The Cybercrime Prevention Act

The Third Eye on Cybercrime Prevention Act video

Last September 12, by the signature of President Benigno Aquino III, Senate Bill No. 2796 and House Bill No. 5808 gave birth to Republic Act No. 10175 or the Cybercrime law, causing a violent uproar among Pinoy netizens, who deemed the act a violation of freedom of speech.

R.A. 10175 titled “An Act Defining Cybercrime, Providing for the Prevention, Investigation, Suppression and the Imposition of Penalties Therefore and Other Purpose,” authored by Senator Edgardo Angara, aims to prevent Internet crimes – hacking, spamming, identity theft, cybersex, and online child pornography among others.

But the libel provision inserted by Senator Vicente “Tito” Sotto III during the bill’s third reading, triggered negative responses from Filipino internet users all around the globe.

“Hindi siya magandang idea para sa’kin kasi una sa lahat, nalilimit yung voice nating mga tao, tayong mga internet users … Hindi ka na pwedeng mag-voice out ng mga gusto sabihin kasi nga natatakot ka, baka makulong ka, makasuhan ka. (It’s not a good for me, because first of all, it limits the people’s voice, especially us, internet users … You can’t voice out what you want to say, because you’re scared that you may be imprisoned or a case may be filed against you,” kulot said.

Under the libel provision, offenses include defamatory statements, even from ordinary conversations over tweets on Twitter, and shares, likes and comments on Facebook.

Another factor that escalated public tension in line with the passage of the law is the penalty clause, which states that any person who committed a libellous act on the internet is subjected to six (6) years imprisonment.

“The provision about the cyber libel, it says that the maximum penalty that could be imposed to whoever would violate the law is … a maximum of 6 years imprisonment,” Joderick Menorca, a professor and law student said. “Whereas, when we are talking about the traditional media, the maximum penalty for any libellous imprisonment is only for a maximum of 4 years … I don’t think that’s acceptable because it makes us fall into the trap of double jeopardy.”

Because of fifteen (15) petitions filed against the implementation of the act, the Supreme Court decided to suspend the said law by issuing a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) last October 9.

The court ordered a 120-day suspension of the execution of the law and scheduled oral arguments on January 15. The government was given 10 days to respond to the 15 petitions.


The Third Eye on Cybercrime Prevention Act from The Third Eye News Group on Vimeo.