The Recent Ayala Central Bloc Bomb Threat and Amending the Anti-Bomb Joke Law
 |
| ABS-CBN News |
I went to Ayala Central Bloc today, after the recent bomb threat. It should be disgusting that the incident was just a day after the Cebu Eastern College incident on July 2, 2024. I believe that this might be the same person, though the identity hasn't been disclosed. Last night, his honor Mayor Nestor Archival with policemen and soldiers, went to the mall to investigate and see if there were any bombs.
The Business Mirror Facebook page gave this update:
ALL CLEAR: Authorities have declared Ayala Central Bloc in Cebu IT Park safe after an extensive search found no explosive device following a reported bomb threat on Friday afternoon.
The Cebu City Police Office (CCPO) announced that the mall was cleared at around 7:49 p.m. after personnel from the PNP Explosive Ordnance Disposal and K9 Unit, CCPO SWAT Team, Bureau of Fire Protection, Cebu City Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Office, Philippine Army's Explosive Ordnance Disposal Battalion Support Command, mall security, and other partner agencies completed a thorough inspection of the premises.
Authorities, however, urged the public to remain vigilant and immediately report any suspicious persons, unattended items, or unusual activities to the police. | Carmel Pedroza
As I entered Ayala Central Bloc, I asked some of the guards about the incident the other day. Some suspected it was a nasty prank. This reminds me of the sign I saw from Robinson's Galleria, pre-pandemic, that warned against bomb jokes.
Revisiting the anti-bomb joke law that's still in order today (but needs updates)
Sure, I'm no fan of the late Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. However, I'm glad that despite the change from the 1973 Constitution of the Philippines to the current 1987 Constitution of the Philippines (which badly needs amendment), I want to put what was declared last 1980, and may need to be amended today:
DECLARING AS UNLAWFUL THE MALICIOUS DISSEMINATION OF FALSE INFORMATION OR THE WILLFUL MAKING OF ANY THREAT CONCERNING BOMBS, EXPLOSIVES OR ANY SIMILAR DEVICE OR MEANS OF DESTRUCTION AND IMPOSING PENALTIES THEREFOR.
WHEREAS, in the wake of recent bombings arsons, and other terroristic acts committed by radicals and other lawless elements in the country, such radical and lawless elements, and other persons popularly known or described as “pranksters”, have been conveying, propagating or otherwise disseminating false informations or willfully making threats regarding the alleged presence of bombs, explosives, incendiary devices, or any similar device or means of destruction in buildings, tenements, and other places, by words of mouth or through the use of telephones, telegraph, the mail, and other means of communication, for the purpose of causing or creating public confusion and disorder;
WHEREAS, such acts and activities of the radical and other lawless elements and other persons pose a grave and positive danger to public safety and security, and it is necessary that the government immediately adopt and enforce adequate and effective measures to curb these criminal acts and activities, and to deter the radicals and other lawless elements in the country from pursuing their destructive designs and their heinous aims and ends;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, FERDINAND E. MARCOS, President of the Philippines, by virtue of the powers vested in me by the Constitution, do hereby order and decree as follows:
SECTION 1. Any person who, by word of mouth or through the use of the mail, telephone, telegraph, printed materials and other instrument or means of communications, willfully makes any threat or maliciously conveys, communicates, transmits, imparts, passes on, or otherwise disseminates false information, knowing the same to be false, concerning an attempt or alleged attempt being made to kill, injure, or intimidate any individual or unlawfully to damage or destroy any building, vehicle, or other real or personal property, by means of explosives, in cendiary devices, and other destructive forces of similar nature or characteristics, shall upon conviction be punished with imprisonment of not more than five (5) years or a fine of not more than forty thousand pesos (P40,000.00) or both at the discretion of the court having jurisdiction over the offense herein defined and penalized.
SECTION 2. The offender shall be arrested by means of an Arrest, Search and Seizure Order (ASSO) and shall not be entitled to bail pending trial by the military tribunals or military courts which shall have exclusive Jurisdiction over cases involving any violation of the provisions of this decree,
SECTION 3. This decree shall take effect immediately.
However, I'd like to criticize the lack of updates to the bomb joke law. Any presidential decree deserves an amendment for the better. Sure, five years of a lack of liberty can be painful. However, the penalty of PHP 40,000.00 back in 1980 may not weigh as much as it would in 2026. I may not be a supporter of Senator Jose Pimentel Ejercito Jr., aka Jinggoy Estrada, but this proposal of his might work:
Under his proposed measure, a penalty of imprisonment of six to 12 years, or a fine ranging from P1 million to P5 million, or both, awaits individuals who spread false information about bombs, explosives, or incendiary devices in key public areas.
Disinformation is deadly. Honestly, I think PHP 40,000.00 is too small, and fines need to be increased, to fit in with the economic times. Given the current PHP depreciation, raising up fines should be done to discourage such activities.
Learning from Singapore's battle against bomb hoaxes (and modifying them for the Philippines)
There have been at least 20 reported bomb hoaxes between the months of August and October at multiple locations across Singapore, including the Environment Building.Making a bomb threat to blow something up carries stiff penalties. Under Regulation 8(1) of the United Nations (Anti-Terrorism Measures) Regulations, it is illegal for someone to intentionally communicate or make available false information to another person, with the aim of causing them or anyone else to believe that a terrorist act has been, is being, or will be carried out.The punishment, under Section 5 of the United Nations Act 2001, is a fine not exceeding S$500,000 or an imprisonment term of up to 10 years, or both. This was increased, through amendments in 2014, from the former maximum sentence of a fine not exceeding S$100,000 or an imprisonment term of up to five years, or both.In Singapore, most terrorism-related offences involving bomb threats are charged under the United Nations Act and the Regulations, while reporting bomb hoaxes (threats that turn out to be false) are usually charged under Section 268A of the Penal Code 1871. This carries an imprisonment term of up to seven years, or a fine not exceeding S$50,000, or both.For incidents involving aircraft while in flight, Section 3 of the Tokyo Convention Act 1971 states that for acts committed on board a Singapore-controlled aircraft flying outside of Singapore, the offender can be charged with the offence under Singapore laws.Given the increased incidences of bomb hoaxes, penalties for bomb hoax perpetrators should be increased and made harsher to deter would-be offenders.DETERRENCEIn Singapore, the main sentencing consideration for bomb hoaxes is general deterrence.The High Court in 2007 said: “Given the current climate where international and domestic terrorist security threats are more prevalent than before, bomb hoaxers must inexorably be visited with draconian sentences… Such offences are easy to commit and difficult to detect and could become rampant if not firmly dealt with.”In 2016, Sze Kai Xuan was sentenced to 18 months’ jail by a District Court for his hoax threat to bomb City Hall in January 2016. As a result, the Public Transport Security Command had to divert 95 per cent of its resources to sweep through 18 MRT stations along three lines to search for the threat.In 2022, La Andy Hien Duc made a hoax bomb threat on a Singapore Airlines flight. The incident caused a four-hour delay, and Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) fighter jets had to escort the plane to Changi Airport.A report from the Institute of Mental Health found that Hien Duc was suffering from schizophrenia. In light of this, the court gave him a stern warning for the offence. He also faced other charges, including voluntarily causing hurt by slapping a cabin crew member.
There's definitely a good joke and a bad joke. A bad joke is just like the short story from Aesop's Fables of The Boy Who Cried Wolf. The story had the boy who kept shouting, "Wolf! Wolf!" to entertain himself. If you read the story deeper and deeper, can you see that the panic the villagers had every time they thought a wolf showed up? By the time the real wolf showed up, nobody wanted to believe the boy out of exhaustion. Whether we want to admit it or not, a bomb joke can produce that same fight-or-flight reaction in people. By the time a real bomb is present, nobody believes it.
Nobody can just say, "It's just a joke!" as an excuse to dismiss it. If one even gets the deeper meaning of the story of The Boy Who Cried Wolf, one might notice that in many versions, the boy only gets a lecture. The boy should've been given some punishment, like detention, because he was causing panic. In a sense, people can get fatigued, resulting in their alertness levels dropping as a result. Singapore decided to take it seriously, weighing the seriousness, and giving the appropriate punishment.
As I think about it, Singapore continues to be one of my role models. Sure, the Philippines might benefit better from following Malaysia's federal-parliamentary system. However, we want to learn from as many countries as possible.