E- Crime & Anti – Internet Freedom of Speech Law

The Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 ( R.A. 10175) has been criticized as the electronic- martial law in this day and age conjuring images of suppression of basic freedoms. The media & netizens were waiting with bated breath for the passage of the Freedom of Information bill but what we got is a Cybercrime Prevention Act that, according to sworn petitions to the Supreme Court, violates our basic freedom of speech or of expression.

It seems that our legislators many of whom were born before the electronic age or age of computers could not appreciate freedoms in cyberspace. Perhaps, there is a need to define vividly in legal parlance how cyber identity theft and fraud can be committed in this electronic age. Still, freedom of expression is a right shared by a community of nations in this planet. Cyber identity theft & cyber fraud are the only two good things worth saving under the cybercrime prevention law. The meaning of pornography in the cybercrime law must be nuanced with freedom of expression & the offense of sexual predation because for many feminists, the freedom of expression also includes the freedom of sexual expression. Since time immemorial, the community of civilized nations has developed standards to test obscenity such as a jurisprudence (Miller v. California) which says that a  “publication is obscene if  taken as whole, it is not literary, artistic, political nor does not have a scientific value as defined by the community” or an existing policy. In this day and age, that community includes the millions of netizens. Are our legislators or representatives who are our agents not connected to us, the  community of netizens?

The Philippines is a signatory to the United Nations International Covenant on Civil & Political Rights (ICCPR) since 1986 & the UN Human Rights Committee (now UN Human Rights Council)  has promulgated a “View” that libel in our archaic Revised Penal Code already violates our existing obligations under article 19 of the UN ICCPR.

But, instead of decriminalizing libel which is the trend in the civilized community of nations, our Philippine legislators & our President of the Philippines further brought the crime of libel to cyberspace. But, not only that, this cybercrime prevention law increases the penalty for libel in cyberspace. And worst, all the crimes listed in the archaic Philippine Revised Penal Code are covered under the cybercrime law & the penalty is one degree higher.

By passing the cybercrime law, the Philippines is guilty of continuing violation of state obligations under the UN ICCPR as stated in sworn petitions to the Supreme Court.

By passing the cybercrime law, our country wants to regulate & limit our freedom of expression. As in most jurisdictions, the right to information is guaranteed right, & the cybercrime prevention act is deemed unconstitutional by thousands & thousands of netizens because our Philippine Constitution says, “No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.”

What is then the remedy for libel & defamation in cyberspace?  One trend is decriminalization & to revisit our law on libel. Libel which has a publication element & which could very well be committed in cyber space can be reformulated as a civil offense instead of a crime. Note that the penalty now for libel in the cybercrime law could be twelve (12) years and so it is very harsh that one needs to consult a lawyer for publishing a report against wrongdoings & erring public servants.

Is there a cultural lag between technology and cyber offenses? Are our material cyber practices and ways of doing things not at pace with information technology and communication? Yes, we must build rules in cyberspace and information technology. Yes, there is so much catching up to do in terms of laws, policies to protect the lives of journalists in the frontlines of communication & our netizens who are writing & blogging “to petition government for redress of grievances.” Yes, we must catch up with civil sanctions for violations of privacy, privileged communication and state security. But, all these must be interfaced and balanced with our basic  freedoms  of speech or of expression and our right to information.


Image credit : Showbiz Government 
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Aquino-Benigno-III-Simeon-Cojuangco-Broadcasting-NetworkGovernment/136875469685310