CEBU urge Manila Govt Cybercrime law 2012 Amend or Reject

CEBU CITY : Starting next week, Particularly October 3, 2012, a law that was intended to stop child pornography and cybersex will take effect. But it will also mean strict penalties for those who commit libel on the Internet.

 

The Cebu Citizens Press Council (CCPC) "strongly and earnestly" asked President Benigno Aquino III and Congress to review the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, which was signed earlier this month.

 

The council recommended amendments to "objectionable provisions" in Republic Act 101751, especially those on Internet libel and the power of the Department of Justice (DOJ) to shut down websites without the need for a court order.

 

"The provision on Internet libel under the new law violates the constitutional guarantee of free speech and free press, due process of law, and equal protection of the law, aside from being unclear about innocent participants in the conversation on the web," the CCPC resolution said.

 

Lapses of the Cybercrime 2012 law

 

At least five other groups, representing lawyers, bloggers and journalists, have already questioned the law before the Supreme Court.

 

The new law imposes penalties for "the unlawful or prohibited acts of libel as defined in Article 355 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, committed through a computer system or any other similar means which may be devised in the future."

 

In its resolution, the CCPC said that the law fails to clearly define Internet libel, "a serious omission since Internet libel, given the technology's peculiarities, is different from other kinds of libel."

 

The resolution, which was certified correct by CCPC Executive Director Pachico A. Seares, was adopted and approved last September 28. Seares is also the public and standards editor of Sun.Star Cebu.

 

The CCPC is a 15-member council that includes six representatives from the public, two from the academe, two from the broadcast industry, and five newspaper editors representing each of Cebu's English and Bisaya dailies.

 

In its resolution, the CCPC said that the law "inexplicably also increases the penalty for computer-related libel."

 

Double Jeopardy penalties

 

The Revised Penal Code imposes six months and a day up to six years in jail; or a fine of P200 to P6,000; or both penalties for a libel conviction.

 

But the Cybercrime Prevention Act provides for a penalty one degree higher, meaning six to 12 years in jail, in addition to the other penalties.

 

"It is oppressive and discriminatory as it makes Internet libel a bigger crime than print or broadcast libel. A complainant would use the law, instead of the Revised Penal Code, to go after a journalist whose work is also published online," the CCPC resolution stated.

 

The Revised Penal Code defines libel as "a public and malicious imputation of a crime, vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status or circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, discredit or contempt of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who is dead."

 

The CCPC had also passed a resolution on March 24, 2008 urging Congress to retain libel as a crime, but to remove the jail sentence as penalty, "which would temper the law's harshness without losing accountability."

 

Excesses

 

This week, it suggested that Congress hold more public hearings, if necessary, so that bloggers, journalists, media organizations, other users of the Internet and technical groups that have studied the Internet can weigh in on the Internet libel provision.

 

In a recent interview with GMA News, deputy director Luis Teodoro of the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility said the Internet libel proviso could be used to harass bloggers and other users of the Internet.

 

The House version of the Cybercrime Prevention Act, whose principal authors included Representative Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, does not have a provision on Internet libel. This was introduced in the Senate.

 

The CCPC resolution said it "agrees with the need to curb excesses in the social media, as it is regulated in mainstream media."

 

"But the law on Internet libel must be so crafted as to consider the unique attributes of the platform or vehicle, not only to balance right to free speech against right to protect one's integrity and privacy, but also to assure enforcement in the new media," the council said.

Sun Star Cebu

Continue reading

Philippine Cybercrime Law: Police are allowed to watch people' private Skype Yahoo FB video conversation

A new cybercrime law in the Philippines that could see people sentenced to 12 years in jail for posting defamatory comments on Facebook or Twitter is generating outrage among netizens and rights groups.

 

The stated aim of the cybercrime law is to fight online pornography, hacking, identity theft and spamming in the conservative Catholic nation amid police complaints they lack the legal tools to stamp out Internet crime.

 

However it also includes a blanket provision that puts the country's criminal libel law into force in cyberspace, except that the penalties for Internet defamation are much tougher compared with old media.

 

It also allows authorities to collect data from personal user accounts on social media and listen in on voice/video applications, such as Skype, without a warrant.

 

Teenagers unwarily retweeting or re-posting libelous material on social media could bear the full force of the law, according to Noemi Dado, a prominent Manila blogger who edits a citizen media site called Blog Watch.

 

"Not everyone is an expert on what constitutes libel. Imagine a mother like me, or teenagers and kids who love to rant. It really hits our freedoms," Dado told AFP.

 

Compounding the concerns, those teenagers or anyone else who posts a libellous comment faces a maximum prison term of 12 years and a fine of one million pesos ($24,000).

 

Meanwhile, newspaper editors and other trained professionals in traditional media face prison terms of just four years and fines of 6,000 pesos.

 

While harsh criminal libel legislation remains in force in other parts of Asia, Dado said the Philippine law sent the wrong signal in a country that overthrew the military-backed Ferdinand Marcos dictatorship just 26 years ago.

 

Dado, a lawyer's wife known in the local online community as the "momblogger", is among a group of bloggers and other critics of the libel element of the cybercrime law campaigning for it to be repealed.

 

Brad Adams, Asia director for New York-based Human Rights Watch, said the law was having a chilling effect in the Philippines, which has one of the world's highest per capita rates of Facebook and Twitter users.

 

"Anybody using popular social networks or who publishes online is now at risk of a long prison term should a reader -- including government officials -- bring a libel charge," Adams said.

 

About a third of the Philippines' nearly 100 million people use the Internet, with 96 percent them on Facebook, according to industry figures.

 

Five petitions claiming the law is unconstitutional have been filed with the Supreme Court.

 

Senator Teofisto Guingona, the lone opponent when the bill was voted on in the Senate, has filed one of the petitions to the Supreme Court.

 

"Without a clear definition of the crime of libel and the persons liable, virtually any person can now be charged with a crime -- even if you just re-tweet or comment on an online update or blog post," Guingona told the court.

 

"The questioned provisions... throw us back to the Dark Ages."

 

The five petitions all say the law infringes on freedom of expression, due process, equal protection and privacy of communication.

 

University of the Philippines law professor Harry Roque, who filed one of the petitions, said the Philippines was one of a shrinking number of countries where defamation remained a crime punishable by prison.

 

Part of the penal code that was drawn up 82 years ago, it goes against the trend in many advanced democracies such as the United States and Britain where defamation is now punished with fines rather than imprisonment, Roque said.

 

Amid the public backlash, some of the senators who voted for the cybercime law have started to disassociate themselves from it, even claiming they did not read the provision on libel.

 

However presidential spokesman Edwin Lacierda has defended the cybercrime law.

 

"The Cybercrime Act sought to attach responsibilities in cyberspace.... freedom of expression is always recognised but freedom of expression is not absolute," he told reporters on Thursday.

 

Nevertheless, Lacierda said the law could still be refined.

 

He called for critics to submit their concerns to a government panel that will issue by the end of the year specific definitions of the law, such as who may be prosecuted.

 

Dailystar

Continue reading