Philippine Cybercrime Prevention Act

On September 12, 2012, President Benigno Aquino III signed the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 into law. It shall take effect fifteen days after the completion of its publication in the Official Gazette or in at least two newspapers of general circulation.

Looking at it positively, the law is enacted to encourage an accelerated and rational development of the “application and exploitation of information and communications technology.  It is also meant “to protect and safeguard the integrity of computers, computer and communications systems, networks, and the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information and data stored therein, from all forms of misuse, abuse, and illegal access by making punishable under the law such conduct or conducts.”

The punishable acts enumerated under the law are:

1.  Offenses against the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of computer data and systems such as illegal access; illegal interception; data interference; cyber-squatting; and misuse of devices.

2. Computer-related offenses such as computer-related Forgery; and computer-related Fraud;

 3. Content-related offenses such as cybersex; child pornography; unsolicited commercial communications;

 4. Libel; and

 5. Other offenses such as aiding or abetting in the commission of cybercrime; and attempt in the commission of cybercrime.

Misuse, abuse, and illegal access are the key words that define the offenses. They should be read, interpreted, and enforced together with the Bill of Rights that the Constitution provided for its citizens.

The Constitution states; “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.” – Section 4, Article III

It should be emphasized that this constitutional provision supersedes any statutory law.  While in some cases Libel is a way to check the abuse of the Freedom of Speech or of the Press, the latter is as strong a protection against abusive use of Libel laws to harass and silence citizens in freely expressing their views and/or distributing information, data, and knowledge online or offline.

“The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of the court, or when public safety or order requires otherwise as prescribed by law.” – Section 3, Article III

The provisions of the Act relating to the offenses should also be read, interpreted, and enforced together with Section 3, Article III of the Constitution because they also touch on the privacy of the citizen's communications and contents or libraries stored in his computer/s or electronic devices and even online through the cloud.

This is especially true when the specific provision under Section 2, Article III of the Constitution is taken into consideration.  This provision states,

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge after examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.”

The enactment of a Cybercrime law in the Philippines is a good start. We can no longer be isolated from the virtual world.  Having been dubbed as the Twitter, Facebook, Text, and Call Center Capital of the World, it is now incumbent upon the Philippine Government to monitor, regulate and protect the lawful behavior and rights of netizens as well as to prevent and punish the misuse, abuse, and illegal use of these rights by others.

The Office of Cybercrime within the Department of Justice (DOJ) to be the central authority in all matters related to international mutual assistance and extradition will be created.

A National Cyber Security Center within the Department of Science and Technology-Information and Communications Technology Office (DOST-ICTO) will also be created to formulate and implement a national cybersecurity plan, and extend technical assistance for the suppression of real-time commission of cybercrime offenses through a Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT).

The National Cybersecurity Coordinating Council (NCCC) under the Office of the President will, most importantly, be created to formulate and implement the national cybersecurity plan.

By the creation of the above-mentioned offices; the search, recruitment, and training of the personnel manning such offices; the training of the judges, prosecutors and the staff of the courts that would be trying potential cases; and the allocation of more funds (the initial budget of P50-M is small) to finance the implementation and enforcement of the law, should get the Philippines as a cyber law nation up and going.

One significant observation on my part is why the Senators and Congressmen failed to include in the recently enacted law a provision that deals with Intellectual Property Crimes such as those that deal with violating Copyrights (original expression of an idea); Trademarks (Identify Source of goods and services); Trade Secrets; and Patent Rights. The infringement is usually massive in scale and is akin to theft.

Section 1, Article III of the Constitution touches on this issue;

“No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.”

The Copyrights including written works; Trademarks; Trade Names; Trade Secrets; and Patents are properties that are protected by the Constitution and should also be safeguarded against theft or misappropriation either online or offline.

Violations against Intellectual Property Rights are always included in Cybercrime laws in the United States and other countries. In my Computer/Cyber Crimes class, we had extensive discussions on Intellectual Property Crimes. There was none on Libel.

This is probably an inadvertent omission on the part of the legislators because of their focus on debating the RH Bill and Plagiarism/Copyright Infringement charges led by Senators Sotto (Anti) and Pia Cayetano (Pro).

My barber is also asking me if the Parliamentary Immunity of legislators is limited to the physical boundaries of the walls of Congress. If a legislator commits a cybercrime, is he still protected by the immunity? :)