"The total banning of a facility that lets people exercise these basic freedoms is constitutionally infirm," Daluz said in his 2-page report.
Councilors Jocelyn Pesquera and Hilario Davide III also signed the report, councilors Procopio Fernandez and proponent Edgardo Labella did not, while councilor Gerardo Carillo who owns an Internet café abstained in the voting.
Labella, laws committee chairman, proposed the ban arguing its necessity to prevent the proliferation of pornography and cyber sex inside these Internet cafes.
Daluz insisted in his report that cubicles in Internet cafes accord privacy to customers, and provide reasons for customers to patronize these establishments.
"Before the advent of web cams, there was the telephone and there was phone sex but we didn't ban phone cubicles. Now that we have the Internet, and web cams, and pornography, and cyber sex, and what have you, we are banning Internet cubicles. What happens to privacy and freedom of choice?" Daluz argued.
Daluz contended: "Shall we allow downright curtailment of this maximum benefit because of the perceived evil of pornography and cyber sex?"
Daluz said it is already up to the discerning public to judge for themselves and to make a choice because these practices are already a strictly personal matter, which a person needs to address with the kind of decision that he or she alone could make.
"There is no question about the nobility of purpose in the proposed ordinance but the means to achieve that purpose maybe tainted with legal infirmities and may have overstepped on constitutional guarantees," Daluz said.
During the deliberation, Labella disagreed with the Daluz report arguing that as public servants, "we have a mandate to promote and protect the morals of the young people. The public interest here is the safety of our young people."
Vice Mayor Michael Rama later told members of the council to reserve their comments for the final deliberations and approval of the ordinance. - Garry B. Lao