Inside Philippine politics & beyond

Why I stand by my story that Sotto “inserted” online libel section in the Cybercrime Law

Share:
LinkedIn0
Pinterest0

Newsbyte

By Raïssa Robles

Senator Vicente Sotto III was quoted today as complaining why he was “being crucified” for something he did not do.  He again denied being responsible for inserting the section on online libel in the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012.

The ABC 5  Interaksyon website quoted Sotto as saying:

Ang proposal ko, hindi insertion, because I proposed it on the Senate floor, open plenary. Ano bang pinagsasabi nilang insertion? Para bang sinasabi nilang merong sinister? Ang mahirap sa kanila bintang sila nang bintang. [My proposal to include libel in the cybercrime law was not an insertion, it was proposed in open plenary, so why do they keep using the word ‘insertion’ and implying there’s something sinister?. The problem with them is they just blindly keep accusing people],” he said.

You can read the entire Interaksyon report here.

Dear Senator Sotto,

I used the word “insertion” because that was the very word used by the Senate Journal of January 24,2012. As you yourself said, Senate journals pass the scrutiny of the office of the Senate Majority Leader, which you currently occupy. This was why I assumed the January 24, 2012 Senate Journal was correct.

Please see below a screencap of the pertinent portion of the journal. I have encircled the pertinent words in red.

Page 880 of the Senate Journal for January 24, 2012 states that “On page 6, line 37, as proposed by Senator Sotto and accepted by the Sponsor, there being no objection, the Body approved the insertion of a new paragraph, to wit…” This screencap of the Senate journal shows that the word “insertion” came from the Senate journal.

 

Thanks @Mel for calling my attention to this. Mel is an active member of our Cyber Plaza Miranda, the growing community of Filipinos here and abroad who congregate on this site to debate and exchange information.

Comments

  1. Another one bites the dust!

    Bongbong disavows knowledge of libel clause in cybercrime bill.

    The way the fire is spreading, only partymates Sotto and Honasan will be left fighting. Both are still defending the added provisions.

    Only in the Philippines, senators and president do not read bills they sign into law.
    It’s more fun in the Philippines.

    • Horse trading or vote trading to all of them ” Karambola ” ika nga he he. Only in the Philippines I agree.

    • TEKA, TEKA

      Hugas-kamay? ‘Yan na ba ang nangyayari ngayon?

      Intent of Section 19

      Angara stressed that for all the flak the law had drawn, “I don’t want to give the impression that I’m now shifting the blame to anyone. No. I will own sole responsibilty for it because I was the one who put it all together and gathered all the inputs from all, from what I believe are responsible, reasonable people.”

      Angara also provided, for the first time, a glimpse into the supposed intent of the bill’s sponsors for Section 19.

      “Yung power sa DOJ, yung tinatawag na ‘take down provision’ na in case a website has been hacked or been attacked or has been converted to the use of an evil doer, then the DOJ has power to close it down—I didn’t put this particular provision,” he said, alluding to Sec. 19. 

      However, the actual phrasing of the law does not in any way reflect this intention to remedy a situation where a site has been “hacked or attacked or been converted to the use of an evil doer.” The section simply, vaguely, empowers DOJ to use its takedown power on a prima facie finding that  the cybercrime law has been violated, critics have said. Other legal experts have said such power is beyond the pale of the DOJ.

      Hindi daw hugas-kamay, sabi ni Angara. “CONSOLIDATOR” lang daw siya…

      Angara clarified he was “not shying off from taking responsibility” for the controversial provision, even as he described himself as the mere “consolidator” of the ideas of several sponsors, naming Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV among them.

      Oops, at nandamay na po.

      Pero, ‘wag daw mag-alala…puede naman susugan (o amiyendahan at pagandahin) ang batas…

      “But I think nga this [Sec. 19] needs some improvement and what I will propose is that DOJ can only do that upon a court order. In the same case that you can only arrest or seize or . . . like a warrant . . . not just a prima facie but a probable cause.

      “So I will import the principles of search warrant and arrest into this thing and I will do that…that amendatory bill,” said Angara.

      Ang titulo ng artikulo kung saan hango ang nasa itaas ay…

      Angara wants to amend takedown clause; asks DOJ to hold off on Cybercrime Law

      Naku po…dioskokuryo…ang batas pala ng Cybercrime Prevention ay parang baril ng mga pulis…

      Teka, teka…teka muna!!!

    • @Johnny Lin,
      “Only in the Philippines, senators and president do not read bills they sign into law”…
      transparency is now getting vital. the more diggers dig, the more bones are dug. haste is waste. horse trading and vote trading. everything now at stake.
      shall we all dump senators who voted blindly on this bill?
      and whoever reviewed this bill for pnoy’s signature, must he be held accountable?
      the bill has not even taken off(no IRR yet), vet an amendment is already in the offing. wow. it’s more fun in the senate…
      lesson learned: if we want more laws like this in the philippines, let’s look forward into voting and installing plagiarists, liars, thief, etc…

      • Ask ko lang…do they know how to read? Bills? Baka ‘di na. Pirmahan, si. To read, no. Bakit? Eh, wala naman makaka intindi sa bill na yan! Kulang-Kulang, sa ng Bisaya. Si Atty. Te sabi walang wisdom!

        Parang si PNoy nadali sa kaka pirma sa Batas na yan! UNA will use that blunder against his Administration…no free speech & of the PRESS! It was killed on Sept. 12, 2012!

        PNoy should change all his legal staff and exe sec. for making him sign that bill into law. He should be more be very careful nowadays! As I wrote before here “WATCH YOUR BACK!” [maybe he wasn’t able to read it.] Now, he will have to WATCH 360 degrees!

    • Sa tingin nyo tatanggapin kaya ni Sen. Tito sotto ang hamo na public debate ng isang Jay Robert (check out the link provided by 57 – pinay710.

      This will be SRO event – I am sure!!!

      Sana nga mangyari at may live coverage ny mga TV stations & rappler…

        • @leona

          LOL!

          Sometimes you make me want to lie on and roll over the floor! You kill me!

        • @ leona,

          I’ll attend and really watch carefully the public debate so I narrate the whole proceedings to my grandchildren and great grandchildren. I surely buy the video coverage if ever there is for posterity…di ba? hehehehehehe. There’ll be great circus in the public debate……I’ll have a have a good laugh and will enjoy the day…..LOL

        • Mahuhuli ka la kung si Sotto mag “insert” ng pusas sa yo! Lagyan mo ang kamay mo ng SAE 30-40 na Penn oil, walang pusas kakapit…MADULAS !

        • hahahahahahah salamat po!sana matuloy para malaman kung ano klase ang graduate ng wanbul univ. mahaba pa ang ipeperwhisyo ni sotto kasi hanggang 2016 pa sya. kaya humanda tayo mga kababayan. libel ba ito?

    • Ingat tayo, sobra palakpak natin…ma HOhoodwinked tayo sa lahat ng araw hanggan 2016 nito!

  4. Ukol sa pagsingit sa “Cyber Libel”, ang sabi niya…

    “Moralidad ang issue dito eh kaya nga gusto nating bantayan ang cyberspace kasi yung moralidad ng mga kabataan natin, nababastos na eh, nabababoy na.”

    – Sotto, Vicente III

    Ukol naman sa “Plagiarism” at “Intellectual Dishonesty”, DAPAT RIN niyang sabihin…

    “Moralidad ang issue dito eh kaya nga gusto nating bantayan ang cyberspace (at ang august Senate chamber) kasi yung moralidad ng mga kabataan natin, nababastos na eh, nabababoy na.”

    • napakataas ng pagpapahalaga ni titosoto sa moralidad ng kabataan. sa palagay ko’y mataas din ang pagmamahal nya sa kabataan. alam nya ang kahalagahan ng moralidad sa tao.
      maaari kayang hinangad niyang maging senador upang magkamit siya ng mataan na pagkakilala sa kanyang moralidad? maari kayang nag-senador siya upang iambag niya ang kanyang nalalaman ukol sa moralodad sa ating mga kabataan? maaari siguro.
      pero aanhin natin ang moralidad kung tayo rin lang ay mangongopya ng gawa ng iba.
      aanhin natin ang moralidad kung ang kahit mumunti nating pagkakamali ay hindi natin kayang aminin? aanhin natin ang moralidad kung hindi natin kayang dinggin at pulsuhan ang ninanais ng karamihan sa ating mga mamamayan?
      hindi ba isang pambababoy rin sa sarili ang pagiging manhid sa hinahangad at hinihiling ng mga taong bumoto sa kanya katulad ng RHbill?

  5. Today the Sandiganbayan issued warrant of arrest against GMA for plunder in connection with PCSO anomaly, according to Rappler.

  6. Update from Rappler:

    (UPDATED) MANILA, Philippines – The Sandiganbayan issued an arrest warrant on Thursday, October 4, against former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo in connection with a P366-M plunder suit earlier filed against her and 9 others by the Ombudsman.

    Rappler sources in the Sandiganbayan said the warrant was signed by Sandiganbayan justice Efren de la Cruz, chairman of the court’s First Division.

    OIC Sheriff Albert dela Cruz said they wil wait for instructions from the court if they go themselves to serve the warant or deputize PNP or NBI agents to do it.

    Arroyo is out on bail in connection with an electoral sabotage case filed against her with the Pasay City Court. She filed her certificate of candidacy on Wednesday, October 3, to seek re-election as Pampanga representative.

    Plunder however is a non-bailable offense.

    On October 1, the Ombudsman denied the plea of the Arroyo camp to drop the plunder charges filed against her.

    In a 21-page resolution filed with the Sandiganbayan, the Ombudsman said Arroyo’s appeal has no basis in law. The resolution now allowed the court to issue an arrest warrant against her.

    It was Arroyo’s appeal in July – filed before the Ombudsman – that stopped the Sandiganbayan from issuing an arrest warrant against the former president.

    Sought for comment, Arroyo’s lawyer Anacleto Diaz said in a text message: “I don’t know how to react. We have no information about that. I will try to find out why because we still have a pending motion. That’s why we have a hearing scheduled.”

    The filing of the suit was approved by Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales last July 12.

    Nine former officials of the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) and Commission on Audit were likewise charged with plunder. They are Sergio Valencia, former PCSO chairman of the board; Rosario Uriarte, former PCSO general manager; Manuel Morato, Jose Taruc V, Raymundo Roquero, and Ma Fatima Valdes, former members of the PCSO board; Benigno Aguas, former PCSO budget officer; Reynaldo Villar, former chairman of the Commission on Audit; and Nilda Plaras, former COA officer.

    The case was based on two separate complaints – one dated Jul 25, 2011 filed by Jaime Regalario, Risa Hontiveros-Baraquel and Danilo Lim, for plunder, malversation and violation of Republic Act (RA) No. 3019; and another complaint dated Nov 29, 2011 by the PCSO itself represented by Eduardo Araullo, for plunder and violation of RA 3019.

    The Ombudsman’s suit alleged that Mrs Arroyo approved the alleged diversion of PCSO’s intelligence funds for purposes not related to the core work of the agency, which is to help indigents and sectors working with them.

    It noted that the PCSO’s intelligence fund ballooned from P10-M in 2000 to P103-M in 2008. And then it continued to request for more intelligence funds in 2009 (P90-M) and 2010 (P150-M).

    The Ombudsman questioned why an agency that helps the poor should enjoy huge “intelligence” funds.

    According to the suit, the repeated identically-worded one-page requests for additional intelligence funds did not have a specific plan, project, program or undertaking of intelligence activity, and that the requests made for 2008 and 2010 even preceded the approval of PCSO’s corporate operating budget. – Rappler.com

        • let her make pila sa pcso just like everybody else. i saw a docu on gma newstv, talaga naman, paparamdam talaga sa yo na humihingi ka ng limos.

      • Pahabol…And again, hospital doctors will give signals that “she’s sick, gravely sick again!” has to stay in the hospital! Court-judges should not take these medical opns with a grain of salt. Put such doctors on the witness stand and grill them on that opns, if found also to be “sick” in such opns, put ’em in jail for contempt of court. 6 months direct contempt also “No Bail” will cure opn sicknesses!

        • bakit po ang kalidad ba ng mga doctor sa VMH ay katulad ng ST LUKE’S HOSP? ay marami akong experiencia sa ating mga pampublikong hospital. no encoding na lang ako baka ma libel pa ako.

        • ay! naintindihan ko po ang ibig sabihin ng “ibang ang bayad mo” hehehheeheh. bawasan ko na po ang text ko baka ako ma libel eh wala akong ibabayad sa lawyer.

        • perhaps that is why her arrest warrant was put on hold, to give her quack doctors time to build a sympathy case.

        • Aheee, that’s clever, you got it. Seems her strategy did not work as I just heard on ABS CBN that the warrant of arrest is back in effect. The chicken is in the pot, happy cooking Philippines.

    • magsasakit-sakitan na naman yan at malaking pera ang gagastusin ng bansa.
      may tanong lang po ako: pwede ba sa isang dating nang-agaw at nagkunwaring presidente ay sa charity ward na lang ilalagay?

      • Di raw, with due respect being a former president of the republic.

        Ok na rin basta balik kulong siya sa VMMC

      • sa charity ward, ang lamok doon ay may dengue…hahanapin ka kasi wala ka pang dengoy! Kagat abot mo doon! Libre nga dengoy naman!

        • drama drama drama……ayan na naman

          ———————————-

          Arroyo admitted to hospital

          By Gretchen Malalad, ABS-CBN News
          Posted at 10/04/2012 3:04 PM | Updated as of 10/04/2012 3:04 PM

          MANILA – Former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo was admitted to the Veterans Memorial Medical Center (VMMC) in Quezon City before a warrant for her arrest could be served.

          VMMC Director Nona Legaspi said Mrs. Arroyo was admitted to the hospital before 7 a.m. Thursday. This was after the ant-graft court Sandiganbayan issued an arrest warrant for her and 9 others for the alleged malversation of funds of the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO).

          Arroyo regularly comes to the hospital for her therapy but this morning, she complained of numbness in her hands.

          Attending physician Dr. Martha Nocum said the former President showed signs of dehydration and had to be administered with IV fluids.

          Legaspi said doctors saw the need for her to be admitted at the hospital.

          Mrs. Arroyo is now at the VMMC presidential suite, and it will be up to her attending physician when she can be discharged.

          Palace respects arrest warrant

          The Palace, meanwhile, said it respects the reported decision of the Sandiganbayan to order the arrest of former President Arroyo in connection with the alleged misuse of PCSO funds.

          “It’s a decision rendered by the Sandiganbayan, we respect whatever decision they issued. It just shows that the government through the PCSO has presented a case which has probable cause. And so, we leave it with the Ombudsman to prosecute the case. They themselves have found a prima facie case against on the former President and the officials of the PCSO,” Presidential Spokesman Edwin Lacierda said.

          The Palace expects that case to be tried “free from politics.”

          “I think, when it comes to the case before the Sandiganbayan, it will be litigated based on the evidence that the government would be presenting through the PCSO. So, I think, it should be free from politics and should be solely based on the evidence that will be submitted.” With a report from Willard Cheng, ABS-CBN News

        • “Numbness in the hands”…

          Malaking pagkakaiba daw ‘yan sa pangangati ng mga kamay sabi ng barbero ko. Kadalasan daw nagkakapera si Mang Karding pag nangangati ang mga kamay niya…gaya nga daw nang habang ginugupitan niya ang hasenderong malaki kung mag-tip.

          Too bad…hindi magkakapera si gloria…

        • Actually, hindi po numbness of hands ang nararamdaman nya…..pangangati po talaga ng kamay….di ba ganyan naman talaga ang mga magnanakaw, nangangati ang mga kamay…..makati lang talaga ang kamay ng big-time magnanakaw na ito.

        • have you seen her “supporters” sa news? i almost fell off my chair, natawa talaga ako kasi nagbigay ng statement na something like “payagan nang makalabas ng bansa para magpatingin sa doctor”, something along those lines. tapos she had the most deadpan expression ever. LOL… planted?

  7. Off topic:

    I hope that the judiciary will allot a special court that will be used exclusively for high profiled cases filed by BOC, BIR, Sandiganbayan/Ombudsman, NBI and PNP.. in this way, we can prioritize cases where it involves taxpayers/ goverment’s interest…

    My fear is that, after Aquino’s term, all of this cases will be dropped one by one…and all effort will be put to waste

    According to the news, judiciary is one of the reason why our economy lags when compared to other countries…
    We need to change that…

    • sana’y tulungan ni pnoy at ng kanyang mga kapanalig ang ating hudikatura na magkaroon ng totohanang pagre-reporma. ang mga hukom na ayaw maki-cooperate, sana wag na lang silang kumuha ng sweldo nila. o di kaya ay magsipag-resign na lang, alang-alang sa ating bayan. mas marami namang abugado na naghihintay na umalis na sila. kung totoo ngnang napakaraming kasong nakabimbin sa SC, dapat nang pag-ukukan iyan ng budget para lahatang mabigyan na ng closure upang ang mga bagong kasong isinasampa ay malitis ng tama at mabilis.
      pwede po sanang mag-pa OJT ang pamahalaan ng mga law students para makatulong sa mga research at office works. o maaaring may mag-volunteer din sa kanila. marami tayong mga estudyanteng willing na makatulong upang iahon ang ating hudikatura sa pagkakalubalob sa abyss mula pa nuong rehimeng diktaturya.
      kung kailangan nila ang tulong ko, ako ay magkukusang maglaan ng oras. kapos man po ako sa pinansyal at hindi rin abogado pero nais ko pong makapag-ambag nang kahit konti sa ating bansa maliban pa sa mga ginagawa ko na sa aking sariling poder.
      kung matatapos ang 2016 at wala nang pwedeng magpatuloy ng lakad ni pnoy, nangangamba akong maibalik muli ang madilim na kalakaran sa ating hudikatura na hindi pa man ay wala pa ring malinaw na repormang mababanaagan sapagka’t hindi ko rin mahalata na nais na tulungan si sereno ng mga kasama nya sa SC. yung flag ceremony nga na tatayo lamang ang mga hukom ay di nila magawa. siguro ay sinawaan na sila sa pag-attend sa flag ceremony o tunay na nagtampo sila sa hindi paglkakahirang na CJ. mauunawan naman natin. kung pwede nga lang na lahat sila CJ na para lang wag silang magtampo.

    • “Click” at Google FINDLAW, you’ll get into US Federal Supreme Court, from there, the U.S. Code you’ll find and all other Fed. and State laws, Fed. and State Courts, etc. Very comprehensive website. Click, Click & Click lang. Try it Raissa. Good luck!

  10. i would just like to share this interesting story that happened hours ago:

    Sotto nephew threatens critic on Facebook
    By AILEEN ESTOQUIA, GMA NEWS October 4, 2012 1:00am
    After Senator Tito Sotto cried foul over being bullied on the Internet, his nephew may have ended up himself bullying someone on Facebook in an attempt to defend his uncle’s good name.

    Stephen Micharl Bacosa, Sotto’s nephew though his wife Helen Gamboa, sent a private message to a certain Adrian Arcega, saying: “Pare dahan dahan lang sa pambabastos mo sa uncle ko ha? kilala kita. ka batch ka ng utol ko!! kung cyber bully ka, ako BULLY sa real world at alam nyo yan.”

    Arcega replied: “How ‘exactly’ ako nambastos? Don’t forget, I (and the rest of the people) am your uncle’s boss. Whether I’m right or wrong, it comes with the territory.”

    The screencap of these messages is currently making the rounds on Facebook.

    Arcega, a musican and children’s TV show director, believes that his posts last Sunday, most of which were reposts, were probably what provoked Basco into making these threats. One of the posts was a Facebook note about the Cybercrime Law.

    Arcega and Bacosa are not “friends” on Facebook but Arcega is a “friend” of one of Bacosa’s family members. Arcega declined to name the family member out of respect for his friend who has remained silent and respectful about the issue. This indirect connection allowed Basco to see Arcega’s posts about Senator Sotto and the Cybercrime law.

    The parties could not be reached for comment as of posting time.

    Online whipping boy

    Sotto first received flak on the Internet over allegations that he plagiarized the speech he delivered on the Senate floor during deliberations on the Reproductive Health Bill. He was alleged to have copied portions of his speech from a US-based blogger.

    He was also accused of plagiarizing a speech of former US Senator Robert Kennedy, which he delivered in Filpino. He denied all accusations.

    With the passing of the controversial Cybercrime Bill, Sotto received more criticisms from netizens after it was alleged that it was he who made the last-minute insertions on online libel. He said the online defamation that has been posted on sites like YouTube prompted him to propose the inclusion of libel as an offense covered by the law.

    He challenged his critics to question the law before the court and not to use the Internet to destroy other people’s reputations. — DVM, GMA News

    Source:
    http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/276728/scitech/socialmedia/sotto-nephew-threatens-critic-on-facebook

    • Word of advice to the honorable Senator’s relatives, your TitoSen is already doing a splendid job digging a deep enough grave to bury himself in. He really doesn’t need the extra help.

    • hayan na nga. isang sample palang iyan ng complication ng batas na iyan na dahil inapura at hindi pinagdebatehan ay tiyak na maraming butas ang maglalabasan kaya’t makikita na natin ang paghahalo ng balat sa tinalupan…
      angara, hindi ka makakatikim ng boto sa akin at sa mga taong kaya kong himukin kung hindi mo ito agad aayusin…

    • It only shows that Sotto is not competent to be a law maker. Hayz! Pang Wanbol University lang talaga!

    • @Targrod…that section of FB is boiling, BOILING, for cyberfighting, friends, kins and commenters getting hotly into the fray. Free Speech still ALIVE!

  11. Quotes from interview of Sotto:

    “I admit that I proposed the insertion of Libel in Cybercrime law. I am now accused that the addition was in retaliation for internet users for bullying me”

    He then, asked this question:
    “If I was retaliating, How could I predict that they will bully me in August when I proposed that early this year?”

    People have two eyes, ears, legs, and hands because they complement each other for normal natural function of human beings.

    Thinking stupid ideas coming in pairs are not different. Inserting libel as punishment to free thinkers in a democratic medium as well as publicly denying obvious plagiarism in a lawful society complement each other proving the accuracy of the theory that “only dumb people could ever come up with identical silly ideas at different times”

    Oh, they grow in Three’s!

    “Repeal libel law so everybody has the freedom to bully each other”
    Solution of nincompoops
    He he he

    • Sotto is now in full self-destruct mode.

      Everytime the guy opens his mouth he only succeeds in making people think the worse of him. I think he should sue himself for libel!

    • As everybody including many lawmakers wants, DECRIMINALIZE LIBEL LAW rather than just repealing that section provision in the Cybercrime Law!

      Make libel a civil obligation. No imprisonment.

      It is much better it is an OPEN SESAME that public officials are subjected to ridicules, etc. , than not being able to exercise free speech and of the PRESS!

      Libel provision in the Rev. Penal Code, as I said before here, is of Spanish origin. In fact the Code was approved in the Spanish language, year 1932. It is a “left-over” of the Spanish colonial mentality, which was not totally “deleted” even by the Americans here. Even the grandpa of the present Sen. Sotto, fought it out such libel provisions of the Code. After decriminalizing this libel law, Congress can make a well studied law on the topic and replace it.

      Not even the Spanish leaders nor the Americans after them would approve this Cybercrime law if they were around now! It would be TOO MUCH not only for us Filipinos but for THEM too! It could have created a 2nd Filipino-Spanish War or 2nd Filipino-American War!

      DECRIMINALIZE LIBEL LAW. Make it only a civil obligation. Daan Matuid will have a better chance of going through. If not, I doubt it will get half way in its path when “Tongues & Minds” are shut down with criminal threats! As many have said here, we will have electronic Martial Law …”e” the 5th letter in the Alphabeth…can stand as “evil”…let’s not have that!

  12. My observations of Sotto during Corona impeachment:

    1. He had a good sounding radio voice.
    2. He made no meaningful contribution to the investigation.

    My observation of Sotto as a Senator:

    1. He is way in over his head.

  13. Latest News INTERAKSYON TV5
    “Binay Dynasty, Nancy Binay to run for senator replacing De Venecia”

    Stop Binay power now before it’s too late.

    Do Not Vote BINAY

    Spread the word on Social media.

    • And I thought they have a law somewhere written a long time ago Against Political Dynasty like Monopoly in Business.
      How many are The Revillas running for elective positions, The Marcose’s despite alleged controversies, and now the spouses Pacquiao, the Arroyo’s, so many more. If there was a law written against it. what exempts these people from overriding that law?

      • There is no law yet created, but it is enshrined in the 1987 Philippine Constitution

        The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines states in Article II Section 26, “The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service, and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.”

        Source: Wikipedia

        They’ve been sitting on the proposal to create a law for this particular provision of the constitution since 1987….

      • exempted yata sa anti-political dynasty provision ang mga taong gustong magsilbi sa masa. lubhang nakatutuwa ang mga taong ito na marubdob ang pagnanasang maiahon sa kahirapan ang masa.
        ang mag-iinang marcos, ang mag-iinang arroyo, mag-anak na revilla, mag-anak na ejercito(o estrada ba?) at iba pa.
        sa tingin ko ang mga taong ito lamang ang sa tingin nila ay ang mga tunay na nagmamahal sa masa. kaya’t ginagawa nila ang buong makakaya upang mapagsilbihan ang masa.
        at kung hindi naman sila minamahal ng masa sa kanilang lugar, mahahalal kaya?
        malas lang ako kasi hindi sila taga-lugar namin kaya hindi ko masasabing mahal ko rin sila para maiboto ko…
        “”The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines states in Article II Section 26, “The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service, and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.””
        alisin na lang ito sa ating constitution. ito’y isang paghamak sa karapatan ng bawat mag-anak na pulitiko na gustong magsilbi sa masa. hindi ito angkop sa kultura ng masa na nais maghalal nang paulit-ulit o tila walang katapusan dahil sa kanilang pagmamahal sa magkakapamilya.

        • crafty! very well said. SAMA-SAMA, PAMILYANG PILIPINO SA SENADO!!!! It’s more fun in the Philippines.

        • mas maganda nga ata na gawing picnic place ang senate at ang house na lang. di ba cla nagkwekentuhan sa kanilang hapag kainan para malaman ang ibat ibang issues ng bayan at iconsolidate para isa boses ang kanilang nalalaman? mas maganda ata na ibigay na rin ang ibang posisyon sa iba para mapagbigyan ang ibang may hinaing din sa bayan! nagtataka lang ako sa dami dami ng sinasabi natin dito bat ni isa man lang walang maglakas ng loob na magrepresent ng ating adhikain sa senado. kung ikukumpara naman sa mga tumatakbo mas malalim at tapat naman ang ating adhikain kesa sa mga anak at kamaganak na kulang sa eksperyensya, edukasyon at lohikal na kaisipan para mamuno sa bayan. unti unti ko na napapansin ang pagbalik ng sistemang “sila-sila” na lamang, bawat sangay ng gobyerno nandun kamaganak….sa huli mararamdaman na natin na nananaig na ang makapamilyang interes at hindi ng pangkalahatang interes.

        • I agree @vander anievas. I agree Ex-Pres. Ramos’ statement on the bad political dynastism!

          If no implementing law is made as the Constitution prohibits, in ‘Pinas we will have in the very few years to consummate this bad political dynastism, a FAMILY OCCUPATION OF POLITICIANS through FAMILY GENERATIONS! A FAMILY MONARCHIES in every Region and Province, including CITIES and TOWNS! No place in ‘Pinas will be without it.

          When a son or daughter answers a question on “occupation?”,,,the answer is ‘Future Senator,” “Future Member of Congress,” “Future Mayor or Governor,” name it, it is a FAMILY DYNASTY. We don’t want monarchies or kingdoms here but we will have this and the effects are just like it. BACK TO FEUDAL ERA where kingdoms & monarchies rule over the people!

          By the time this bad dynasty is IN PLACE, it will take heaven and earth to destroy it just like as long it really took so long in centuries in Europe where it grew and existed mostly.

          No ordinary folks’ member can get into public office, by election or appointment. It is a CLOSED AND EXCLUSIVE CLUB only for political dynasty members! No shares of stocks needed.

          Now, with Cybercrime Law, this law will track this political dynastism faster! We, the people will plunge over the cliff on this.

          For those who will be elected in 2013, lawmakers DO this: MAKE A LAW PROHIBITING POLITICAL DYNASTY. Check the “fee-tail” concept in land ownership transfers upon last owner’s death. A good guide. DON’T FORGET TO PROVIDE REQUIREMENTS TO DISQUALIFY THOSE NOT FIT FOR PUBLIC OFFICE too!

    • PLEASE – LET US ALL SPREAD THE WORD!

      Otherwise, there maybe no end to a BINAY presidency….

      or it maybe the end of our democratic system…

      • eto na ang ikakasira ni vinnay . para pakawalan mo ang mga anak mo at kamaganak mo sa pulitika at manalo (wag naman sana) nagpapakita lang ang ganitong aksyon ng pagkagahaman sa power. pag sya ang lumabas sa pagkapresidente (dati sya ang idol ko) at isipin na lang natin na nanalo ang mga kaanak nya e di daig pa nya si gloria :) wrong move lakay! maaga pa lang pinakita mo na ang kulay mo! nababalot ka ng kaitiman :)

    • Who were the Binay’s before they entered politics. Were they in a big money-making business to put them where they are now?

  14. Gumaganda ang laban pre, segi maghamunan tqyo, total pareparehas na tayo, TAKAL (taong kalye ) laban sa isang senatong, just remove your immunity at lalaban kami, talagang produkto ng ISKUL BUKOL, di murahin nyo na, you have the right to do it sir, tulad din sana ng karapatan namin para ma express ang aming damdamin sa mga kapalpakan ng mga senador na di nagbabasa ng mga provision ng batas bago lagdaan…

    Tulad ng paliwanag ni Mam Raissa, insertion na nga at ang senate journal pa pala ang source, hirap talaga umamin ng mali, tulad ng isang kwento, nahuli ng asawang babae ang kanyang husband na nakapatong sa isang babae, aba ang palusot, di daw sya yun, at pinilit lang sya ,

    • @kontrapilo…the last phrase is a tonto shield…”if caught in flagrante…deny!”…so, the poor wifey will be wondering “I did see him on top…am I dreaming?”…hahaha.

  15. Ma’am Raisa, good evening :). I’m just wondering if there was any deliberation made on the floor after the proposal to include libel in the cyber-crime bill? I may be wrong (please correct me if I am) but I have read somewhere that it was just accepted as inclusion to the bill “due to lack of time”, hence, I fear that there wasn’t any discussion made. Online libel originated from the Senate version of the bill as what Rep. Herrera-Dy said (http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/274706/scitech/technology/authors-defend-inclusion-of-online-libel-in-cybercrime-law), so we are certain it came from the Senate. The question is, when was the proposal to insert the online libel provision made? Was it during the Committee Hearing or Second Reading, or etc in the Senate? As I am aware, every bit of the bill must be deliberated thoroughly and scrutinized to the minutest detail to reveal its PROS and CONS so if it was just inserted immediately without debating on it “due to lack of time” it could have been the reason why other Senators weren’t made aware of online libel’s implications, hence, voted on it without knowing the possible outcome of the said provision. OR were they even made aware that there exists such provision in the bill?

    If it was indeed “just accepted due to lack of time” and wasn’t debated, isn’t it against the very basic principle of “How a bill becomes a law” in our legislature? Is there anything that can be done since the debate was bypassed?

    #Dami ko pong tanong! Sana po masagot nyo. :)

    • My replies to the following questions =

      I’m just wondering if there was any deliberation made on the floor after the proposal to include libel in the cyber-crime bill?

      None.
      I may be wrong (please correct me if I am) but I have read somewhere that it was just accepted as inclusion to the bill “due to lack of time”, hence, I fear that there wasn’t any discussion made.

      No. It was accepted as an inclusion due more to “collegiality”. After all, this was the Senate Majority Leader proposing an amendment to the bill. The Majority Leader has the power to schedule bills for deliberation on the floor.

      Still, there was no discussion. No one stood up to ask for any explanation.

      The question is, when was the proposal to insert the online libel provision made? Was it during the Committee Hearing or Second Reading, or etc in the Senate?

      Please read my previous piece where I outlined the steps to approving a bill into a law-
      http://raissarobles.com/2012/09/23/was-senator-sotto-lying/

      Thanks for dropping by.