We should fear no law - 'The truth shall set us free'

“The truth shall set us free”…so it was written. Information liberates. Suppress its flow and people will cower in the dungeons of ignorance.

The best man is the one who is well informed. We need to be informed otherwise we will not know how deep the floodwater is. Years ago, information was passed on using the smoke signal, the bird, the horse, the mail, the radio, the telephone, and the telegram. Today, we have the magic of Internet that brings information where it is needed. Our lives have been invaded by what is now called the social networks. Social networking has become a part of our daily existence, young and old alike.

Facebook, Twitter, Skype, Real-Time, Face-Time, Linkedln, MySpace, Google, Yahoo, Devian Art, LiveJournal, Tagged, Orkut, Pinterest, CafeMom, Ning, Meetup, myLife, Badoo, etc. are (or were) meant to make life more convenient, more comfortable, and more fun. Everything now is just a Wi-Fi away. Bloggers are now part of our everyday milieu. This cyberspace has become the world’s leading platform of messages, opinions, ideas and information that people want to put across whenever they are online.

Just an hour ago I was chatting with a friend (face to face using my laptop) on the other side of the world, something that was beyond imagination before the advent of the computers and the Internet. Yet, from the fire down to the other inventions of man, these wonders of cyber-technology could bring nightmares too, when abused, misused, or illegally used.

The Filipino family now seldom eats together and laughs together, because the son cannot leave his Temple Run, the daughter is on Twitter, the mother is on Facebook and the father is playing on-line poker. More unfortunately, lives have been ruined because of cyber-bullying, cyber-scam, identity theft, cyber-pornography, cyber-human trafficking, cyber-libel, or even plain cyber-tsismis and the like. We never thought that one day, our personal lives will be known to many, our innermost secrets divulged, our financial capability out in the open, security in all aspects of our lives compromised, our day to day activities monitored, and our lives controlled by hooligans! Sanamagan!

On one side of the coin, we are enjoying cyber space. But on the other side, it has become a nightmare for others. No one will be spared – in time if no controls are put, maybe you too will become a victim of it!

The Philippine Congress enacted Republic Act 10175, known as the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, to protect individuals against, and punishes, among others: (1) Online fraud and identity theft; (2) Hacking or offenses against the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of computer data and systems; (3) Cyber-pornography; and (4) Willful engagement, maintenance, control, or operation of cybersex operations for profit or consideration. These offenses are without doubt, destructive and pernicious offenses that should be penalized by the state.

Republic Act 10175 is good. The law is timely and relevant, addressing crimes which indeed are fast becoming pervasive evils in a society controlled by technology. I just wonder though why this law was passed faster than the RH Bill. My golly! Everyone was caught by surprise on this bill. No ifs and buts…presto the President signed it without batting an eyelash. How I wish the Senate and the President can also do the same for the RH Bill.

Just like any law, this is not perfect. There are provisions that need to be amended. With around 11 petitions that have been filed before the Supreme Court questioning the constitutionality of this new law, the lawmakers who themselves signed and passed the law have already openly declared their intentions to change some provisions.

Debates abound regarding the validity and constitutionality of the libel provision (Section 4[4]) as well as the risk of and possibility of double jeopardy (Section 7). As a journalist, I would always welcome the decriminalization of libel, without prejudice to an award of civil damages in favor of the victim. Or an alternative could be a fine only, not imprisonment, that can be imposed as penalty for libel, similar to the present treatment of a violation of the Bouncing Checks Law. On the other hand, this should not be a big deal because libel is not at all new in our criminal law books.

The freedom of expression is not at all absolute, and for as long as we become responsible in the exercise of this freedom and avoid maliciously maligning our fellowmen, we can still live with Section 4[4]. From where I stand, I do not think that mere liking a libelous message would also make one the author thereof and therefore responsible for the offense committed. But if we find a comment libelous, would it not be irresponsible for us to pass it on to others? As to the possibility of double jeopardy, this could be raised in court when a proper controversy arises. If indeed it will constitute double jeopardy, there is no need to worry because the Constitution that prohibits it is supreme.

Most chilling however, to borrow the words of netizens, are the real-time collection of traffic data (Section 12) and what is now called the takedown provision (Section 19) of the Cybercrime Prevention Act. Sections 12 and 19 empowers, without seemingly adequate and sufficient limits, the executive department “to effectively prevent and combat [cyber] offenses by facilitating their detection, investigation and prosecution at both the domestic and international levels, and by providing arrangements for fast and reliable international cooperation.” The takedown provision in particular authorizes the executive branch to block Internet access of anyone they suspect to have violated the law without a court order. Understandably, there is justification for this seeming procedural shortcut because if a website promotes child pornography, terrorism or other serious cyber-crimes, it is to the best interest of the state to block Internet access thereto at once.

Yet, we cannot ignore the reasons why many are worried and frightened by this extra-ordinary power, not because of what it legally allows, but because of the possibility of its abuse by the enforcers in the executive branch. The constitution is clear that no search warrant or warrant of seizure may be issued except upon probable cause to be determined by a judge. Section 19 however does not require probable cause but only prima facie evidence determined not even by a judge but by the Department of Justice.

Cyber-technology is a blessing that should not be abused, misused or illegally used. We should all know when to use it, how to use it, and what to use it for. With these parameters, we should fear no law because – “The truth shall set us free”.