First of THREE PARTS
By Raïssa Robles
Over the past week since Senator Panfilo Lacson said my use of the word “stealthy” to describe his insertion of Section 25 in the Anti-Terrorism Law (ATL) “is malicious and untrue”, the senator has gone on radio, print and the official Senate website to belittle my blog post.
What did I say that upset him so much? I said that first, Section 25 was inserted at the last moment and second, Section 25 is a dangerous provision. To read it, please click on this link: Senator Panfilo Lacson hastily inserted the new Anti-Terrorism Law’s ‘dangerous’ Section 25 empowering Duterte officials to ‘designate’ anyone a terrorist
Before I go on, let me explain that my reply to Senator Lacson will be divided into three parts:
Part 1, which is this post, will explain why I found Senator Lacson’s insertion of Section 25 “stealthy” and “hasty”;
Part 2 will show proof why my blog post has no malice, because the senator is implying he might file a cyber libel suit against me (he did this by saying he would not sue me for libel,); and
Part 3 will post all the documents I used as basis in Part 1, in other words, the documentary proofs.
And so, my reply is going to be lengthy. To read the rest, please click on this link.