Protesters seek repeal of Cybercrime Law provision on libel

MANILA, Philippines - Various sectors marched to the Senate yesterday to demand the repeal of provisions of  the Cybercrime Prevention Act increasing penalty for online libel.

They believe online libel is an infringement of the freedom of expression.

Senate President Franklin Drilon believes the debate over online libel could be addressed through a law decriminalizing libel “because right now libel is punished under the Revised Penal Code and the Cybercrime Law.”

“The only difference is the medium.We cannot say it is libelous if spoken in radio or printed in print and not libelous when it gets to the Internet. So the solution, and I endorse it, is we must decriminalize libel under the Revised Penal Code.” 

Drilon said the right way of dealing with the issue of libel in cybercrimes is to decriminalize libel in its totality. “If it’s libelous in one then it’s libelous in all. If it is decriminalized in one it is decriminalized in all. Because the elements of the crime does not include the medium that you use.” 

Sen. Teofisto Guingona III  said libel must be decriminalized because as long as libel exists as a criminal act under the Revised Penal Code, it must apply to traditional media as well as to new media, including the Internet.

“The point is why this time single out the use of computers?” he said. “Why not take out libel altogether? This time you’re discriminating against those who use the airwaves, those who use the print versus those who use the Internet. So let’s take it out.”

Opposing the Cybercrime Law

Marnie Tonson, Philippine Internet Freedom Alliance (PIFA) convenor and legal counsel, raised the issue of mass surveillance of the populace as in the case of former US National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden.

“What is the concern of the Philippine government to the 5-eyes network? Edward Snowden pointed to the Australian embassy as an active node in this 5-eyes network, which means that they are spying on Filipino citizens,”  he said.

“Our problem in the law is that it places every netizen under surveillance. Even if the Philippine government would say that there are still no acts of surveillance being conducted, as stated by Snowden, we are already under surveillance by the 5-eyes network.” 

Tonson said the Supreme Court ruled on the constitutionality of online libel  on Feb. 11, the global day against mass surveillance.

“This is important to note because in 2013, we were put on notice by the declarations of Snowden that there is a 5-eyes spy network already in place worldwide,”  he said.

He was among the resource persons at the joint hearing of the Senate committees on science and technology,   constitutional amendments and revision of codes, civil service, and finance.

Tonson said it will take a government official to ask any of the 5-eyes network countries: the United States, Australia, Great Britain, New Zealand and Canada.

“It is our concern that this type of cyber surveillance increases and will be promulgated by the IRRs of the cybercrime law,” he said.

The human rights framework of PIFA emphasizes that the Internet is an enabling human right covering freedom of expression and includes rights to privacy and freedom of association. 

Justice Assistant Secretary Geronimo Sy allayed fears that the government will place Filipino citizens under   surveillance.

“The fear on surveillance should not cramp the need for everyday law enforcement,” he said. “The fear of surveillance should be tempered by very strict administrative checks, the exercise of oversights of agencies, that our NBI which is beside me, will not do things with special knowledge that has been specially given,” referring to the National Bureau of Investigation. 

Sy said an online libel provision was not included when the law was originally crafted.

“So it bled our hearts... that for such as a technically simple and good piece of legislation that we end up having to defend it,” he said.  â€“ With Marvin Sy