC is hereby authorized to inquire into or examine deposits and investments with any banking institution or non-bank financial institution and their subsidiaries and affiliates without a court order.SEC. 36. Authority to Freeze. – Upon the issuance by the court of a preliminary order of proscription or in case of designation under Section 25 of this Act, the AMLC, either upon its own initiative or request of the ATC, is hereby authorized to issue an ex parte order to freeze without delay: (a) any property or funds that are in any way related to financing of terrorism as defined and penalized under Republic Act No. 10168, or any violation of Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 or 12 of this Act; and (b) property or funds of any person or persons in relation to whom there is probable cause to believe that such person or persons are committing or attempting or conspiring to commit, or participating in or facilitating the financing of the aforementioned sections of this Act.The freeze order shall be effective for a period not exceeding twenty (20) days. Upon a petition filed by the AMLC before the expiration of the period, the effectivity of the freeze order may be extended up to a period not exceeding six (6) months upon order of the Court of Appeals: Provided, That, the twenty-day period shall be tolled upon filing of a petition to extend the effectivity of the freeze order.Notwithstanding the preceding paragraphs, the AMLC, consistent with the Philippines’ international obligations, shall be authorized to issue a freeze order with respect to property or funds of a designated organization, association, group or any individual to comply with binding terrorism-related resolutions, including UNSCR No. 1373 pursuant to Article 41 of the charter of the UN. Said freeze order shall be effective until the basis for the issuance thereof shall have been lifted. During the effectivity of the freeze order, an aggrieved party may, within twenty (20) days from issuance, file with the Court of Appeals a petition to determine the basis of the freeze order according to the principle of effective judicial protection: Provided, That the person whose property or funds have been frozen may withdraw such sums as the AMLC determines to be reasonably needed for monthly family needs and sustenance including the services of counsel and the family medical needs of such person.However, if the property or funds subject of the freeze order under the immediately preceding paragraph are found to be in any way related to financing of terrorism as defined and penalized under Republic Act No. 10168, or any violation of Sections 4, 5, 6,7, 8, 9, 10, 11 or 12 of this Act committed within the jurisdiction of the Philippines, said property or funds shall be the subject of civil forfeiture proceedings as provided under Republic Act No. 10168.SEC. 37. Malicious Examination of a Bank or a Financial Institution. Any person who maliciously, or without authorization, examines deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets, or records in a bank or financial institution in relation to Section 36 hereof, shall suffer the penalty of four (4) years of imprisonment.SEC. 38. Safe Harbor. – No administrative, criminal or civil proceedings shall lie against any person acting in good faith when implementing the targeted financial sanctions as provided under pertinent United Nations Security Resolutions.SEC. 39. Bank Officials and Employees Defying a Court Authorization. – An employee, official, or a member of theboard of directors of a bank or financial institution, who after being duly served with the written order of authorization from the Court of Appeals, refuses to allow the examination of the deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets, and records of a terrorist or an outlawed group of persons, organization or association, in accordance with Sections 25 and 26 hereof, shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment of four (4) years.SEC. 40. Immunity and Protection of Government Witnesses. – The immunity and protection of governmentwitnesses shall be governed by the provisions of Republic Act No. 6981, otherwise known as “The Witness Protection, Security and Benefits Act”.SEC. 41. Penalty for Unauthorized Revelation of Classified Materials. – The penalty of imprisonment of ten (10) years shall be imposed upon any person, law enforcement agent or military personnel, judicial officer or civil servant who, not being authorized by the Court of Appeals to do so, reveals in any manner or form any classified information under this Act. The penalty imposed herein is without prejudice and in addition to any corresponding administrative liability the offender may have incurred for such acts.SEC. 42. Infidelity in the Custody of Detained Persons. – Any public officer who has direct custody of a detained person under the provisions of this Act and, who, by his deliberate act, misconduct or inexcusable negligence, causes or allows the escape of such detained person shall be guilty of an offense and shall suffer the penalty of ten (10) years of imprisonment.SEC. 43. Penalty for Furnishing False Evidence, Forged Document, or Spurious Evidence. – The penalty of imprisonment of six (6) years shall be imposed upon any person who knowingly furnishes false testimony, forged document or spurious evidence in any investigation or hearing conducted in relation to any violations under this ActSEC. 44. Continuous Trial. – In cases involving crimes defined and penalized under the provisions of this Act, the judge concerned shall set the case for continuous trial on a daily basis from Monday to Thursday or other short-term trial calendar to ensure compliance with the accused’s right to speedy trial.SEC. 45. Anti-Terrorism Council. – An Anti-Terrorism Council (ATC) is hereby created. The members of the ATC are: (1) the Executive Secretary, who shall be its Chairperson; (2) the National Security Adviser who shall be its Vice Chairperson; and (3) the Secretary of Foreign Affairs; (4) the Secretary of National Defense; (5) the Secretary of the Interior and Local Government; (6) the Secretary of Finance; (7) the Secretary of Justice; (8) the Secretary of Information and Communications Technology; and (9) the Executive Director of the Anti Money Laundering Council (AMLC) Secretariat as its other members.The ATC shall implement this Act and assume the responsibility for the proper and effective implementation of the policies of the country against terrorism. The ATC shall keep records of its proceedings and decisions. All records of the ATC shall be subject to such security classifications as the ATC may, in its judgment and discretion, decide to adopt to safeguard the safety of the people, the security of the Republic, and the welfare of the nation.The NICA shall be the Secretariat of the ATC. The ATC shall define the powers, duties, and functions of the NICA as Secretariat of the ATC, The Anti-Terrorism Council-Program Management Center (ATC-PMC) is hereby institutionalized as the main coordinating and program management arm of the ATC. The ATC shall define the powers, duties, and functions of the ATC-PMC. The Department of Science and Technology (DOST), the Department of Transportation (DOTr), the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), the Department of Education (DepEd), the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), the Presidential Adviser for Peace, Reunification and Unity (PAPRU, formerly PAPP), the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM), the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), the BI, the Office of Civil Defense (OCD), the Intelligence Service of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (ISAFP), the Philippine Center on Transnational Crimes (PCTC), the Philippine National Police (PNP) intelligence and investigative elements, the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), and the National Commission on Muslim Filipinos (NCMF) shall serve as support agencies of the ATC.The ATC shall formulate and adopt comprehensive, adequate, efficient, and effective plans, programs, or measures to prevent, counter, suppress, or eradicate the commission of terrorism in the country and to protect the people from such acts. In pursuit of said mandate, the ATC shall create such focus programs to prevent and counter terrorism as necessary, to ensure the counter-terrorism operational awareness of concerned agencies, to conduct legal action and to pursue legal and legislative initiatives to counter terrorism, prevent and stem terrorist financing, and to ensure compliance with international commitments to counterterrorism-related protocols and bilateral and/or multilateral agreements, and identify the lead agency for each program, such as:(a) Preventing and countering violent extremism program – The program shall address the conditions conducive to the spread of terrorism which include, among others: ethnic, national, and religious discrimination; socio-economic disgruntlement; political exclusion; dehumanization of victims of terrorism; lack of good governance; and prolonged unresolved conflicts by winning the hearts and minds of the people to prevent them from engaging in violent extremism. It shall identify, integrate, and synchronize all government and non-government initiatives and resources to prevent radicalization and violent extremism, thus reinforce and expand an after- care program;(b) Preventing and combating terrorism program – The program shall focus on denying terrorist groups access to the means to carry out attacks to their targets and formulate response to its desired impact through decisive engagements. The program shall focus on operational activities to disrupt and combat terrorism activities and attacks such as curtailing, recruitment, propaganda, finance and logistics, the protection of potential targets, the exchange of intelligence with foreign countries, and the arrest of suspected terrorists;(c) International affairs and capacity building program –The program shall endeavor to build the State’s capacity to prevent and combat terrorism by strengthening the collaborative mechanisms between and among ATC members and support agencies and facilitate cooperation among relevant stakeholders, both local and international, in the battle against terrorism; and(d) Legal affairs program – The program shall ensure respect for human rights and adherence to the rule of law as the fundamental bases of the fight against terrorism. It shall guarantee compliance with the same as well as with international commitments to counterterrorism-related protocols and bilateral and/or multilateral agreements.Nothing herein shall be interpreted to empower the ATC to exercise any judicial or quasi-judicial power or authority.SEC. 46. Functions of the Council. – In pursuit of its mandate in the previous Section, the ATC shall have the following functions with due regard for the rights of the people as mandated by the Constitution and pertinent laws:(a) Formulate and adopt plans, programs, and preventive and counter-measures against terrorists and terrorism in the country;(b) Coordinate all national efforts to suppress and eradicate terrorism in the country and mobilize the entire nation against terrorism prescribed in this Act;(c) Direct the speedy investigation and prosecution of all persons detained or accused for any crime defined and penalized under this Act;(d) Monitor the progress of the investigation and prosecution of all persons accused and/or detained for any crime defined and penalized under the provisions of this Act;(e) Establish and maintain comprehensive database information systems on terrorism, terrorist activities, and counterterrorism operations;(f) Enlist the assistance of and file the appropriate action with the AMLC to freeze and forfeit the funds, bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets and property of whatever kind and nature belonging (i) to a person suspected of or charged with alleged violation of any of the acts defined and penalized under Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of this Act, (ii) between members of a judicially declared and outlawed terrorist organization or association as provided in Section 26 of this Act; (iii) to designated persons defined under Section 3(e) of R. A. No. 10168; (iv) to an individual member of such designated persons; or (v) any individual, organization, association or group of persons proscribed under Section 26 hereof;(g) Grant monetary rewards and other incentives to informers who give vital information leading to the apprehension, arrest, detention, prosecution, and conviction of person or persons found guilty for violation of any of the acts defined and penalized under Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of this Act: Provided, That, no monetary reward shall be granted to informants unless the accused’s demurrer to evidence has been denied or the prosecution has rested its case without such demurrer having been filed;(h) Establish and maintain coordination with and the cooperation and assistance of other states, jurisdictions, international entities and organizations in preventing and combating international terrorism;(i) Take action on relevant resolutions issued by the UN Security Council acting under Chapter VII of the UN Charter; and consistent with the national interest, take action on foreign requests to designate terrorist individuals, associations, organizations or group of persons;(j) Take measures to prevent the acquisition and proliferation by terrorists of weapons of mass destruction;(k) Lead in the formulation and implementation of a national strategic plan to prevent and combat terrorism;(l) Request the Supreme Court to designate specific divisions of the Court of Appeals or Regional Trial Courts to handle all cases involving the crimes defined and penalized under this Act;(m) Require other government agencies, offices and entities and officers and employees and non-government organizations, private entities and individuals to render assistance to the ATC in the performance of its mandate; and(n) Investigate motu proprio or upon complaint any report of abuse, malicious application or improper implementation by any person of the provisions of this Act.SEC. 47. Commission on Human Rights (CHR). – The CHR shall give the highest priority to the investigation and prosecution of violations of civil and political rights of persons in relation to the implementation of this Act.SEC. 48. Ban on Extraordinary Rendition. – No person suspected or convicted of any of the crimes defined and penalized under the provisions of Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10,11 or 12 of this Act shall be subjected to extraordinary rendition to any country.SEC. 49. Extraterritorial Application. – Subject to the provision of any treaty of which the Philippines is a signatory and to any contrary provision of any law of preferential application, the provisions of this Act shall apply:(a) To a Filipino citizen or national who commits any of the acts defined and penalized under Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of this Act outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Philippines;(b) To individual persons who, although physically outside the territorial limits of the Philippines, commit any of the crimes mentioned in Paragraph (a) hereof inside the territorial limits of the Philippines;(c) To individual persons who, although physically outside the territorial limits of the Philippines, commit any of the said crimes mentioned in Paragraph (a) hereof on board Philippine ship or Philippine airship;(d) To individual persons who commit any of said crimes mentioned in Paragraph (a) hereof within any embassy, consulate, or diplomatic premises belonging to or occupied by the Philippine government in an official capacity;(e) To individual persons who, although physically outside the territorial limits of the Philippines, commit said crimes mentioned in Paragraph (a) hereof against Philippine citizens or persons of Philippine descent, where their citizenship or ethnicity was a factor in the commission of the crime; and(i) To individual persons who, although physically outside the territorial limits of the Philippines, commit said crimes directly against the Philippine government.In case of an individual who is neither a citizen or a national of the Philippines who commits any of the crimes mentioned in Paragraph (a) hereof outside the territorial limits of the Philippines, the Philippines shall exercise jurisdiction only when such individual enters or is inside the territory of the Philippines: Provided, That, in the absence of any request for extradition from the state where the crime was committed or the state where the individual is a citizen or national, or the denial thereof, the ATC shall refer the case to the BI for deportation or to the DOJ for prosecution in the same manner as if the act constituting the offense had been committed in the Philippines.SEC. 50. Joint Oversight Committee. – Upon the effectivity of this Act, a Joint Congressional Oversight Committee is hereby constituted. The Committee shall be composed of twelve (12) members with the chairperson of the Committee on Public Order of the Senate and the House of Representatives as members and five (5) additional members from each House to be designated by the Senate President and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, respectively. The minority shall be entitled to a pro-rata representation but shall have at least two (2) representatives in the Committee.In the exercise of its oversight functions. the Joint Congressional Oversight Committee shall have the authority to summon law enforcement or military officers and the members of the ATC to appear before it, and require them to answer questions and submit written reports of the acts they have done in the implementation of this Act and render an annual report to both Houses of Congress as to its status and implementation.SEC. 51. Protection of Most Vulnerable Groups. – There shall be due regard for the welfare of any suspects who are elderly, pregnant, persons with disability, women and children while they are under investigation, interrogation or detention.SEC. 52. Management of Persons Charged Under this Act. – The Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP)and the Bureau of Corrections (BuCoR) shall establish asystem of assessment and classification for persons charged for committing terrorism and preparatory acts punishable under this Act. Said system shall cover the proper management, handling, and interventions for said persons detained.Persons charged under this Act shall be detained in existing facilities of the BJMP and the BuCoR.SEC. 53. Trial of Persons Charged Under this Act. – Any person charged for violations of Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 or 12 of this Act shall be tried in special courts created for this purpose. In this regard, the Supreme Court shall designate certain branches of the Regional Trial Courts as anti-terror courts whose jurisdiction is exclusively limited to try violations of the abovementioned provisions of this Act.Persons charged under the provisions of this Act and witnesses shall be allowed to remotely appear and provide testimonies through the use of video-conferencing and such other technology now known or may hereafter be known to science as approved by the Supreme Court.SEC. 54. Implementing Rules and Regulations. – The ATC and the DOJ, with the active participation of police and military institutions, shall promulgate the rules and regulations for the effective implementation of this Act within ninety (90) days-after its effectivity. They shall also ensure the full dissemination of such rules and regulations to both Houses of Congress, and all officers and members of various law enforcement agencies.SEC. 55. Separability Clause. – If for any reason any part or provision of this Act is declared unconstitutional or invalid, the other parts or provisions hereof which are not affected thereby shall remain and continue to be in full force and effect.SEC. 56. Repealing Clause. – Republic Act No. 9372, otherwise known as the “Human Security Act of 2007”, is hereby repealed. All laws, decrees, executive orders, rules or regulations or parts thereof, inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed, amended, or modified accordingly.SEC. 57. Saving Clause. – All judicial decisions and orders issued, as well as pending actions relative to the implementation of Republic Act No. 9372, otherwise known as the “Human Security Act of 2007”, prior to its repeal shall remain valid and effective.SEC. 58. Effectivity. – This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its complete publication in the Official Gazette or in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation.Approved,(Sgd.) ALAN PETER S. CAYETANOSpeaker of the House of Representatives(Sgd.) VICENTE C. SOTTO IIIPresident of the SenateThis Act was passed by the Senate of the Philippines as Senate Bill No. 1083 on February 26, 2020, and adopted by the House of Representatives as an amendment to House Bill No. 6875 on June 5, 2020, respectively.(Sgd.) JOSE LUIS G. MONTALESSecretary GeneralHouse of Representatives(Sgd.) MARIE D. VlLLARlCASecretary of the SenateApproved: JULY 03, 2020(Sgd.) RODRIGO ROA DUTERTEPresident of the Philippineshttps://ederic.net/the-anti-terrorism-act-of-2020/

Supreme Court of IndiaThe State Of Tamil Nadu Rep. By ... vs K. Balu & Anr on 15 December, 2016Author: D Y Chandrachu[1] dBench: T.S. Thakur, D.Y. Chandrachud, L. Nageswara Rao REPORTABLE    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA  CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION   CIVIL APPEAL Nos .12164-12166 OF 2016  [Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.14911-14913 of 2013]   THE STATE OF TAMILNADU .....APPELLANTS REP. BY ITS SECRETARY HOME, PROHOBITION & EXCISE DEPT & ORS   Versus  K BALU & ANR .....RESPONDENTS    WITH   CIVIL APPEAL No. 12167 OF 2016  [Arising out of SLP (C)No.8267 OF 2014]   CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 12168 OF 2016  [Arising out of SLP(C) No.8971 OF 2014]   CIVIL APPEAL No. 12169 OF 2016  [Arising out of SLP (C) No.35454 OF 2014]   CIVIL APPEAL No.12170 OF 2016  [S.L.P.(C) No.36787 of 2016 @ of CC No.231 OF 2015]   CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 12171-12172 OF 2016  [S.L.P.(C) Nos.36788-36789 of 2016 @ of CC Nos.18587-18588 OF 2015]   CIVIL APPEAL No.12173 OF 2016  [Arising out of SLP(C) No.34525 OF 2015]     AND   T.P.(C) No.739-741OF 2016      J U D G M E N T Dr D Y CHANDRACHUD, J Delay condoned.Leave granted.The issue which we address in this case is about the presence of liquor vends on national and state highways across the country. The backdrop to the case is provided by alarming statistics on the occurrence of road accidents. They have claimed human lives and caused debility and injury. Both on a personal scale (in terms of the injuries and loss of life) as well as in a social context, restitution in the form of mandatory awards of compensation can never undo the trauma of loss and the pain of suffering. The law can only imperfectly alleviate the consequences of road accidents. In terms of personal suffering caused to individuals and families as well as in terms of deprivation caused to society of its productive social capital, road accidents impose unacceptable costs. We will analyse the issues which have been raised in this case on the basis of facts which are not in dispute and on the foundation of policy statements of the Union government which have been formulated after careful consideration. In doing that, the court must ensure that the parameters for the exercise of its jurisdiction are confined to the familiar terrain of enforcing the constitutional right to lead a life of dignity and self-worth.2 The Union and the State Lists of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution distribute (in conjunction with Articles 245 and 246) legislative jurisdiction over the highways which traverse the length and breadth of India, between Parliament and the State Legislatures. The constitutional pattern in relation to the distribution of legislative heads is replicated in this area : what is national is reserved to Parliament while that which has a state-centric orientation is reserved to the state legislatures. Entry 23 of the Union List is thus :“23. Highways declared by or under law made by Parliament to be national highways”.Entry 13 of the State List is thus :“13. Communications, that is to say, roads, bridges, ferries, and other means of communication not specified in List I; municipal tramways; ropeways; inland waterways and traffic thereon subject to the provisions of List I and List III with regard to such waterways; vehicles other than mechanically propelled vehicles.” 3 The Union Ministry of Road Transport and Highways in its Transport Research Wing has brought out a publication titled “Road Accidents in India- 2015”. The cover depicts in rather graphic terms vehicles involved in car crashes. There is a large group of persons assembled in the foreground, an ambulance bearing the ‘108’ logo and a police car. Familiar sights on Indian roads. The publication tells us that :“11.1 During 2015, within the category of drivers’ fault, accidents caused and persons killed due to ‘Exceeding lawful speed’, accounted for a high share of 62.2 per cent (2,40,463 out of 3,86,481 accidents) and 61.0 per cent (64,633 out of 1,06,021 deaths), respectively.However taking into account the total road accidents and total road accident killings, the share of over speeding comes to 47.9 per cent (2,40,463 out of 5,01,423 accidents) and 44.2 per cent (64,633 out of 1,46,133 deaths) respectively.11.2 Intake of alcohol/drugs by drivers resulted in 16,298 road accidents and 6,755 fatalities in 2015 within the category of drivers’ fault, intake of alcohol/drugs accounted for 4.2 per cent and 6.4 per cent respectively.However taking into account the total road accidents and total road accident killing, the share of intake of alcohol/drugs comes to 3.3 per cent (16,298 out of 5,01,423 accidents) and 4.6 per cent (6,755 out of 1,46,133 deaths) respectively.” 4 The total number of persons killed in road accidents on national highways was 48,768 in 2012 and 51,204 in 2015. In 2014, on the national highways there were 1.24 lakh accident cases resulting in 1.35 lakh persons injured and 46,110 deaths. During the same year, on state highways, there were 1.13 lakh accident cases resulting in 1.24 lakh injured and 39,352 deaths. The expressways witnessed 4,208 accident cases, 4,229 injured and 1,802 deaths.[1]. Figures are also available of the distribution of road accidents by causes during 2014. 1.38 lakh persons were injured in road accidents involving dangerous or careless driving and 42,127 deaths occurred. Injuries caused in accidents due to over-speeding stood at 1.81 lakh while there were 48,654 deaths. 7,307 accident cases involving driving under the influence of drugs/alcohol were registered resulting in 7,398 injuries and 2,591 deaths. In regard to the figures of death or injury due to drunken driving there is a tendency to under estimate or under—report in order not to impede the right of victims and/ or their legal heirs to receive compensation.5 Now in this background, it would be necessary to elucidate the policy adopted by the Union government. The National Road Safety Council (NRSC) is an apex body for road safety established under Section 215 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. NRSC unanimously agreed in a meeting which was held nearly thirteen years ago on 15 January 2004 that licences for liquor shops should not to be given along the national highways. The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH) issued a circular to all the state governments advising them to remove liquor shops situated along national highways and not to issue fresh licenses. Since 26 October 2007, when an advisory was issued, MoRTH has consistently advised all the state governments to remove liquor shops and not to issue fresh licences to liquor vends along national highways.6 On 1 December 2011, MoRTH in an advisory to the Chief Secretaries of all the States and Union Territories noted that India had reported the highest number of road accident fatalities in the world and data of 2009 indicated that a road accident occurred every four minutes. Drunken driving, it was stated, was a leading cause of road accidents with as many as 27,152 road accidents being caused under the influence of alcohol in that year. The advisory drew attention to the provisions of Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and solicited the following enforcement action :“(i) Strict enforcement of section 185 of MV Act 1988 preferably pursuing cases in various courts for award of penalty of imprisonment followed by adequate publicity which will together act as a deterrent for drunken driving.(ii) Removal of Liquor shops along National highways.(iii) No fresh license may be issued to Liquor vendors to open shops along National highways.(iv) Wherever licenses have been given in the past to open liquor shops along National highways, such cases may be reviewed and corrective action taken under intimation to this Ministry.” Section 185 to which a reference has been made in the above circular provides as follows :“185. Driving by a drunken person or by a person under the influence of drugs.Whoever, while driving, or attempting to drive, a motor vehicle,--has, in his blood, alcohol in any quantity, howsoever small the quantity may be, or is under the influence of a drug to such an extent as to be incapable of exercising proper control over the vehicle, shall be punishable for the first offence with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees, or with both; and for a second or subsequent offence, if committed within three years of the commission of the previous similar offence, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine which may extend to three thousand rupees, or with both.Explanation.--For the purposes of this section, the drug or drugs specified by the Central Government in this behalf, by notification in the Official Gazette, shall be deemed to render a person incapable of exercising proper control over a motor vehicle.” .Section 185 is indicative of a Parliamentary intent to follow a zero- tolerance policy towards driving under the influence of alcohol.The position was illustrated in another advisory dated 18 March 2013 of MoRTH to the Chief Secretaries of States and Union Territories where it was stated that in 2011, 1.42 lakh people were killed in 4.9 lakhs road accidents. 24,655 road accidents were caused due to drunken driving resulting in 10,553 deaths and injuries to 21,148 persons. The advisory requested the removal of all liquor vends on national highways and a ban on the issuance of fresh licences on the ground that “prevention is better than cure”.7 In an advisory dated 21 May 2014, MoRTH stated that in 2012, 1.38 lakh people were killed in 4.9 lakh road accidents. 23,979 road accidents were caused due to drunken driving resulting in 7835 deaths and injuries to 23,403 persons.8 The Union government has constantly issued advisories setting out, as a matter of policy, its position.9 The material which has been placed on record indicates that :(i) India has a high rate of road accidents and fatal road accidents – one of the advisories states that it is the highest in the world with an accident occurring every four minutes;(ii) There is a high incidence of road accidents due to driving under the influence of alcohol;(iii) The existence of liquor vends on national highways is in the considered view of the National Road Safety Council and MoRTH – expert authorities with domain knowledge – a cause for road accidents on national highways;(iv) Advisories have been issued to the State Governments and Union Territories to close down liquor vends on national highways and to ensure that no fresh licences are issued in the future. The reason why these advisories are confined to the national highways is because of the distribution of legislative competence between the Union and the States under the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution. State highways fall under the domain of the states.10 The figures which are available on the record indicate that the occurrence of a large number of road accidents is not a phenomenon confined to national highways nor is the prevalence of road accidents, including fatalities, confined only to the national highways. Both the national highways and state highways share a common experience of an unacceptably high number of road accidents, the prevalence injuries and fatalities; drunken driving being one of the major causes. Hence, the content of the advisories which have been issued by the Union government as well as their basis, rationale and foundation would equally apply to state highways. Human life is precious. As the road network expands in India, road infrastructure being an integral part of economic development, accidents profoundly impact on the life of the common citizen. For a nation on the cusp of economic development, India can well avoid the tag of being the accident capital of the world. Our highways are expanding, as are the expressways. They provide seamless connectivity and unheralded opportunities for the growth of trade and industry and for the movement of goods, persons and capital. They are the backbone of the freedom of trade and commerce guaranteed by Article 301 of the Constitution. Our highways are dotted with sign boards warning of the dangers of combining speed and alcohol. Together, they constitute a heady cocktail. The availability of liquor along the highways is an opportunity to consume. Easy access to liquor shops allows for drivers of vehicles to partake in alcohol, in callous disregard to their own safety and the safety of others. The advisories of the Union government to the states are founded on a logical and sound rationale.11 We are conscious of the fact that the policy of the Union government to discontinue liquor vends on national highways may not eliminate drunken driving completely. A driver of a motor vehicle can acquire liquor even before the commencement of a journey or, during a journey at a place other than a national or state highway. The law on preventing drunken driving also requires proper enforcement. Having said this, the court must accept the policy of the Union government for more than one reason. First and foremost, it is trite law that in matters of policy, in this case a policy on safety, the court will defer to and accept a considered view formed by an expert body. Second as we have seen, this view of the Union government is based on statistics and data which make out a consistent pattern year after year. Third the existence of liquor vends on highways presents a potent source for easy availability of alcohol. The existence of liquor vends; advertisements and sign boards drawing attention to the availability of liquor coupled with the arduous drives particularly in heavy vehicles makes it abundantly necessary to enforce the policy of the Union government to safeguard human life. In doing so, the court does not fashion its own policy but enforces the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution based on the considered view of expert bodies.12 There is no fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g) to trade in liquor. Liquor has been regarded as res extra commercium : State of Bihar v. Nirmal Kumar Gupta, (2013) 2 SCC 565; Amar Chandra Chakraborty, Appellant v. Collector of Excise, Govt of Tripura, Agartala, (1972) 2 SCC 442; Nashirwar v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (1975) 1 SCC 29; Har Shankar v. Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner, (1975) 1 SCC 737; Secretary to Government, Tamil Nadu v. K. Vinayagamurthy, (2002) 7 SCC 104; State of Punjab v. Devans Modern Breweries Ltd. (2004) 11 SCC 26. State of Kerala v. Kandath Distilleries, (2013) 6 SCC 573.13 Liquor licences in respect of potable alcoholic liquor are granted by the state governments. Entry 51 of the state list provides for duties of excise on alcoholic liquors for home consumption manufactured and produced in the state and countervailing duties at the same or lower rates on similar goods manufactured or produced elsewhere in India. The power of the states to grant liquor licences is undoubted. The issue is whether such liquor licences should be granted on national and state highways at the cost of endangering human lives and safety. In our view, which is based on the expert determination of the Union government, we hold that the answer should be in the negative. Though, excise duty is an important source of revenue to the states, a prohibition on the grant of liquor licences to liquor shops on the national and state highways would only regulate the grant of such licences in a manner that would ensure that the consumption of alcoholic liquor does not pose dangers to the lives and safety of the users of national and state highways. May we also remind ourselves that among the Directive Principles contained in the Constitution is that in Article 47 :“47. Duty of the State to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living and to improve public health:The State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of public health as among its primary duties and, in particular, the State shall endeavour to bring about prohibition of the consumption except for medicinal purposes of intoxicating drinks and of drugs which are injurious to health.” 14 Well over a decade ago, the Union government had formulated for consideration and adoption by the states a document titled “Model Policy/taxation/act/rules for alcoholic beverages and alcohol”. The Model Policy inter alia made general provisions relating to liquor vends. Para 92(2) of the Model Policy inter alia provides as follows :“(2) No licence for sale of liquor shall be granted to a retail vend selected within a distance of 100 metres from any religious or educational institution or hospital or outside the inhabited site of village /town/city or any Office of the State/Central Government or Local Authorities or within a distance of 220 metres from the middle of the State/National Highways.Explanation – For the purpose of this rule :“National Highway” or “State Highway” shall not include such parts of the National Highway or State Highway as are situated within the limits of Municipal Corporation, City or Town Municipal Council or such other authority having a population of twenty thousand or more.” This Model Policy provided for a minimum distance from the state/national highways for locating liquor shops. However, an exception was carved out to the effect that the national or state highways would not include such parts of them as are situated within the limits of the local authorities with a population of 20,000 or more. By an order of this Court dated 8 September 2015, the attention of the authorities was drawn to the fact that the model policy had been prepared nearly a decade earlier and several decisions of the High Courts have been delivered since. Hence, the court opined that it was necessary that the policy is revisited by the states and union territories and by the Union government together in regard to the sale of liquor and alcoholic beverages in the proximity of national and state highways. MoRTH however has informed the court on affidavit that a model policy on alcoholic beverages and alcohol does not fall within its purview, and hence it may not be in a position to review the model policy. MoRTH while stating this has emphasised its considered view and position based on the statistics of road accidents that liquor shops should not be situated along national highways. We see no rational basis to exclude stretches of national highways and state highways which fall within the limits of a municipal or local authority (with a population exceeding a stipulated figure) from the ambit of the suggested prohibition. Where a national or state highway passes through a city, town or through the area of jurisdiction of a local authority, it would completely deny sense and logic to allow the sale of liquor along that stretch of the highway. Such an exclusion would defeat the policy since the presence of liquor shops along such stretches of a national or state highway would allow drivers to replenish their stock of alcohol, resulting in a situation which the policy seeks to avoid in the first place. Once it is an accepted position that the presence of liquor vends along the highways poses a grave danger to road safety an exception cannot be carved out to permit the sale of liquor along a stretch of the highway which passes through the limits of a city, town or local authority. Such an exception would be wholly arbitrary and violative of Article 14.15 During the course of the hearing, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State of Punjab stated before the court that based on the model policy the Punjab Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016 was brought into force on 28 March 2016. Section 26A of the Punjab Excise Act, 1941 provides as follows :"26-A. (1) The location of the liquor vends shall be regulated by the Government: Provided that this section shall be applicable only to liquor vends situated in areas adjoining the National Highways and State Highways for consumption, off the premises. (2) No licence for sale of liquor shall be granted to a liquor vend situated within the road reservation of National Highways and State Highways and beyond road reservation neither the liquor vends nor their entry points shall be visible or directly accessible from the National Highways and State Highways. Explanation.– (i) “Visibility” means existence of any signboard, direction mark, display of stock of liquor, display of rates or any direct/indirect invitation to the commuter travelling on such Highway; and (ii) “Directly Accessible” means such liquor vend shall not be directly approachable from the National Highway and State Highway. (3) The restrictions referred to in sub-section (2) shall not apply to the liquor vends situated in the areas adjoining to National Highway and State Highway, passing through the limits of Municipal Corporation/Municipal Council/ Municipal Committee/ Notified Area Committee/ Nagar Council/ Cantonment Board or any other Authority having a population of twenty thousand or more."16 Explanation 3 by its operation merely confers an enabling power upon the state government to grant liquor licences in the area as described therein. We are of the view that the exercise of this enabling power by the State government must not obstruct or impede the overwhelming public interest in ensuring that the sale of liquor along national or state highways should be discontinued having regard to the danger to road safety.17 These proceedings have arisen under Article 136of the Constitution from the judgments of the High Courts at Madras and Punjab and Haryana respectively. The Madras High Court was seized with a public interest litigation seeking the removal of retail outlets for liquor on national and state highways, contrary to the advisory of the Union government dated 1 December 2011. The High Court noted that in the state of Tamil Nadu liquor shops along the highways are being run by Tamil Nadu State Marketing Transport Corporation (TASMAC). Before the High Court, the Managing Director of TASMAC stated that :“It was also submitted that TASMAC Ltd has been taking all prudent steps to remove the shops located in Highways and has instructed all the Senior Regional Managers to refrain from giving new licenses to shops that are proposed to be located on the Highways and also shift the existing shops to some other place without violating the Rule 8 of the Tamil Nadu Liquor Retail Vending (in Shops and Bars) Rules, 2003 and other relevant laws.” The affidavit stated that nearly 504 shops are situated along national highways and sometime would be required to relocate them. It was stated that 75 shops have been shifted and a new location for 335 shops had been identified. Six months’ time was sought for shifting the shops; the affidavit having being filed in March 2013. The High Court by a judgment and order of its Division Bench dated 25 February 2013 granted time until 31 March 2013 for the relocation of existing liquor shops being run on national/state highways. This order of the High Court has been questioned by the State of Tamil Nadu and TASMAC.18 During the pendency of these proceedings, this Court by its order dated 7 May 2013 directed that liquor vends along national highways be removed by 14 August 2013. Notice was issued, confined to the closure of liquor vends along state highways. An affidavit was filed before this Court on 22 August 2013 by the state government stating that 504 TASMAC retail liquor shops along the national highways have been shifted. The additional affidavit filed by the state on 29 April 2013 sets out the position in regard to state highways.The total length of state highways is divided into five regions namely,(i) Chennai; (ii) Coimbatore (iii) Madurai; (iv) Salem; and (v) Trichy and traverses 9520.4 kilometres. The total number of shops situated thereon is stated to be 1731. 839 liquor shops out of them are situated in market areas abutting the state highways in towns, municipalities and corporations while 892 are liquor shops in rural areas abutting the state highways. These figures which have been disclosed by the state government indicate the serious nature of the problem. The proliferation of liquor shops on state highways (1731 shops over 9520 kilometres) indicates the easy availability of liquor on the state highways. Evidently within a distance of a few kilometres a liquor shop is available to cater to the demand of the users of the highways. There can be no valid distinction between a national highway and state highway insofar as the location of liquor shops abutting the highway is concerned. Accidents take place both on national and state highways and the easy availability of liquor possess a grave danger to the safety and lives of those who use these highways.19 Insofar as the State of Punjab is concerned, the petition for special leave has been filed by the state government against a judgment and order of a Division Bench of the High Court dated 18 March 2014. Like the case before the Madras High Court, the proceedings before the Punjab and Haryana High Court were instituted in public interest (in this case by the Arrive Safe Society of Chandigarh) seeking directions for the removal of liquor vends from highways. The High Court directed the State of Haryana to ensure in its liquor policy that no liquor vend shall be located along the national highways/state highways and that liquor shops are not accessible or visible from those highways or from the service lanes running along such highways. The High Court rejected the case of the state that the prohibition should be confined only to the national highways. The High Court has, in our view, justifiably held that it can hardly be contended that drunken driving is not permissible on national highways but does no harm on state highways. In relation to the States of Punjab as well as Haryana the High Court has held that the prohibition would apply to state and national highways.20 For the reasons that we have already indicted, we have come to the conclusion that the views of the High Court of Madras and the High Court of Punjab and Haryana are unexceptionable. No distinction can be made between national and state highways in regard to the location of liquor shops. In regulating the use of national and state highways, the safety of the users of the road is of paramount concern. It would defy common sense to prohibit liquor shops along national highways while permitting them on state highways. Drunken driving as a menace and as a cause of road accidents is a phenomenon common to both national and state highways. Nor, is it a plausible defence to urge that while it is impermissible to drink and drive on a national highway, it is permissible to do so on a state highway.21 Moreover, we find merit in the restrictions suggested by the Punjab and Haryana High Court that the prohibition should extend not merely to the national and state highways but must be so appropriately tailored so as to ensure that the policy is not defeated by locating liquor shops in close proximity of the highway. A restriction that the shop should not be accessible or visible from the national or state highways or from a service lane along such highways is necessary to ensure that the policy is not surreptitiously violated. Our attention has been drawn during the course of the hearing to a report filed by the OSD Vigilance before the High Court indicating that the prohibition was sought to be defeated by setting up liquor vends which, though not visible from the highway, were situated in close proximity with signboards indicating their presence. The entry to the shop is camouflaged or placed at the rear portion to evade the judicial direction. A detailed survey has been made by the OSD in which observations in regard to liquor shops located along the highway have been recorded. We may also advert at this stage to a letter dated 4 August 2012 of the Project Director of National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) to the Deputy Commissioners of various regions in Punjab. The letter highlights that on a stretch of 291 kilometres on the Panipat-Jalandhar section of NH- 1, there are as many as 185 liquor shops (though in comparison the trauma centres and hospitals where immediate medical service can be provided to road accident victims is almost negligible). Many of the liquor shops have encroached on national highway land. Though, NHAI has sought the removal of these shops, “concrete action” is yet to be taken due to the lack of support from various quarters. Liquor shops, the Project Director notes, are owned by influential people making the removal of unauthorised encroachment impossible without the support of the district administration.22 For all these reasons, we have come to the conclusion that no licences for liquor shops should be allowed both on the national and state highways. Moreover, in order to ensure that this provision is not defeated by the adoption of subterfuge, it would be necessary to direct that no exception can be carved out for the grant of liquor licences in respect of those stretches of the national or state highways which pass through the limits of any municipality corporation, city, town or local authority. Necessary safeguards must be introduced to ensure that liquor vends are not visible or directly accessible from the highway within a stipulated distance of 500 metres form the outer edge of the highway, or from a service lane along the highway.23 However, we have also duly borne in mind the practical difficulty which has been expressed on behalf of the licence holders (including those in the town of Mahe) and the states that there are licences which have been duly renewed and whose term is still to expire. The states apprehend that premature termination may lead to claims for refund of licence fee for the unexpired term, with large financial implications. Hence we would direct that current licences may continue for the existing term but not later than 1 April 2017.24 We accordingly hereby direct and order as follows :All states and union territories shall forthwith cease and desist from granting licences for the sale of liquor along national and state highways;The prohibition contained in (i) above shall extend to and include stretches of such highways which fall within the limits of a municipal corporation, city, town or local authority;The existing licences which have already been renewed prior to the date of this order shall continue until the term of the licence expires but no later than 1 April 2017;All signages and advertisements of the availability of liquor shall be prohibited and existing ones removed forthwith both on national and state highways;No shop for the sale of liquor shall be (i) visible from a national or state highway; (ii) directly accessible from a national or state highway and (iii) situated within a distance of 500 metres of the outer edge of the national or state highway or of a service lane along the highway.All States and Union territories are mandated to strictly enforce the above directions. The Chief Secretaries and Directors General of Police shall within one month chalk out a plan for enforcement in consultation with the state revenue and home departments. Responsibility shall be assigned inter alia to District Collectors and Superintendents of Police and other competent authorities. Compliance shall be strictly monitored by calling for fortnightly reports on action taken.These directions issue under Article 142 of the Constitution.25 We dispose of the appeals and transfer petitions in the above terms. There shall be no order as to costs.….......................................CJI [T S THAKUR] ….............................................J [Dr D Y CHANDRACHUD] ...........................................J [L NAGESWARA RAO] New Delhi December 15, 2016.-----------------------[1] [2] See death A.7 page 160Footnotes[1] The State Of Tamil Nadu Rep. By ... vs K. Balu & Anr on 15 December, 2016