Inside Philippine politics & beyond

Fr. Bernas calls Cybercrime Law “frightening”

Share:
LinkedIn0
Pinterest0

Newsbytes

By Raïssa Robles

The Cybercrime Law is “partly good and partly chilling,” wrote Jesuit priest-lawyer Joaquin Bernas in his latest blog entry posted yesterday.

Bernas explained why:

As can easily be seen, the law deals not only with the most delicate rights of freedom of expression, freedom of communication, and the privacy of communication but also with the equally sacred right of the people “to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects” against government intrusion.  These rights suffered during the period of martial rule. Their suppression or impairment are usually  the targets of governments who have dark intentions.  When criticized, the facile answer to critics given by those with dark intentions is that these rights are not absolute.  That defense is already being repeated by Palace mouthpieces.  It is therefore a good time to look into the disturbing aspects of the law.  We might begin by taking at least a preliminary look at some of the provisions which are now under attack.

To read the rest of his explanation on the cybercrime law, please click on this link.

For the young Netizens who are now running scared because of this law, this gives you a chance and a lesson to experience even just a little bit the chilling effect of dictator Ferdinand Marcos’ Martial Law.   The latter was much, much worse.  And yet you fear this online libel.

By the way, I’m glad Senator Vicente Sotto has finally admitted it was he who had inserted the online libel provision in the Cybercrime Act.

Wonder why he said this to a foreign news network but denied the same to local journalists.

Prominent digital rights champion takes up our fight against online libel

Since I wrote about Senator Vicente Sotto’s midnight insertion of the online libel section in the Cybercrime Prevention Act, the outrage  has gone viral on the Net.

My husband Alan called my attention to the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation which wrote a piece supporting Filipino netizens. I am humbled by the fact that EFF linked the piece to my website. It is a demonstration of the power of the World Wide Web to connect people globally together.

Please click on this link to read the piece.

Boingboing also picks up cybercrime law

My piece was also picked up by the much-read culture and technology site Boingboing. And I’m not even a geek :)

Please click on this link to read.

Philippine Daily Inquirer mentions me in their editorial

I would also like to thank the Philippine Daily Inquirer, the biggest-selling Philippine newspaper, for mentioning me and what I wrote in their editorial.

Please click on this link to read.

Again, all these underscore that one person cannot do this alone.

But altogether, we can.

I’m not against a libel law covering netizens

Let me explain my personal stand on online libel. I am not against punishing people who make libelous statements online. But the law has to be well-defined on what are considered libelous statements; who gets punished for them; and what the punishment is. I also don’t believe in a jail term.

And I believe a public hearing should be called on the matter and a separate law crafted just on this.

I have been a victim of libelous statements myself – frequently repeated lies that accuse me up to now of being “the small lady who gave bank documents to the prosecution” during the impeachment trial of then Chief Justice Renato Corona; of being a kleptomaniac who filched from a high-end furniture store; and of being a paid hack. I am aghast at how some people can make up lies and post these online. I will fight such lies no end and will expose those behind it.

But I believe that the Internet can and is being used more for the greater good of the country. The Cybercrime Law – the way it is so sloppily worded now – will make this blooming of democracy shrivel on the vine.

As my hubby Alan told me during one of our discussions at the breakfast table, democracy is defending another person’s right to say what I vehemently disagree with; not what I agree with. Sometimes, discussions do get so heated up that these degenerate into name-calling and opinions that defy logic. But this is all part and parcel of our maturation as a democracy.

Which is why, Alan said we have to rid our law books of what he calls “this Sottobomination”.

Alan also also coined another word –” Sottomy: the act of poisoning a well-intentioned bill with a vested interest stealth amendment not subject to public hearing.”

I have always believed in the expression of contrary views, and this shows in this blog. Because only when we are exposed to a multiplicity of opinions and ideas do we see many sides of an issue. In the same way that in order to appreciate the beauty of a polished diamond, you have to turn it around and around to see all its facets.

Oh, by the way – NO, this is not the interesting topic  I promised to write about Sotto. That’s coming next. You’d be surprised. I guess he will, too.

Comments

  4. THEY HAVE STARTED BLOCKING COMMENTS ONLINE

    I just want to report that they have started to block out comments deemed libelous in the Inquirer news online forums.

    It uses a horizontal black stripe on the banned comment, with the words “comment blocked” RA No. 10175.

    Can someone post a screen shot of it? I do not know how.

    Reminds you with what they do with books written by ex-CIA operatives.

    Is this Inquirer’s move or the Cybercrime authorities?

    • it goes like this: (shades of black) followed by
      “ᴄᴏᴍᴍᴇɴᴛ ʙʟᴏᴄᴋᴇᴅ.] (ʀᴀ ɴᴏ. 10175)”
      i saw this in one comment on Facebook.

      • It’s a form of protest going around in facebook. People are deliberately blacking out their own comments to dramatise cybercrime law enactment scenario. Profile photos are also being blackened.

    • maiba ako. Please read the PDI articles: Enrile Jr. Chance to Clear up bad image by Gil Cabacungan and read comments by Juan, and Rock 7222. Also Alfie Anido Mystery death according to Enrile by Cathy Yamsuam and comments by Rock 7222, Manong Osang, Wishful thinking, and R. also published by PDI.
      intersting to read.

  6. Napansin ko lang, wala ng narco-comment sa mga news item like in Phil inquirer, abs-cbn news, etc…. Hindi lang nag copy paste si plagiarist,; pinatay pa ang acting freedom of speech/ expression. Hanep talaga.

  7. SOTTOBOTOMY : The removal, by surgery, of all the healthy and sound parts of the brain.

  8. Fellow CPMers, please forgive me for digressing from the day’s favorite topic.  But I am really disappointed on what is happening with the Supreme Court (SC) on, according to the most senior justice (Carpio), an insignificant event.  This is about the continued inability of senior justices to attend the flag raising ceremony in the SC without any valid explanation.  Justice Carpio merely explained that the attendance thereof depends on the predisposition of individual justice.  Shall we accept that explanation? I think we all know the real reason for such actuation of the senior justices.

    To me, the failure of the justices to attend the flag raising rites constitutes a bad example to all Filipinos, especially the youth. Not to mention that such failure is a gross violation of an SC circular of 2001 and the 1998 Flag and Heraldic Code of the Philippines.  In regard to this, the Inquirer cited Atty. Romulo Makalintal.

    “Lawyer Romulo Macalintal earlier called on the justices to attend the flag ceremony, whether they liked Sereno or not, to show respect for the law, the flag and the country.

    “He reminded the justices about a circular issued by the Court in 2001, which required executive judges to supervise the holding of the flag rites in their courthouses and “shall ensure the attendance of all judges and court personnel in the rites.”

    “Macalintal also pointed out that Section 18 of the Republic Act No. 8491 or the 1998 Flag and Heraldic Code of the Philippines provides that “all government offices and educational institutions shall observe the flag-raising ceremony every Monday morning.”

    I believe that such gross and unabashed “thrashing” of our flag constitutes at least a betrayal of public trust and a ground for impeachment.  May be we can start soonest with the Arroyo 8 whom we have lost our trust since the time they engineered the aborted escape of GMA through a TRO last year.  Of course we are facing an election year in 2013 but the impeachment proceedings should be started ASAP.   The Arroyo 8 justices are now  forewarned.

    • Not only a bad example (!) but a blatant display of disrespect to the nation they sworn to protect.

      Who are they to violate the simple law of the land and expect to escape accountability by merely citing their personal preferences over their duty to uphold the constitutionality of our laws?

      Their egos do not matter in our right to become a respectable nation.

      Let’s challenge them!

      • @ joseph,

        Tama ka pare, Hindi dapat baliwalain ang kabobohang pinaggagawa nang mga TUTANG justices na ito. Kong hindi nila nagustuhan si chief justice sereno eh dapat magresign nalang sila diyan. Sila na dapat magpakita nang magandang halimbawa pero ano itong ginagawa nila. if l were Pnoy patatalsikin ko mga BOBONG justices na yan kong noon iniimpeach si convicted thief justice nato corona ay wala silang kibo dahil takot na takot dahil baka mawala ang sariling pakinabang ngayon ay nagpapakita nang nabobohan…Kilala na namin kayo mga TUTAng justices, Mahiya naman sana kayo sa pinaggagawa ninyo.

    • Justice Carpio said we should watch his judicial decisions.

      Conchita Carpio-Morales said, “Institutional integrity starts with personal integrity”.

      Personal integrity relates to all decisions, whether large or small, judicial or not.

      So in the small matter of flag-raising ceremonies, Justice Carpio at al must observe personal integrity. It is a matter of law and, therefore, a matter of judicial institutional integrity.

    • Attending flag ceremony (every Monday?). Is there a law on that? Or it is a mere “regulation” by someone or group in the SC? Then “pledge of allegiance” too? If a justice or et al., does not attend, keeps on not attending that, what happens? Disloyalty? Not true Pilipino? Etc.? During the time of ex-CJ Corona, there is that ceremony? Di ba? But, what was the low poll survey of the SC as re to some of its decisions, flip-flopping, TROs, “letters” from lawyers re: PALEA Case, atbpa? In short, despite attending that ceremony, it couldn’t raise the people’s trust on the Court. Is that it? I do not see waking up so early a.m. just to attend that and again sing and give the pledge. They have done that so many thousands of times already! Wa-Ay epekto yan!’

      Dapat, laging ng X-Ray machine doon, so it can be seen who are really not true Pilipino. Let us not waste too much show such as that ceremony every Monday.

      What counts and should be watched is the quality of the performance of the work in that department of government. Never mind attending that “EVERY MONDAY MORNING!” One is still a true Pilipino without that.

      • What is the penalty under the law R.A. 8941 for not attending? Has anyone been punished? Has anyone been stripped of what? None? Justices of the Court not attending? VIP violators yan! If the law cannot be enforced even on justices, why the law in the first place? Right infront of everybody’s noses and nothing is done for non-attendees!

        • @leona

          Let us not talk about the fact that the flag is the symbol of the country. Let us not talk about disrespect for the flag is equivalent to disrespect for the country. Let us not talk about the law. Let us not talk about betrayal of trust. Let us not talk about impeachments.

          Rather let us talk about little things. Let us talk about how little things mean a lot.

          You know how touching it is, as the song goes, when a loved one says how nice you look even when you feel you’re not, or when a loved one sends the “warmth of a secret smile”? Whew, that sends shivers down my spine. And you know how, as a Mom or Dad or even as a grandparent, how the spontaneous hug of child gives whole meanings to the word “love”?

          Surely you have been the recipient of such little things. Surely you have been the giver.

          Now I know it is a long stretch to compare such acts with attending a flag ceremony so early on Monday mornings when you would rather have another minute in the warmth of the bed or another cup of that magnificent coffee. And, no, you don’t have to do this every Monday morning.

          But that is how certain moments in life is and should be: a small symbolic act confirms our intentions. It reveals the bigger truth of where our passions lie.

          Smile. :-)

        • But that is how certain moments in life is and should be: a small symbolic act confirms our intentions. It reveals the bigger truth of where our passions lie.

          very nicely put @springwoodman. thumbs up.

        • Thanks for your smile…the problem is, since I am the ponente justice to kill that Cybercrime law and its libel provisions, and I am still lying on my bed finishing my thoughts on the rationale or reasons to kill that law, making me get up so early just to attend that flag ceremony and forget my almost finished rationale to be put into writing upon arrival at 9 a.m. at the SC bldg, I FORGOT my rationale thoughts then! I sang Bayan Magiliw and took my Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag & Country. Now, all my Bretheren in Court will have to wait for some another weeks to bring my “decision” to finish to kill that law! While CPMers continues to bully-HO the inserter at Raissa’s BLOG!

      • @Leona

        Do we need to be rewarded to do a little bit of patriotism? It’s the Philippines flag we are respecting here, not the justices or the supreme court. Do you advise the younger generations to ignore this “tradition” because when they get older it doesn’t matter anyway? Because they won’t get popular by reciting the “pledge of allegians” every Monday morning? It’s a shame. We all grew up respecting the Flag and now when we are facing our oblivion in life we suddenly don’t give importance to what we believed in.

    • Chief Justice ML Sereno’s warning to Monday Flag Ceremony Truants?

      Chief Justice now requires SC employees to attend flag-raising ceremony

      MANILA, Philippines — Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno issued last Friday a memorandum reminding all employees at the Supreme Court to attend the flag-raising ceremony every Monday morning.

      Court employees, who declined to be identified because they were not authorized to speak to mediamen, revealed this to reporters.

      The memo was not intended for release to the media because it was an internal memo, according to the sources.

      Source: By Jerome Aning Philippine Daily Inquirer. 9:42 pm | Sunday, September 30th, 2012

      READ the whole story at newsinfo inquirer net/280268/chief-justice-now-requires-sc-employees-to-attend-flag-raising-ceremony

    • Agree with Sereno putting out this flag ceremony reminder because it is part of the official obligation of a government employee? As CJ it is her duty to remind everyone of their patriotic duty under the law. Sereno inherited the rule. All SC employees, not only the justices, are put on notice. If one is non compliant, admonishment accordingly with internal memo would ensue. That is fairness as it could be. The memo was not given only to justices. Give credit to Sereno for instituting discipline to spoiled SC employees and their complaint is basically to fodder intrigue among justices and to protect their own selfish interest not to go to work early every Monday.

      Also agree with Justice Carpio that “do not look on the flag ceremony attendance but at their decisions”.
      Attending a flag ceremony will not enhance their knowledge but open defiance to a government office rule under the law is a test of their intelligence and simple obedience to the law. If the justices could not follow reasonably their own law, then, they don’t have the moral ascendancy dispensing justice.

      We do not expect every employee or justices to be present every Monday in the flag raising. Yet their absence must not be habitual!

    • I am one hundred percent agreeing with you in your opinion Mr. Rene-Ipil.
      With what this members of Supreme Court have been doing lately, it clearly state that they need a total revamp on its membership.

Trackbacks