General Obligations Law Title 15-A Designation Of Person: Fill & Download for Free

A tech company that is in the United States or does business with the United States does absolutely have a legal obligation - as well as a moral and reputational one - to report, block or deny the use of their product by certain terrorist and criminal groups, once they are identified as such.In certain cases, depending on the nature of the business, they may be under an affirmative obligation to perform due diligence on their customers and users of their product to determine and identify whether or not they could potentially be in violation of government regulations (and in some cases may be able to apply for special licenses to transact with those customers); in others, they have a duty to report promptly when aware of a potential violation, or block and refrain from transacting.All US persons, whether located in the US or abroad, are required to comply with OFAC (Office of Foreign Assets Control, part of the US Treasury), which administers economic and trade sanctions for the US government, in line with US foreign policy objectives and national security mandates. Office of Foreign Assets ControlOFAC targets primarily narcotics trafficking, terrorism, and proliferators of weapons of mass destruction, and administers various sanction programs in place with respect to certain countries (such as Cuba, Iran or Iraq.) Under some sanctions programs, US persons may apply for a OFAC license to authorize them to engage in certain kinds of transactions, in some cases even with embargoed countries depending on the particulars of the relevant law. OFAC FAQs: General QuestionsOFAC can impose penalties including freezing and blocking assets, and substantial fines against U.S. citizens, permanent residents of the U.S. and U.S.-based businesses, including U.S. branches of foreign companies, who engage in business or financial transactions with any party included on OFAC's SDN List (Specially Designated Nationals), a list of (currently) over 15,000 names. The SDN list includes individuals, banks, businesses, vessels and other organizations that have been targeted and blocked by the U.S. government.OFAC has particular authority with respect to the following industries (due to the US Patriot Act, among other statutes and regulations):finance and bankingcredit bureausinsurancetravel and tourismNGO's and non-profitsimport/exportbusiness registration companies (include domain name registration services)Those industries typically have extensive OFAC compliance programs in place.The SDN list is not the only relevant "list": go to the OFAC site for more information. OFAC FAQs: Sanctions Lists and FilesThe US Department of Commerce also maintains certain lists in conjunction with "the programs that it administers (including the Denied Persons List and the Entity List). The Denied Persons List consists of individuals and companies that have been denied export and re-export privileges by BIS. The Entity List consists of foreign end users who pose an unacceptable risk of diverting U.S. exports and the technology they contain to alternate destinations for the development of weapons of mass destruction. Accordingly, U.S. exports to those entities may require a license. Authority for the Denied Persons List and the Entity List can be found in Title 15, Part 764, Supplement No. 2 and Title 15, Part 744, Supplement No.4 of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, respectively." OFAC FAQs: Sanctions Lists and Files*FYI - "On October 10, 2014, OFAC upgraded Sanctions List Search to incorporate additional sanctions lists. The improved search tool employs fuzzy logic on its name search field to look for potential matches on the Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) List and on its Consolidated Sanctions List. This consolidated list includes the Non-SDN, Palestinian Legislative Council List "NS-PLC List," the Part 561 List, the Non-SDN Iran Sanctions Act List "NS-ISA List," the Foreign Sanctions Evaders List "FSE List," and the Sectoral Sanctions Identifications List "SSI List"). [10-10-2014]...Does OFAC have a web-based search engine for its sanctions lists?Yes, OFAC does maintain its own web-based search service. It can be accessed at the following URL: https://sdnsearch.ofac.treas.gov/. [10-10-2014]"OFAC FAQs: Sanctions Lists and Files

I saw this question, and my first thought was, it's the wrong question. Atheism is merely the lack of belief, its the baseline position.Obviously atheists don't believe, because they don't see a reason to believe. That's kind of a boring answer, but that's what you get when you question the Null hypothesis, without reasons of your own.Therefore the better question would be Why do you believe in God(s)?Lets ask the people who see a reason to believe.Since I'm making the claim that I've never seen a reason to believe, I'm going to explain here how all the reasons out there, are not, in fact, reasons.So to start with I'm dissecting this article Twenty Arguments For The Existence Of God, which, as I'll get into, is sadly inaccurate as a title... a more appropriate title would be "Twenty Variants of the Same Two Arguments for the Existence of God".I'll post other reasons and their counter points as I hear them. Feel free to contribute!--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Twenty Arguments For The Existence Of God1. The Argument from ChangeThis seems to be the cause and effect argument. AKA, nothing can change, without a reason or cause. We observe this in our lives, and we are hypothesizing it goes all the way to the very existence of the universe.There are 2 huge problems with this:A. This argument is postulating that all things require external "causes", and that those causes, are themselves caused, etc, as a law of the universe. However, then to avoid infinite regression, the argument creates an exception. God. Why is he immune? If it is a law that all things need a cause, what is god's cause?If we can arbitrarily give him an exception, why can't we use the same exception one step earlier, and say the universe itself is the exception?B. When we see change, being caused by other changing factors, aka cause and effect, what we are seeing, is matter and energy changing forms, but NEVER BEING CREATED OR DESTROYED.This seems to imply that the cause and effect of changing matter and energy, and even space/time, and the physical laws could be part of an infinite regression that does not involve creation or destruction.Because we never see creation or destruction, we have no reason to think it is possible. All we see is changing forms, which does NOT imply creation in any possible way.This is in compliance with current theories like the Big Bang. Matter and energy weren't created, they just existed in different forms. The earliest we can postulate with any logical basis, is that all the matter in the universe existed as Hydrogen in a hot dense mass. But it existed. Anything before then is pure conjecture. Many physicists think the big bang followed by big crunch by big bang is a repeating cycle.2. The Argument from Efficient CausalityThis is effectively the same argument as the above, with the same stated problems... It's merely arguing that there "has to be an uncaused cause."But in no way does this argument say WHY that is, how we can demonstrate this supposed need, or why God is immune to the rule."And this need—for being, for existence—cannot be met from within the imagined set. But obviously it has been met, since contingent beings exist. "It's an argument by assertion. I can as easily say "All things require a cause, this proves an infinite regression of cause and effect, because we are here."Since we've never witnessed anything coming into existence EVER, we can't say there is a need for existence in the first place.3. The Argument from Time and Contingency"We notice around us things that come into being and go out of being. A tree, for example, grows from a tiny shoot, flowers brilliantly, then withers and dies.Whatever comes into being or goes out of being does not have to be; nonbeing is a real possibility.Suppose that nothing has to be; that is, that nonbeing is a real possibility for everything.Then right now nothing would exist. ForIf the universe began to exist, then all being must trace its origin to some past moment before which there existed—literally—nothing at all. ButFrom nothing nothing comes. SoThe universe could not have begun.But suppose the universe never began. Then, for the infinitely long duration of cosmic history, all being had the built-in possibility not to be. ButIf in an infinite time that possibility was never realized, then it could not have been a real possibility at all. SoThere must exist something which has to exist, which cannot not exist. This sort of being is called necessary.Either this necessity belongs to the thing in itself or it is derived from another. If derived from another there must ultimately exist a being whose necessity is not derived, that is, an absolutely necessary being.This absolutely necessary being is God."This is the same argument again. This particular variant is dependent on the clause "Whatever comes into being or goes out of being does not have to be; nonbeing is a real possibility." But what is going in and out of being? We have never observed this phenomena EVER.We merely see matter and energy changing form, not going in and out of being...Did the cited tree come into being? Obviously not. It started with a seed. It soaked in energy from the sun, nutrients from the soil, and water. Nothing new came into being whatsoever. It simply changed form into a tree.4. The Argument from Degrees of PerfectionThis argument says that existence of a scale of perfection, like a scale for temperature, requires a perfect being to compare to.Why? Says who? I call BS. Still very similar to all the above "arguments", though you could consider the anthropomorphizing of a concept to be a separate argument.Why can't perfection exist as a concept, like that of truth, without being an entity?Must all concepts be entities?I would say clearly not, you may disagree, but I would challenge you to find a basis to disagree on.5. The Design Argument/yawn. Wow this one is plumb wore out. I like the designers who say that complexity of design is PROOF of evolution... because it's impossible to independently create something of complexity that actually works.Everything we see came into being by a slow step by step process of evolution. That's why cavemen didn't make skyscrapers. The history of architecture shows this process in action. The history of living creatures shows this in biological evolution (whether you want to believe it or not, one of the best verified theories in science!).We even see this step by step process in the evolution of technology. Steve Jobs simply could not have produced the I-phone a hundred years ago. Or even 5 years before he in fact did. Each stage of technology is dependent on the stages before it.Name a single instance of something complex that works, and is beautiful, that just sprang up out of nothing, or through "top-down design".That is merely one of the obvious ways of debunking this tired argument, I would refer any doubters to actually study science, because science answers this one abundantly clearly.If real science is out of your league, at least read a book by Richard Dawkins about Evolution, like "The Blind Watchmaker"."The universe displays a staggering amount of intelligibility, both within the things we observe and in the way these things relate to others outside themselves. That is to say: the way they exist and coexist display an intricately beautiful order and regularity that can fill even the most casual observer with wonder. It is the norm in nature for many different beings to work together to produce the same valuable end—for example, the organs in the body work for our life and health. (See also argument 8.)Either this intelligible order is the product of chance or of intelligent design.Not chance.Therefore the universe is the product of intelligent design.Design comes only from a mind, a designer.Therefore the universe is the product of an intelligent Designer."Wow that's a coherent argument. Not. First off, to say the side opposite of design, is random chance, is purely a strawman. Evolution is not random, and is not guided by chance. It is governed by Natural Selection.And then they simply dismiss the strawman as "not chance".6. The Kalam ArgumentReally? I thought this was "20 arguments for the existence of God". We are on #6 and how many do we have? Really the design one is another variation of ye ole cause and effect argument. Design implies designer etc. I'd consider the anthropomorphizing of a concept a different argument I guess. So two. Anyway, back to subject."Whatever begins to exist has a cause for its coming into being.The universe began to exist.Therefore, the universe has a cause for its coming into being.Grant the first premise. (Most people—outside of asylums and graduate schools would consider it not only true, but certainly and obviously true.)"Wow. Never heard anyone so handily disregard graduate schools like that, lumping them in with asylums? Really? All the incredibly qualified people that have come from them, the increased incomes, the innovation and leaderships, and we are just going to summarily toss them in with asylums because the majority of less educated people disagree with them?I am incredulous.1. Again... we have NEVER witnessed anything coming into being, or ceasing to be. Only changing of forms.2. The universe might have always been here in one form or another... no reason why not. Any reason you could bring up, can be applied to why God could not have always existed.3. Even if the universe did "come into being", there's no reason to say the only possibility is some impossibly complex eternal being.Then he goes to say the Big Bang cosmology proves his point. No, it does not. All the theory states is that before the Big Bang event, all matter existed as Hydrogen, in a hot dense mass. That doesn't mean it didn't exist before then... Besides, many like Stephen Hawking have pointed at studies proving the physicality of time, and speculate that an event like the big bang would have started time as we know it, or changed it in a fundamental way. Ditto to physical laws. Some people believe the expansion (big bang) and compression (big crunch) are a cycle, and we may end up with a different form of time and physical laws each time.So "before" the big bang could be irrelevant."And the kalam argument proves something central to the Christian belief in God: that the universe is not eternal and without beginning; that there is a Maker of heaven and earth. And in doing so, it disproves the picture of the universe most atheists wish to maintain: self-sustaining matter, endlessly changing in endless time."REALLY!?! It proves no such thing, not even remotely... not unless you completely redefine the meaning of "prove". It doesn't even indicate. It's not even a complete hypothesis. Flabbergasted as to how I can even argue with such unabashed arguments by assertion.7. The Argument from ContingencyHere we go again...:"The basic form of this argument is simple.If something exists, there must exist what it takes for that thing to exist.The universe—the collection of beings in space and time—exists.Therefore, there must exist what it takes for the universe to exist.What it takes for the universe to exist cannot exist within the universe or be bounded by space and time.Therefore, what it takes for the universe to exist must transcend both space and time."The real problem is with #4. Argument by assertion. It certainly can be a part of this universe... in the same way that the laws of nature are an intrinsic part of this universe. It is after all, these laws that let all we know happen.It's really beautiful how much we understand about how all we see came about... and it takes no god to make it come into being.But the ire of this guy to call these vague pseudo-philosophical ideas "proofs"..."To some extent this Giver must always remain unknown to human reason. We should never expect otherwise. But reason can at least let us know that "someone did it." And that is of great value."Um. I am expecting otherwise. Why shouldn't I again? Damn I hate unsupported and unexplained arguments by assertion. And reason certainly doesn't lead us to "someone did it". Ever noticed how most atheists became atheist, while most religionists "grew up"(read indoctrinated) in it?Reason doesn't lead us to it. If it did, you wouldn't need to brainwash your children. Truth is true whether you believe it or not, so let your children find truth on their own, much more useful to teach them HOW to find truth. AKA critical thinking.What reason can do though, is give you a reason to believe someone did it after you already believe it's true. AKA Confirmation bias.8. The Argument from the World as an Interacting WholeA. Since the parts make sense only within the whole, and neither the whole nor the parts can explain their own existence, then such a system as our world requires a unifying efficient cause to posit it in existence as a unified whole.B. Any such cause must be an intelligent cause, one that brings the system into being according to a unifying idea...........................Now a real idea cannot actually exist and be effectively operative save in a real mind, which has the creative power to bring such a system into real existence. Hence the sufficient reason for our ordered world-system must ultimately be a creative ordering Mind. A cosmic-wide order requires a cosmic-wide Orderer, which can only be a Mind.C. Such an ordering Mind must be independent of the system itself, that is, transcendent; not dependent on the system for its own existence and operation. For if it were dependent on—or part of—the system, it would have to presuppose the latter as already existing in order to operate, and would thus have to both precede and follow itself. But this is absurd. Hence it must exist and be able to operate prior to and independent of the system.Thus our material universe necessarily requires, as the sufficient reason for its actual existence as an operating whole, a Transcendent Creative Mind.Cause and effect, yet again. Gotta admire the persistence. This time, the effect is how well everything works together, and the cause is postulated to be God, and again, we are supposed to accept it A priori.A. The parts can explain their own existence, as well as the whole they exist in. Case in point, an evolved being (part), understanding his own evolution(part of the whole). Thank you Darwin.B. Um, why must said cause be intelligent again? Oh... Because an idea requires a mind? So.... if a tree falls in the forest, it doesn't make a sound? How do you define sound? I define it as the vibrations in the air our ears pick up. And the tree still makes vibrations, and so still makes sound, whether or not anyone hears it.Gravity is an idea, however it exists whether or not anyone believes in it. How the solar system works is an idea, and it works whether or not we believe or understand it.Ideas don't require a mind to exist.C. Yes, if a god did create the universe, it would have to exist outside the universe, that one I'll grant.However, it would have to interact with the universe in order to create it, maintain it, or be worthy or capable of receiving worship. And surely we could detect that interaction in some verifiable way?9. The Argument from MiraclesThis one sounds fun!A miracle is an event whose only adequate explanation is the extraordinary and direct intervention of God.There are numerous well-attested miracles.Therefore, there are numerous events whose only adequate explanation is the extraordinary and direct intervention of God.Therefore God exists.Sweet, this must be where we list out some miracles. Like anybody, I'd dearly like to see or even hear of a verified miracle! *popcornSuppose that a holy man had stood in the center of Houston(when stones fell from the sky) and said: "My dear brothers and sisters! You are leading sinful lives! Look at yourselves—drunken! dissolute! God wants you to repent! And as a sign of his displeasure he's going to shower stones upon you!" Then, moments later—thunk! thunk! thunk!—the stones began to fall. The word "miracle" might very well spring to mind.Wow, that'd be a miracle, praise Jesus for showing his power!Oh wait. That was a rhetorical device, didn't actually happen? Darn it.But miraculous events exist. Indeed, there is massive, reliable testimony to them across many times, places and cultures.Therefore their cause exists.And their only adequate cause is God.Therefore God exists.Oh boy, here we go, the good stuff! The unexplained, the miraculous! After all, there is MASSIVE, RELIABLE TESTIMONY about miracles! So lets delve into the details.*Gasp.Next argument? You aren't going to talk about a SINGLE verified miracle? Not much of an argument huh. Disappointing. But wait, we are going to discuss miracles further! Sweet!Oh wait. I have to buy the book the person who is making these arguments, wrote. That isn't acting out of self-interest at all. Peter Kreeft's website, Peter Kreeft's book. Handbook of Christian Apologetics: Peter Kreeft, Ronald K. Tacelli: 9780830817740: Amazon.com: BooksI ain't buying it. If he had ANY verified miracles, I'd think he'd share at least one here.(And no, biblical miracles that supposedly happened 2,000 years ago don't count. That was before people understood where rain came from, what the sun was, how the solar system worked, what stars were... in other words when everybody was vastly uneducated by our standards. Sorry, if god cared to show them miracles 2,000 years ago, why not now? Does he not care about us as much? How are we supposed to believe they happened in the first place and aren't pure fiction, or exaggeration?)10. The Argument from Consciousness.We experience the universe as intelligible. This intelligibility means that the universe is graspable by intelligence.Either this intelligible universe and the finite minds so well suited to grasp it are the products of intelligence, or both intelligibility and intelligence are the products of blind chance.Not blind chance.Therefore this intelligible universe and the finite minds so well suited to grasp it are the products of intelligence.There are obvious similarities here to the design argument, and many of the things we said to defend that argument could be used to defend this one too. For now we want to focus our attention on step 3.Similarities to the design argument, and the base cause and effect argument.The problem with using variants of the same old tired argument, is we can use the things we used to destroy the other variants.And again, he props up that poor ole tired beatup strawman, and fells him with a single blow.Not blind chance.Well sir, you are correct. It wasn't blind chance. It was the process of evolution, which is anything but, random. It's guided by Natural Selection, not chance. The genes that work best survive and propagate. Far from random.And if you refer to science, you have the answers. We actually have a good idea how consciousness comes about. We have computers today that could be said they are "aware" of themselves in a much more primitive way. AKA some programs, can analyze other programs on the same system. It seems clear it's an issue of complexity. But every step is a survival advantage, and thus selected for by evolution.A lot of good discussion on this subject here: Did consciousness evolve? If so, what selective pressures might explain its emergence?If thought is laryngeal motion, how should any one think more truly than the wind blows? All movements of bodies are equally necessary, but they cannot be discriminated as true and false. It seems as nonsensical to call a movement true as a flavour purple or a sound avaricious. But what is obvious when thought is said to be a certain bodily movement seems equally to follow from its being the effect of one. Thought called knowledge and thought called error are both necessary results of states of brain. These states are necessary results of other bodily states. All the bodily states are equally real, and so are the different thoughts; but by what right can I hold that my thought is knowledge of what is real in bodies? For to hold so is but another thought, an effect of real bodily movements like the rest. . . These arguments, however, of mine, if the principles of scientific [naturalism]... are to stand unchallenged, are themselves no more than happenings in a mind, results of bodily movements; that you or I think them sound, or think them unsound, is but another such happening; that we think them no more than another such happening is itself but yet another such. And it may be said of any ground on which we may attempt to stand as true, Labitur et labetur in omne volubilis aevum ["It flows and will flow swirling on forever" (Horace, Epistles, I, 2, 43)]. (Some Problems in Ethics, pp. 14—15)Just because there is an objective, absolute truth (yes I do believe that), does not follow that we have to anthropomorphize it as a distinct entity. And if there is an actual truth that exists as a concept, then as we evolved our brains, and eventually patterns of thought, consciousness, and intelligence, we'll naturally get closer to truth, or reality.And even if we do anthropomorphize it as a distinct entity, what right do you have to claim to know anything about such an entity? All we can do is use the scientific process and rational objective thought to draw ever nearer. But this I know. Truth is true whether we believe it or not. Because of the power of confirmation bias, if you really want to search for truth, blind faith and belief are the enemy.11. The Argument from TruthOur limited minds can discover eternal truths about being.Truth properly resides in a mind.But the human mind is not eternal.Therefore there must exist an eternal mind in which these truths reside.My bad. I didn't realize the next argument was going to be so similar... You'd think I would have learned from now. I already dealt with this above...How can a logical person say something like "Truth properly resides in a mind"?How? Delusion also dwells in a mind. So do dreams, insanity and hallucination. The primary DIFFERENCE between truth and delusion, is that truth, ALSO exists OUTSIDE of the mind.Truth exists irregardless of belief in it. Didn't matter how many people believed the sun rotated around the earth. The earth still rotated around the sun.Why must we authropormophise a concept like truth? What reason have we to think of it as an entity, and not simply a concept?12. The Argument from the Origin of the Idea of GodI swear I'm not making this stuff up. Click the link at the beginning and follow along!We have ideas of many things.These ideas must arise either from ourselves or from things outside us.One of the ideas we have is the idea of God—an infinite, all-perfect being.This idea could not have been caused by ourselves, because we know ourselves to be limited and imperfect, and no effect can be greater than its cause.Therefore, the idea must have been caused by something outside us which has nothing less than the qualities contained in the idea of God.But only God himself has those qualities.Therefore God himself must be the cause of the idea we have of him.Therefore God exists.Evolutionary psychology answers this neatly. "God" and religions in general spring out of some basic human needs and tendencies common to all (or most) humans. The origin of these needs and tendencies is easily understood in evolutionary terms, with clear survival advantages along the way.Also a lot of good answers to this one here: How do you think the concept of God came into existence? Assuming that God is a human creation, how and why was he created?13. The Ontological ArgumentAnselm's VersionIt is greater for a thing to exist in the mind and in reality than in the mind alone."God" means "that than which a greater cannot be thought."Suppose that God exists in the mind but not in reality.Then a greater than God could be thought (namely, a being that has all the qualities our thought of God has plus real existence).But this is impossible, for God is "that than which a greater cannot be thought."Therefore God exists in the mind and in reality.I agree with 1. I disagree with 2. God is taken to be a supernatural entity by most people, not an anthropomorphized concept. If 2 is wrong, the entire rational is destroyed.The real problem is it is an attempt to define something into existence.The primary way you demonstrate a logical fallacy, is to show the identical logic proving something that is known to be false. So don't take the following as mocking, it's merely an analogy demonstrating the fallacy of the above argument."1. It is greater for a thing to exist in the mind and in reality than in the mind alone.2. "Santa" means "a present giver than which a greater present giver cannot be thought."3. Suppose that Santa exists in the mind but not in reality.4. Then a greater than Santa present giver could be thought (namely, a being that has all the qualities our thought of Santa has plus real existence).5. But this is impossible, for Santa is "a present giver than which a greater present giver cannot be thought."6. Therefore Santa exists in the mind and reality.You can't have something that exists "by definition". You need some other reason to believe he exists to back it up. We have no reason to think this definition of God is valid, and isn't made up by humans.Think about it from an Atheistic POV and you'll realize why it is such an utterly pointless argument.First, imagine there is, in fact, no God. When somebody thinks up this definition of God, what happens? Did this definition of God just create God? I think not.We don't believe there is any God. We believe all ideas of any Deity are from a HUMAN origin. Which means this definition you speak of, has a human origin.First you have to give a reason to believe the definition is reality, before you can use the definition to prove God's existence.He then goes into a couple of reconstructions of the same argument, with the same problem. You can't define something into existence.I'm going to skip the "GCB" version since it's so close to the above.Possible Worlds VersionThis variation on the modal version has been worked out in great detail by Alvin Plantinga. We have done our best to simplify it.Definitions:Maximal excellence: To have omnipotence, omniscience and moral perfection in some world.Maximal greatness: To have maximal excellence in every possible world.There is a possible world (W) in which there is a being (X) with maximal greatness.But X is maximally great only if X has maximal excellence in every possible world.Therefore X is maximally great only if X has omnipotence, omniscience and moral perfection in every possible world.In W, the proposition "There is no omnipotent, omniscient, morally perfect being" would be impossible—that is, necessarily false.But what is impossible does not vary from world to world.Therefore, the proposition, "There is no omnipotent, omniscient, morally perfect being" is necessarily false in this actual world, too.Therefore, there actually exists in this world, and must exist in every possible world, an omnipotent, omniscient, morally perfect being.This is also an absurd attempt to define something into existence.But I specifically wanted to point out the error in #5. How the heck can we know what is possible or not possible in alternative universes? Physicists who speculate about these universes usually seem to think the natural laws could be different in each.Since all we can do, at least so far, is imagine these alternative universes, how could we possible be able to make an absolute statement, with no observation whatsoever, what is impossible in them?These arguments for god sure like to slip in arguments by assertion that have no basis, as axiomatic truths, and hope you don't notice.14. The Moral ArgumentReal moral obligation is a fact. We are really, truly, objectively obligated to do good and avoid evil.Either the atheistic view of reality is correct or the "religious" one.But the atheistic one is incompatible with there being moral obligation.Therefore the "religious" view of reality is correct.This issues has already been clearly dealt with here on Quora.If there is no God, then how can there ever be any sort of objective system of morality?Is God the only possible foundation for objective morality?Real moral obligation is not a fact. It's clear from any look at history that morality is relative and has evolved with society. No religion in the world has been consistent in its morals through written history. (Most haven't existed through all of written history either.)I would agree with #3, but there's a difference between there being no external moral obligation, and there being no morality. Because, in reality, atheists have at least as strong reasons to be moral as theists, because they are based in reality, and reason.I really needed to point out how THEISTS NEVER TIRE OF THIS STRAWMAN:Atheists never tire of telling us that we are the chance products of the motion of matter—a motion which is purposeless and blind to every human striving.Atheists don't, in general, make that claim. Evolution is not a random process, neither is the rest of our universe, it's based on natural laws like natural selection. And natural selection is anything but "purposeless and blind".15. The Argument from ConscienceNice, this one at least admits it's a version of the above "argument". Yet he still counts it towards his "Twenty arguments".Since moral subjectivism is very popular today, the following version of, or twist to, the moral argument should be effective, since it does not presuppose moral objectivism.Anyway, to this version:Isn't it remarkable that no one, even the most consistent subjectivist, believes that it is ever good for anyone to deliberately and knowingly disobey his or her own conscience? Even if different people's consciences tell them to do or avoid totally different things, there remains one moral absolute for everyone: never disobey your own conscience.Now where did conscience get such an absolute authority—an authority admitted even by the moral subjectivist and relativist? There are only four possibilities.From something less than me (nature)From me (individual)From others equal to me (society)From something above me (God)The real core problem with this argument, is #1. In what universe is the totality of nature "less then me"? It's certainly above me, like God, and this, in one fell swoop, discounts the entire argument.Furthermore, perhaps even more fundamentally to the argument, most people won't claim the absolute authority of conscience if it disagrees with nature, individuals, and society as a whole.If a bunch of rabid Mayan's have me, and believe in their very soul, their very conscience that it is right and good to rip my beating heart out of my chest as an offering to their God, you can betchurass I'm not arguing for them to "follow their conscience".Now if most people won't argue FOR a conscience that is contrary to Nature, individuals, and society as a whole (more likely to recommend a Psychiatrist), that seems to indicate to me that conscience is, in fact, formed by nature, individual, and society.Let's consider each of these possibilities in order.How can I be absolutely obligated by something less than me—for example, by animal instinct or practical need for material survival?How can I obligate myself absolutely? Am I absolute? Do I have the right to demand absolute obedience from anyone, even myself? And if I am the one who locked myself in this prison of obligation, I can also let myself out, thus destroying the absoluteness of the obligation which we admitted as our premise.How can society obligate me? What right do my equals have to impose their values on me? Does quantity make quality? Do a million human beings make a relative into an absolute? Is "society" God?The only source of absolute moral obligation left is something superior to me. This binds my will, morally, with rightful demands for complete obedience.1. The will to survive is strong bub. Evolution sees to that. I consider myself absolutely obligated to survive in fact. Besides these though, part of our "conscience" is inherited genetically. In fact, in modern society we NEED to control and violate that part more often then not. Instinct sees a sexy woman with no man around and says "lets have sex with her by any means necessary". Instinct will fight for many reasons considered dumb now (and the reason bars have so many fights... alcohol releases the inhibitions, including sometimes the inhibitions we have on our primal "conscience".2. Yes, I can obligate myself, and no, no other single person or entity does, or should have more control over my life then I do. If self-interest is part of this obligation, which it is, then self-interest doesn't let me "open the door to this prison".3. a. Laws? b. You could say power makes right... but to me it's more of a peer review process. If the masses think what you are doing is wrong, it just might be. c. Yes? If the majority of people say a wine is crap, will that wine be considered quality? Obviously not. Therefore quantity of people DO define quality. d. Society invented god, so yes, in a way you could say it is god.4. Already demonstrated the problems with this assumption. However I would argue that both nature, and society which came from nature, are superior to me as an individual.Atheists may know that some things are not permissible, but they do not know why.Thank you for the generalization, but yes we do know why, it's actually pretty simple. Common sense and evolutionary psychology can explain any moral you might consider "absolute".Thus the moral argument and the various metaphysical arguments (cause and effect arguments) share a certain similarity in structure.That's because they are all versions of the same argument... even this one. Oh look, a conscience! That's a cause and it must have an effect and that effect must be god! It's all cause and effect. Twenty versions of the same argument. But as I've shown, cause and effect doesn't imply a creator, and there are multiple possible causes for all these arguments, with god being the least likely.16. The Argument from DesireEvery natural, innate desire in us corresponds to some real object that can satisfy that desire.But there exists in us a desire which nothing in time, nothing on earth, no creature can satisfy.Therefore there must exist something more than time, earth and creatures, which can satisfy this desire.This something is what people call "God" and "life with God forever."I know I'm coming off as smug or condescending to some people, and I apologize. But this is utter tripe. Only an extreme confirmation bias could pass any of this stuff off as actual evidence for God.I honestly, have a very real desire to have magical abilities. Ever since I was kid. I would love to control wind, and fire, and ice, and create things from nothing. I loved Jim Butchers magical books, and Tolkien and many more.This feels like a natural, innate desire to me. I've wanted magic as long as I can remember. I have had extremely vivid dreams much of my life where I have some kind of magical ability, and when I wake up, I feel like I'm missing a part of myself.Is there a real force that can satisfy that desire? I don't see any mages spraying fire or ice out of their fingers or flying around on brooms or carpets, so I'm going with no. That desire is manufactured entirely by my imagination thinking how cool it'd be.I'm sure it stems from a desire to be unique, and or for more power over my own destiny, so it stems from more base psychological needs that can actually be fulfilled, just not by magic. Ditto to God.Secondly, no to #2. This desire for God is far from universal. And for those who it is real for (not arguing some people at some time may think they have such a desire), there is every reason to believe it comes from how we are raised, or a leftover desire for a better parent when we realize our parents aren't all-knowing, all-powerful, all-caring. So just like I describe above, it doesn't need to correspond to the actual thing you are desiring, it stems from a more basic psychological need, that actually can be filled outside of God.Third, Wrong. As I explained. It's very easy to imagine a desire we can't satisfy. Like exploring the multiverse for instance. We may never master interstellar travel, let alone to other universes... And certainly not in my lifetime. Therefore that's a desire that can't be fulfilled.All you have to do is look at the vast fictional fantasy realm to see a slew of fictional desires we can't fulfill outside of fantasy.The first three points being so clearly wrong make #4 irrelevant.And then we have the strawman questions and answers. One is irrelevant IMO. You can't know anything without both evidence and deduction. But both the reason, and the evidence given for God are sadly lacking.Two is downright silly.Question 2: Suppose I simply deny the minor premise and say that I just don't observe any hidden desire for God, or infinite joy, or some mysterious X that is more than earth can offer?Reply: This denial may take two forms. First, one may say, "Although I am not perfectly happy now, I believe I would be if only I had ten million dollars, a Lear jet, and a new mistress every day." The reply to this is, of course, "Try it. You won't like it." It's been tried and has never satisfied. In fact, billions of people have performed and are even now performing trillions of such experiments, desperately seeking the ever-elusive satisfaction they crave. For even if they won the whole world, it would not be enough to fill one human heart.Yet they keep trying, believing that "If only... Next time ..." This is the stupidest gamble in the world, for it is the only one that consistently has never paid off. It is like the game of predicting the end of the world: every batter who has ever approached that plate has struck out. There is hardly reason to hope the present ones will fare any better. After trillions of failures and a one hundred percent failure rate, this is one experiment no one should keep trying.A second form of denial of our premise is: "I am perfectly happy now." This, we suggest, verges on idiocy or, worse, dishonesty. It requires something more like exorcism than refutation. This is Meursault in Camus's The Stranger. This is subhuman, vegetation, pop psychology. Even the hedonist utilitarian John Stuart Mill, one of the shallowest (though cleverest) minds in the history of philosophy, said that "it is better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a pig satisfied."He actually destroys his own argument and apparently doesn't recognize this. I feel like I should just quote him and leave it.Soooo... first you can't be satisfied without God, and then if you are satisfied, you are an idiot, or a liar, and certainly not ambitious. Wow. Right? But wait, isn't it just as sad to be satisfied BY god?Is satisfaction a good thing? The first scenario portrays never finding it as sad, and the second shows finding it as sad. I rather agree with John Stuart Mill, because feeling unsatisfied is what drives ambition and progress. That feeling is a huge evolutionary advantage, which is why it isn't proof for God. It keeps us trying to improve. And that is why I believe a belief in God is damaging.Because that desire for knowledge, for truth can be satisfied by a made up God, and because it is satisfied, people stop looking. Which was an evolutionary benefit when we didn't have spare energy or time to devote to science and needed to focus on survival.But now artificially satisfying that desire for knowledge with a man-made god only stunts our real search. I'd rather be Socrates dissatisfied, then a pig satisfied.17. The Argument from Aesthetic ExperienceThere is the music of Johann Sebastian Bach.Therefore there must be a God.You either see this one or you don't.Don't.Music, just like biotic life, technology, law, civilization, language, art... it's all evolved. Johann Sebastion Bach wasn't born in a cave and didn't come up with his work independently of everybody else. He heard music from infanthood on and simply built on it.18. The Argument from Religious ExperienceMany people of different eras and of widely different cultures claim to have had an experience of the "divine."It is inconceivable that so many people could have been so utterly wrong about the nature and content of their own experience.Therefore, there exists a "divine" reality which many people of different eras and of widely different cultures have experienced.Yes to one. No to two and three.It is not only completely conceivable, but actually fully understood how so many people are so utterly wrong. Because it is because of common human tendencies everybody has because of our shared evolutionary history that people have theses experiences.It's very simply a combination of Anthropomorphism, Confirmation bias, and Selection bias.If you aren't well familiar with those three very well understood psychological principles, please click the links and read before continuing.How can we KNOW the human psyche is where these experiences come from? Because the ONLY common denominator in these experiences, is the human psyche. People from every religion there has ever been share the same experiences, in spite of vastly different beliefs, and ideas of god.Psychics make a good living by recreating the same phenomena to make people think their dead relatives are talking to them.I can personally recreate the same type of experiences through hypnosis. Many people define hypnotherapy as effecting personal change, by changing or tweaking belief systems. It is in this study you realize why religion has such a powerful hold on people. It's simply another hypnotic modality.There are three steps to effecting change in people's belief systems.1. Authority. People don't buy into somebodies opinion if they don't respect them. People trying to effect change in belief systems always use strategies to effect a perceived authority. Whether in self-improvement, religion, politics, or business. Special clothes/uniforms. Raised platforms. Testimonials. Titles. Oneupmanship of various types.2. Logic. There are three types, the strongest of which, is the one religion uses. Doctrine. A written belief, shrouded in time and or mystery. Paradigm, simply uses facts and logic, charts and pictures. Or Translogic, which is logic that makes sense in the short term, but probably won't last long.The point of any of the three is to satisfy the conscious critical mind, so you can get past into the noncritical subconscious mind and effect change in the belief system.3. Experience. When people EXPERIENCE something physically, it cements in the belief. And by setting up using the first 2 points, it's actually pretty simple to recreate an experience. Psychics and hypnotists rely on recreating this experience for their livelihood.Believe me, I understand and accept the TREMENDOUS power of belief. More so than most Theists in fact. However this power of belief demonstrably comes from our own mind.If you truly believe, to your core, that God will cure your smoking habit, it will have the same effect as if through hypnosis, you come to believe you are cured. It's the same effect.This is a fascinating concept, because if you understand how this belief mechanism works, you can exercise it intelligently, on purpose, to tremendous effect in your personal life. This is all self-hypnosis and hypnotherapy is.It all comes back to evolutionary psychology. Looking at how our shared evolution has shaped our deepest tendencies. Anthropomorphism came into being because it's better to assume an intelligence (a tiger in the grass for instance) and be wrong, than assume none, and be wrong. False positive survives, false negative dies. Natural selection. That's why this is SUCH a deep tendency. Why were you sad when Tom Hanks lost Wilson? It was a freakin ball. But we anthropomorphized.Coincidentally, that's why Pascal's Wager is such a powerful part of the major religions. (Pascal defined it, but it was there many thousands of years before he did.) Because we fundamentally know that a false positive is better than a false negative. But that's #20 so I'll deal with it in a bit.We also have a very deep desire to be RIGHT. So deep that our subconscious will create the reality that we believe in. Via Selection and confirmation biases.It's not hard to imagine the evolutionary benefit. Tribes united by belief had a far better chance at survival. Even if that unity came through pseudologic and confirmation/selection bias.Furthermore, the person who appears to be RIGHT, had the best chance at both survival and reproduction. Even if he was wrong, if he could seem to be right, it builds his status and reproductive options.I realize this particular argument is the most vehemently put forth as well as personally believed in, it's why I used to believe as well. I thought I had talked to God too. But looking at the evidence, Occam's Razor demands that we go with the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions.Which must needs be that the root of these experiences is in the single shared factor, the believing human psyche. Especially since we can recreate it at will without the God part.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I'd like to share a personal story here, even though it's embarrassing to me, because its completely relevant to how this happens.When I was 11, I was extremely shy. Didn't help my fundamentalist parents started homeschooling me with the 2nd grade.At church I developed this HUGE crush on this really pretty girl my age.I wanted to talk to her soooo bad. But I couldn't. After awhile, I started believing we were communicating telepathically... I had conversations with her in my head for hours... over probably a years spread.We both (in my head) understood why we couldn't talk in person, her parents would be mad.But every time she looked at me, it confirmed my thoughts. A couple times I tested it, I remember this one time I told her to meet me at the front door to the church if we were really talking telepathically.I go to the door and we actually bumped into each other right at the door. Before she ran on.Now were there times my tests failed? I'm sure. But Selection bias, and Confirmation bias combine to where I justify the failed tests, and remember the passed ones. (Sound familiar in regards to your prayer life?)The whole experience was extremely real to me. I heard her voice. The relationship filled a social void in my life. I felt understood.Meanwhile she had no idea we were talking of course. In retrospect, I'm sure she knew I had a crush based on me looking at her etc.The only reason I stopped believing this, was because one Sunday my parents invited her family over for lunch (they did that almost every week) and we actually spent some time together talking.And I realized two things. She OBVIOUSLY hadn't been talking to me telepathically (thankfully I realized it without mentioning it, never would have recovered that embarrassment), and I realized that mental conversations can't and shouldn't replace real social interaction.It was way more fun for real.The vast majority of people actually think, via holding a conversation in their head. The problem is because of our evolutionary history, we have a tendency to anthropomorphize all kinds of things, including our own thoughts, and since you can't physically hear it, you can't tell it's your own mind talking back.I am glad to demonstrate through either scientific study, or at least anecdotal testimony, a SECULAR version OF ANY RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE you would like to bring to my attention.Thus validating the hypothesis that the cause of this effect, is NOT the supernatural, it is the power of belief in the human mind.19. The Common Consent ArgumentThis proof is in some ways like the argument from religious experience (18) and in other ways like the argument from desire (16). It argues that:Belief in God—that Being to whom reverence and worship are properly due—is common to almost all people of every era.Either the vast majority of people have been wrong about this most profound element of their lives or they have not.It is most plausible to believe that they have not.Therefore it is most plausible to believe that God exists.And yet you still title it 20 reasons....Is there anything left to say? I dealt with this. Shared evolutionary psychology is demonstrably the cause of this near universal belief. It's nearly universal because its based on shared human tendencies.It is most plausible to believe they have.Because we can recreate the process at will. Just look at John Frum and the cargo cults, or other cults like Mormonism, or scientology to arise in modern history.As I just explained, we understand where human belief comes from, and can change it at will, given the right conditions.If it was based on a divine reality, especially a divine reality still active in our world, there'd be some damn consistency. In stead of so many millions of different versions of belief at war with each other throughout history.With absolutely no reason that passes Occam's Razor to believe in any of them... that I know of. Please enlighten me if I missed something.For believing in God is like having a relationship with a person. If God never existed, neither did this relationship. You were responding with reverence and love to no one; and no one was there to receive and answer your response. It's as if you believe yourself happily married when in fact you live alone in a dingy apartment.I actually gave a personal example of how it is completely possible, even common to have an imaginary relationship. It happened to me, it's happened to many others. Plenty of kids have had imaginary friends. My example was perhaps a bit less common because it was based on a real person and my shyness, but same scenario.Question 2: But isn't there a very plausible psychological account of religious belief? Many nonbelievers hold that belief in God is the result of childhood fears; that God is in fact a projection of our human fathers: someone "up there" who can protect us from natural forces we consider hostile.Reply A: This is not really a naturalistic explanation of religious belief. It is no more than a statement, dressed in psychological jargon, that religious belief is false. You begin from the assumption that God does not exist. Then you figure that since the closest earthly symbol for the Creator is a father, God must be a cosmic projection of our human fathers. But apart from the assumption of atheism, there is no compelling evidence at all that God is a mere projection.There is also no evidence at all, compelling or less so that god ISN'T a mere projection.And in the absence of reasons to believe..... we have ample reason NOT TO believe.20. Pascal's WagerThis and the religious experience one (coupled with the childhood indoctrination that isn't one of the arguments...) are the real core reasons people believe in religion.I don't really have anything to add to this one, the wikipedia page deals with it nicely, as do some Quora questions.If you want to understand both Pascal's Wagers, and its inherent problems, read this: Pascal's WagerIn a nutshell.1. There isn't one consistent concept of God. There are millions... so your odds of selecting the right version are pretty damn slim, this isn't the 50/50 proposition Pascal makes it out to be. What if by selecting the wrong god, you are only making the right god angrier?2. You really think God would reward those who feign belief in order to avoid damnation, or claim heaven? If you don't believe, you don't believe.3. My personal reasoning. If there is a powerful God or gods, it seems that he doesn't want us to have credible evidence of his existence. If these Gods judge the afterlife, would a good God judge, based on belief he withheld evidence for, or would he judge based on actions?That's 20 arguments (well, variations of 3 I think... Cause and effect, anthropomorphism of concepts, and personal experiences. And miracles, but that can't even be called an argument since he only claimed it via assertion), and we are left with no reasons to believe in god.To be clear, even if there was a God, some mythic entity that started the universe, set Nature's constants and laws, is the embodiment of absolute truth or morals, or any other vague concept of god you might try to defend, my point here, is that if that god exists, he/she/it hasn't given us any reason to believe in him/her/it.And in the absence of reasons to believe, the logical person has ample reason not to believe.And if you don't believe in God, you are an Atheist. A=without, Theism = belief in God.Thanks for reading the LONGEST QUORA ANSWER EVER, and please let me know how I can improve it, or if you have any reasons to add, would like to engage in debate, or any other suggestions positive or negative.

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/