Article 3. Section 4. “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.”

Probably you know my purpose why am I writing this and why you were interested reading this. Recently the Cyber Crime Law or the RA 10175 was implemented. If you were not able to read that yet, let me give you an idea. This simply aims to protect everyone from Cyber Crimes like bullying, hacking, and child pornography.

Well that’s what everybody knows. But hidden in the law were the prohibition of downloading online stuffs through the use torrents and other downloading software. Retweeting and copying/quoting tweets, Liking or commenting on Facebook status and comments are also part of the prohibitions.

Is this redundant? Libel, as defined in Article 353 of the Revised Penal Code, is a “public and malicious imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status or circumstance tending to discredit or cause the dishonor or contempt of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who is dead.” This can be in the form of “writing, printing, lithography, engraving, radio, phonograph, painting, theatrical exhibition, cinematographic exhibition, or any similar means.” So my point is, Internet is also one of those publications, right? So, why adding libel to a new law if it’s already implemented?

Understanding the law itself is very important before campaigning/ protesting for what you think is right. I don’t urge you to something that is unlawful, but instead, I’m trying to explain to you what I understand about the law in layman’s term. Re-read the law, it says there that you’re liable if you posted something that is malicious or if you liked a malicious post of a friend or retweeted someone’s malicious work. So that’s clear. But up to what extent can you say a post is malicious or degrading? I mean, how about the freedom of speech? Can bloggers still post something like criticisms or opinions on what is happening around them? How about those people who just wanted to express their feelings about a certain topic online? This is probably an eye-opener for those who voted for the law to be implemented. Our freedom of speech is at stake.

How ready are we?

• Those Photos that were trendy in Facebook, those humorous edited photos are no more allowed in the net.
• Those typography about a certain person that either way teaching the person described or the readers are also prohibited.
• Blogs about what you think is wrong is also at stake.
• You can’t even download a free song in the internet, are ready to buy CDs again?
• No free software installers anymore. Ready to spend thousands of pesos to buy copyrighted materials in the store even if it’s already allowed to be downloaded online before?
• Ready to erase some said to be malicious comments to your friend even if you both know you were just joking?
• Liking of what Juan dela Cruz said to Uncle Sam even if they’re just teasing each other is now prohibited. Are you ready to explain to the police that you just liked what they said to each other?
• You can’t retweet anymore what your mean friend stated about her bad day and enemies even if your purpose is just to tell your followers that you’re having the same experience as hers.

I guess at some points we’re still not ready. I mean, this is not what we wanted the law to become.

Some senators and bloggers are against the implementation. Written on PhilStar article by Edu Punay “A total of seven petitions against RA 10175 were included and consolidated in the session of the justices and assigned to Associate Justice Presbitero Velasco Jr. as writer of the decision or ponente.

Five petitions were filed last week by businessman Louis Biraogo, a group of journalists belonging to Alab ng Mamamahayag (ALAM), a group of bloggers and Internet law experts led by Jose Jesus Disini Jr. of the Internet and society program of UP College of Law, Sen. Teofisto Guingona III and another group of journalists, bloggers and lawyers led by UP law professor Harry Roque Jr.

The two others were filed last Monday by a group of lawmakers, bloggers, members of academe and students led by Kabataan party-list Rep. Raymond Palatino; and militant groups Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (Bayan), Anakpawis, Karapatan and Kilusang Mayo Uno. “

A Black Protest by Bayan Muna Rep. Teddy Casiño and his supporters together with the members of the Philippine Internet Freedom Allaince was made. They’re currently protesting for the placing of provisions for online libel.

Social Networking sites namely Facebook and Twitter users are now joining the protest by changing their profile pictures into a black color picture.

And also according to the article, implementing of the said law is already inexorable.

For the Damage control, Sen. Francis Escudero prepared a bill to repeal certain provisions of the RA 10175, particularly libel.

I guess we have to take extra care now of what we are posting on the internet. We should deliberate before we post. Funny but true.

We don’t have to be vetoed on something that is not harsh enough to degrade someone, especially when we are just expressing want we know is right to say to a friend or a colleague. Somehow the law is good for those who were bullied online and those who’ll be protected from child pornography and bashers. But it’s not rational enough to prohibit us from commenting, liking and even downloading stuffs online.

As a writer, I post this because I want readers to know the two sides of the law. Writing with my knowledge about media ethics as a communication student and a future media practitioner, I believe I’m protected by Article 3 Section 4 of The 1987 Philippine Constitution, but hey! RA 10175 is already implemented, what now?

Post Carefully. Comment Gently. 🙂