THE BULLIED. Cyberbullying victim Christopher Lao expresses his approval on the Cybercrime Law. Photo by JUSTIN FAY REFUERZO
By Patrishia Ann Yap and Keisha Gail Pena
The Supreme Court has issued a 120-day temporary restraining order on the anti-cybercrime law, following protests from activists that it is a form of online martial law.
According to a member of the court, the TRO was issued to avoid irreversible violation to basic human rights. Despite this, questioned provisions of the anti-cybercrime law, also known RA 10175, do not mean they are unlawful.
A total of 15 petitions were filed before the SC which questions the validity of the law as critics argue that it violates the freedom of speech and the freedom of press. RA 10175 was signed into law on September 12 by President Aquino.
Malacanang said that the president carefully reviewed the law before affixing his signature to it. Lacierda adds that the government “recognizes and respects” the proposed revisions to the law.
The new law aims to prevent and rid the Internet of crimes such as online child pornography, hacking, cybersex and identity theft.
Media men and human rights groups, however, continue to protest against the law because it makes the punishment for online libel a degree higher than what is provided for in the Revised Penal Code.
Online libel is punishable with 6 to 12 years of imprisonment without parole and a fine of one million pesos while ordinary libel is only punishable with 6 months to 4 years of imprisonment.
Those opposing the law believe that such provisions will be utilized by politicians to silence critics.
According to De La Salle College of Law Dean Jose Manuel Diokno, the provision in the new law which makes libel a cybercrime is “redundant” because “the Revised Penal Code already includes online publication as a platform for the crime.”
Senator Tito Sotto was accountable for including the libel clause into the law.
Senator Chiz Escudero called the insertion a “mistake” and said that he'll move to have the law nullified.
Full of ambiguities
Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila Law Dean Ernesto Maceda said the law is full of layers of ambiguity for it does not fully state who is liable for libel and the publication of libelous content online.
The law is vague on whether users who were only recipients of Facebook comments, videos, links, and emails with libelous content may also be punishable by the new law.
Blogging, tweets, status updates, and other networking site interaction are not prioritized by the DOJ, saying that their focus is on punishing online syndicates and high criminals.
The new law also covers any violation by a Filipino national regardless of the place and time of commission.
Carlos Conde, spokesperson of the Human Rights Watch, said that the law may legally affect Filipinos in America who are regular users of social media to communicate with loved ones at home.
Sen. Teofisto Guingona believes that the issuance of TRO by the SC on the implementation of the law proves that it poses real danger and generates fear among internet users.
He said the law is problematic because it threatens the Constitutional right to freedom of expression particularly in the case of online communities where interaction is encouraged.
Guingona is the only senator to decline the Cybercrime Prevention Act and one of the petitioners against it before the Supreme Court.
The Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility said the law ignored the 2011 declaration of the United Nations Human Rights Committee which views libel as “excessive” because it puts violators behind bars and stifles freedom of expression.
However, Sen. Edgardo Angara, the principal sponsor of the cybercrime law, is confident that the constitutionality of the law will be endorsed and only certain provisions will be affected in the case that the SC issues adverse ruling on it.
He believes that minor revisions are necessary but the purpose of the law actually expands their rights to use online communication.
Speaker Feliciano Belmonte said the law is necessary to attend to the rising crime incidents committed through cyberspace.
Social media has been brimming with protests. Government websites went down as hackers showed their protest through the cyberspace. Philippine Internet Freedom Alliance painted anti-cybercrime law images along Padre Faura Street which police considered as an act of vandalism.
Government websites have been disabled days before the law was implemented, hackers sparing the government's main portal gov.ph and websites of the Senate and House of Representatives.
A social networking group led by Marlene Aguilar boldly protested by simultaneously putting up their middle fingers to express disappointment with the law.
Activists cheered upon learning about the SC ruling and immediately left the area of the rally.