Miriam Defensor against CybercrimeLaw
By mrsuniega
@mrsuniega (786)
Philippines
October 9, 2012 8:40am CST
Increased legislators still believe the controversial unconstitutional cybercrime prevention act after Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago says the said law uses language that are broad or overboard.
Sen. Santiago believes that the Supreme court declared the law unconstitutional and give to such growing petition filed primarily of netizen group.
Furthermore,the Senator state that the act has a chilling effect because it would encompass immense which also covers the free expression of the people.
Clearly the constitution is absolute "No Law Shall be passed abridging the freedom of Speech".
So TRO shall imposed to Cybercrime Prevention Act.
3 responses
@rsa101 (40987)
• Philippines
10 Oct 12
I am no lawyer and reading the law was really not that conscious about anything chilling or anything to that effect. But I only understand that the libel law was indeed kind of harsh and I also read about the provision on it that the state can stop a website if they see its content unacceptable.
I believe they can revised or refine the law but junking it is not necessary. I think that the law itself is a necessity to protect everyone from the real cybercriminals. It should be defined else many of these criminals can easily get out and victimized more without the law.
1 person likes this
@mrsuniega (786)
• Philippines
10 Oct 12
the libel is one of the punishable act in the controversial cybercrime prevention act and the provision you are talking is the Sec. 19. well it's really a freedom of speech killer. glad that they have now issue TRO regarding this matter.
1 person likes this
@jeanneyvonne (5500)
• Philippines
10 Oct 12
@rsa. Also not a lawyer but the punishment is really harsh compared other heinous crimes. I think this was what irked people (particularly the netizens) the most. Of course, the law is beneficial to some extent but there are some provisions where it was really out of bounds. The whole law should not entirely be repealed but I think many people will be satisfied if the addressed concern (the punishment and libel provision) will be changed
@mrsnuiega. Yes, finally the SC acted on this. It might look suspicious if they didn't.
@rsa101 (40987)
• Philippines
10 Oct 12
Well I guess senate should be more careful in drafting and making laws. I think they should be careful next time when doing a landmark law.
I think SC was force to issue the TRO because there is nonstop filing for it to request the law to be reviewed and acted upon by SC. I was suspecting that since the SC is more likely to be allied with the administration since CJ was just newly appointed they could not deny the fact that there was just an enormous protest against that law and the non stop filing of petitions in SC.
For this, I just hope that the real cybercriminals have nothing to do with this since I know they are the ones who will be most affected by it. I know they can join the protest so that at least they can buy more time to victimized more.
@jdalaqui (1073)
• Philippines
12 Oct 12
I for one is not so much bothered about the cyber crime law. As long as you are not violating degrading someone or violating the higher law, God's law, then you should not fear such a law. It's harsh but sometimes, there is a need to impose such to regulate irresponsible use of the so called freedom of expression.
@rog0322 (2828)
• Cagayan De Oro, Philippines
11 Oct 12
Hi,
I do like the Lady Merriam is spite of her fiery way of making her point which always hit home. I don't want to be at the receiving end of it. This time, maybe she has a point, TRO on no TRO, they who caused this law should see to it that the freedom of expression shall never be infringed.
