TRO on RA 10175: Upholding People's Freedom of Opinion and Expression in the Internet

The Philippine Supreme Court issues a Temporary Restraining Order on Republic Act 10175 suspending the implementation of the law for 120 days until some of the controversial issues are resolved. Relative to the TRO, a total of 15 petitions have been filed in the Supreme Court. The petitioners stated that the law violated people’s constitutional rights on freedom of speech, equal protection of the law, right to privacy, illegal searches and seizures and double jeopardy.                                                                                                             

RA 10175 received protests and criticism from different sectors because of provisions giving power to the Secretary of Justice to block access to computer data even without a court order when there is prima facie evidence that the law is violated. Another controversial provision is the inclusion of libel which gives the offender one degree higher punishment than those who commit it through the traditional media. Libel is already covered by the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines.

Senator Edgardo Angara, the principal sponsor of the bill that becomes the law defended his position on the libel provision saying that online libel is given harsher penalty because of the speed of publication in the internet, and that online information covers a much larger area with just a click of a mouse than one that is published in the traditional media.  However, the probability is that outside the Philippines, except perhaps for the President of the Philippines and Manny Pacquiao and few others, the names of politicians who could be the subject of libelous posts might not ring a bell to other nationalities. People from other countries will most likely not click on posts they come across which contain names of people they do not know. Posts on Justin Bieber or on phenomena like flood, tsunami will by far get more views than those about wrongdoings by local Philippine politicians. Articles on local Philippine public officials that are in the internet will be most likely confined to viewers who are Filipinos or Filipinos living abroad.

In this contemporary time, people are living in a high tech world. They could transmit communications such as letters, news and videos in the internet that could reach the far corners of the world in real time.  For this reason, newspapers and other publications are disseminated both online and the traditional media. Even local newspapers which only a decade ago were available only in hard copies have now their online version.     

The internet is a molder of public opinion in this present day and age. The spread of the Arab Spring revolution was in a way facilitated by the users’ posts on Facebook and Twitter. In the Philippines, online newspaper commenters, bloggers and Facebook and Twitter users helped fan the negative sentiments against former chief Justice Renato Corona so that he became a very unpopular public figure during the height of his impeachment proceedings. It cannot be said though that the senators were influenced by public opinion when they rendered their guilty verdict on him.

President Aquino has for his slogan “matuwid na daan” or the straight path. And one of the advocacies of his government is to eliminate or minimize graft and corruption. The internet can be one of his effective platforms to convey his message or carry out his endeavors. Excesses and corruption committed by public officials can be dealt with by exposing them through the internet.

It is a good thing that the Supreme Court has issued a Temporary Restraining Order on the controversial Cybercrime Prevention Act which is enacted at a time when the international trend is to decriminalize libel. Although people should be held accountable for doing irresponsible acts online, their freedom of expression should be upheld. The showing of the controversial YouTube video “Innocence of Muslims” caused destruction of properties and lives of Americans including that of Ambassador  J. Christopher Stevens. However, the US government did not force YouTube to take the offensive video off the internet because of the people’s right to freedom of expression and opinion.

Legislators should heed the lawful and reasonable demand of the people especially if it involves the latter’s rights and freedoms that are provided for in the constitution. The lawmakers are after all the servants and representative of the people who should perform their duties according to the people’s will. The people, after all, have the final say on the elective officials’ retention in office or their dismissal from it.    

Related post:

Uproar over Philippine RA 10175 (Cybercrime Prevention Act)                                                                                                         

Uproar over Philippine RA 10175 (Cybercrime Prevention Act)

Online journalists, bloggers, other internet users, written and broadcast media people and ordinary Filipinos are up in arms against RA 10175 known as Cybercrime Prevention Act which was signed into law by President Benigno Aquino III on September 12, 2012 and is to take effect on October 3, 2012.

The Cybercrime Prevention Act empowers the government in the implementation of laws against people using cyberspace to commit offenses such as child pornography, cyber sex, human trafficking, identify theft, hacking, spamming, and other crimes.

But RA 10175 was received with concerns and apprehensions by some people because of some controversial provisions. A crime punishable under the Philippine Revised Penal Code if committed with the use of information and communication technologies shall have a penalty one degree higher than that provided by that code. For example, libel committed in the internet is fined one million pesos or US $24,000 and a maximum of twelve years imprisonment. On the other hand a libel committed through the traditional media is punishable by six years imprisonment and a fine of only six thousand pesos. A person is also liable for other crimes under the Revised Penal Code in addition to the one he commits in violations of RA 10175. Under section 19 of the act the Secretary of Justice if he or she finds prima facie evidence on violation of RA 10175 can issue order to block access to computer data or take down websites of suspected offenders.

Several persons filed petition to the Supreme Court to declare some provisions of RA 10175 as unconstitutional and need to be scrapped or amended. Some of the petitioners included Senator Teofisto Guingona lll who did not sign for the passage of the law and Professor Harry Roque of the University of the Philippines College of Law.  The New York based “Human Rights Watch” also urged the Philippine government to repeal or replace the Cybercrime Prevention Act.

Senator Teofisto Guingona III and other petitioners said that some provisions of RA 10175 are discriminatory and may result in the infringement of the fundamental rights of individuals under the constitution such as freedom expressions, privacy of communications, due process and the laws on double jeopardy. The petitioners also argued that some of the provisions such as the crime of libel are vague and may result to misinterpretations.  The petitioners stated that mere posting on tweeter or making comments on blogs and posts in social media such as Face book may send an internet user to 12 years in jail. Guingona asked the Supreme Court to issue a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) on the implementation of the controversial provisions until the issues have been decided.

Related to the signing of RA 10175 some of the government and private-owned websites such as  Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, Metro Manila Sewerage System, American Chamber of Commerce Philippines Incorporated and others were hacked. A group called “Anonymous Philippines” claimed responsibility for the act.

Senator Edgardo Angara author of RA 10175 defended the law saying that the internet has become a wild frontier where no due process is afforded to victim of legitimate internet-related crimes.  Malacañang on its part defended its signing saying that the bill passed several long deliberations in both houses of congress before it was submitted to the office of the president.

Except for the controversial provisions especially on libel, RA 10175 is designed to conform to the standard of international cyberspace laws. Majority floor leader Senator Vicente Sotto III admitted inserting some of the controversial provisions.  It is ironic that the passage of RA 10175 comes at a time when the international trend is to decriminalize libel.  Some people regarded some of its provisions as a step backward in upholding freedom of expression.                                                                                                                                                        

Surprised by the negative public reaction to the law, some senators especially Sen. Francis Escudero, who authors a pending bill decriminalizing libel, made statement that he committed an oversight when he indorsed the approval of the controversial law in the senate. Escudero along with Senator Alan Peter Cayetano adopt a joint resolution that will postpone the implementation of the controversial law otherwise it becomes effective and enforceable.                                                                                                                                                        

Internet users who post blogs, articles, videos, comments or other form of communication should exercise responsibility in doing it especially if their posts are defamatory or critical to other people or if they are against public decency or morals. Offensive posts might cause trouble to their authors later. Freedom of expression is not absolute, but it is one of our most precious freedoms. “I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death your right to say it,” Voltaire, the French enlightenment writer said.

Related topics:
Facebook, a Platform to Exercise the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression
Commenting on Online News and Articles
The Internet Is Mightier Than the Sword

The United States-Philippine Defense and Security Cooperation in Asia-Pacific

The rise of the Marxist Soviet Union after the Second World War put it in collision course with the United States the world’s another super power. Their competition for global leadership brought about the Cold War. The fall of China to the communist under Mao Zedong in 1949 made the United States to be more concerned of the spread of communism to other parts of the world. In connection with the global political and security concerns that were prevailing at that time, the United States and the Philippines signed a Mutual Defense Treaty on August 31, 1951 at Washington D.C. which called for the two nations to help each other if either of them is attacked by an external enemy within its territory. The term of the treaty is indefinite and ends one year after one of the parties notified the other of its desire to terminate the agreement.                                                 

During the Cold War, the US and the USSR fortunately did not engage each other physically which would have been catastrophic for the world. However, they did compete utilizing their client states and at times sent their own forces to participate in battles such as the war in Viet Nam and Afghanistan. The war in Korea ended in a stale mate. And the conflict in Cuba and the war in Viet Nam ended in communist victory. The support of the US of corrupt and repressive anti-communist dictators like Anastasio Somoza and Ferdinand Marcos made the US unpopular to the people where those leaders reigned. The dumping of hated dictators by the US when they were no longer useful to it had created an image of the US as untrustworthy ally.

Anti-US sentiment and distrust to the US were manifested in the Philippines in 1997 when the expiring US Bases Agreement of 1947 was to be renewed by the Philippine Senate. Despite US President’s George Herbert Walker Bush’s support of it and Philippine President’s Corazon Aquino’s intimate campaign to have it renewed, the Senators nevertheless rejected the agreement on September 13, 1991. The last American troops left the Philippines on November 24, 1992.

The incident on 9/11 in USA on the bombing of Twin Towers of New York precipitated to the US War on Terrorism. The threat posed by Abu Sayyaf which is linked with the Jemaah Islamiyah, an international terrorist organization, has rekindled military cooperation between the US and the Philippines in dealing with mutual security concern. Pestered by kidnappings and other terroristic activities perpetrated by the Abu Sayyaf, the Philippines welcomed the presence of limited number of US troops whose operations and conduct are regulated by the Visiting Forces Agreement between the US and the Philippines. The United States considers VFA as executive agreement that does not need the approval of the US Senate.                                                                                                                                                     

Despite the constitutional provision banning foreign forces in the Philippines, the government recognized its legitimacy. Former president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo invoked the 1951 RP-US Mutual Defense Treaty to justify presence of US troops. They are in the Philippines as advisers and trainers to the Armed Forces of the Philippines on counter-terrorism. They are also involved in civic action to help depressed communities in the south. So far, the partnership of US and Filipino troops has resulted to the killing of top Abbu-Sayaff leaders and the rescue of American kidnap victim Gracia Burnham on June 7, 2002.

Another matter that is of mutual security concern to the Philippines and the United States is the situation at South China Sea. At present the administration of President Benigno Aquino III is faced with the problem of conflicting claims of neighboring countries on shoals and islets in the South China Sea. A case in point is the Scarborough Shoal which is 198 kilometers off Subic Bay in the Philippine province of Zambales, and it is therefore within the Philippines’ 200 nautical kilometers exclusive economic zone (EEZ). However, it is also claimed by China. The situation becomes volatile for both countries, and the Philippines is in no position to uphold its claim militarily because of the economic strength and the influence of China in the global community.

The Philippines’ quest for the resolution of dispute on territorial boundary with China got a big boost when US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton aboard USS Fitzgerald signed the Manila Declaration on November 16, 2011, reaffirming US commitment to honor the Mutual Defense Treaty with the Philippines. The declaration was signed in the presence of her Filipino counterpart Foreign affairs Secretary Alberto del Rosario.

Furthermore, the US Senate passed Resolution 481 on June 5, 2012, calling for increased defense and security cooperation between the United States and the Philippines. President Aquino visited the White House to talk with US President Barack Obama in the second week of June 2012 on bilateral issues concerning economic, security and defense in the Asia-Pacific region.

US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has announced in Singapore that the US will position 60% of its naval ships in the Asia-Pacific region before the end 2020. That figure is an increase by 10% of the current  deployment of 50%. His pronouncement emphasized the importance of Asia Pacific in the US’s future economic and defense plans. The region is the home of the world’s second and third largest economies by GDP like China, and Japan plus the economic power houses such as South Korea, India, Singapore and Taiwan.

China’s economy is predicted to improve even more in the years to come and that it will even surpass that of the United States. China’s military power is also growing and it is modernizing its Peoples’ Liberation Army. Its military might and its aggressive stance in the South China Sea relative to its claims on the disputed areas are cause of concern to its neighbors.                                                                

The defense and security cooperation between the United States and the Philippines is highly beneficial not only to the national interest of both countries but also to the other countries in the region. The increased presence of the US Navy will maintain the balance of power in the South China Sea. It will make the waters in it accessible to international vessels for economic and other productive purposes. The Philippines with its strategic location is a valuable partner of the US in that endeavor. The Philippines also needs the US to protect its interest in the disputed Scarborough Shoal because its Armed Forces is poorly equipped. It needs a credible defense, and cooperative and friendly relations with other countries to sustain its economic growth. The Philippines at present is a new industrializing country which is the 45^th largest economy in the world by GDP. It is projected by HSBC to become the 16^th world largest economy by 2050.

Related posts:

China and Japan Territorial Dispute in East China Sea: a Flash Point in the Pacific

Martial Law: Marcos' Coup to Cling to Power

China and Philippine Dispute over Scarborough Shoal
The Historic Philippine-United States Relationship
The Communist Insurgency in the Philippines

China and Philippine's Dispute over Scarborough Shoal

Scarborough Shoal in the South China Sea has become a bone of contention between the Philippines and China. Both countries claim ownership of that barren shoal which is called Panatag by the Philippines and Huangyan by China. Scarborough shoal is composed of islets, reefs and an atoll. Beijing based its claim in history citing Yuan dynasty map of 1279 which included the shoal as part of its territory. The Philippines on the other hand premised its claim on geography since it is only about 123 nautical miles or 198 kilometer off Subic Bay while it is 350 nautical miles from China. The Philippines asserted that the shoal is within its 200-nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), and therefore it has the legitimate right to explore and use its marine resources in accordance with the UN Convention on the Laws of the Sea (UNCLOS).                                                                                                                  

Countries at the South China Sea such as China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Philippines and to a lesser extent Malaysia and Brunei have overlapping claims over the outlying group of small islands and reefs in that sea. However, China claims sovereignty over almost all of the disputed islands. The conflicting claims resulted to an armed confrontation between China and Vietnam in the Paracel and Spratly’s islands. That engagement went badly for Vietnam, and since then China secured the area with its troops. The Philippines also claim some of the areas such as the Panganiban Reef in the Spratly’s which is just 87 nautical miles off its province of Palawan. But the Chinese fished at the sea around it. When the Philippines protested, China responded by building a four- story military garrison there.  China insisted that it is part of its territory. After some saber-rattling the Philippines backed down.                                                                  

Scarborough Shoal is not a part of Spratly’s Islands, and the Philippine government considers it as part of its municipality of Masinloc, Zambales. But the Chinese government also considers it as its own. On April 10, 2012 eight Chinese vessels with their crew were caught by the Philippine Navy with corals, giant clams and live sharks at the shoal. In response, Chinese authorities then sent navy vessels to that area.  Although there was no armed engagement between the Chinese and the Philippine vessels, the presence of the Chinese Naval ships enabled the Chinese fishermen to get away.  Relative to the incident the Philippine ambassador was called from his embassy in China, and the Chinese authorities told him that the Philippine government should let alone Chinese fishermen at the shoal and that its navy should not be sent there.                                                                 

The Philippines however, is not in a mood to submit to the threat of its giant and powerful neighbor. It has signified its openness to the assistance of its long time ally, the United States in the dispute.  The United States has so far shown supportive but sometimes ambivalent position with regard to the issue. Prior to the May incident the US senate passed a resolution on June 2011 condemning China’s use of force against smaller countries in the area and affirmed US willingness to use its military might against China’s aggression in South the China Sea. The US and the Philippines also agreed to conduct joint military exercise in the Philippines, an activity which further alienated the Philippines from China.  Despite that resolution from the US senate, Secretary of State Hilary Clinton issued statement that the US will not take side in the event armed conflict erupts in South China Sea.

Dealing with the Philippine resoluteness, China engages its small neighbor in the economic front. It declared 150 containers of bananas as infected with pest and as a result the fruits just rot in the Southern Chinese ports. Chinese tourist bookings to Boracay Island, a popular tourist destination, were also cancelled. The Chinese account for the fourth largest tourist arrivals after the Koreans, Americans and Japanese. The sanction had an immediate impact on the affected businessmen who relayed to the Aquino administration their situation. The president advised them to look for markets and tourists elsewhere.

Some Filipinos view the event at Scarborough Shoal as an act of aggression and violation of their country’s sovereignty by China. They marched at the Chinese embassy in the Philippines on May 11, 2012. Parallel march was also conducted at Chinese embassies in other countries. Before that protest China issued an advisory to its citizen in those countries not to go out of their homes in that date. To ease the tension, the Philippines sent a communication to China that the protest was an exercise of its citizens’ right for the redress of their grievance, and it was not initiated in any way by the government.

China is the world’s second largest economy and the third largest in size in terms of total area. It has also the world’s second largest army with 2.3 million active troops that are supported with a whooping military budget of US $129 billion in 2011.  It is also a recognized nuclear weapon state. Indeed, by all accounts China is the strongest country in the area at the South China Sea and perhaps in all of Asia. A small and poor country like the Philippines has a very limited chance of success against China in a military conflict. However, the Filipinos are united behind the national leadership of President Aquino to defend and protect a territory that they think as rightfully belonging to them.                                                                                                                           

The Philippines has so far made move to settle its dispute with China over the Scarborough Shoal. It has tried to propose with China to bring the matter to the International Tribunal for the Laws of the Sea (ITLOS), but the latter refused. It has also tried to get the involvement of its neighbors to resolve the issue. But so far, those countries have not yet responded. And most of all the Philippines keeps its line of communication always open with china in resolving their disputes diplomatically.

The disputed islets, reefs and cays in the South China Sea are mostly barren, uninhabited and devoid of vegetation. Apart from being rich fishing ground, they have little economic value at present. However, speculations are rife that those groups of island sit on vast natural gas and fossil oil deposits.  And it is probably the reason why China would want to have all of the islets of the South China as its own. China is a newly industrialized country with the biggest fossil fuel consumption in the world.                                   

With its super power potential, increasing international influence as well as its growing economic and military powers, China may eventually possess and control all of the disputed islands in the South China Sea. The country that can deter or stop China most from its aggression is the United States, the only remaining super power in the world. China will think twice before locking horns with the most powerful and influential country of the world.  Although the US is indebted financially to China, the latter owes its prosperity with its trading with the US and other Western countries. The US can do better in having partnership with countries in the area other than China if the contested areas are indeed rich in deposits of oil and other underwater mineral resources. The control of China of important key trading route in the sea may not be good for the US in its global projection of power. Adherence to international laws such as UNCLOS by nations having conflicting territorial claims of the disputed areas is perhaps the best option to avoid armed conflicts among them.

Related post:
China and Japan Territorial Dispute in East China Sea: a Flash Point in the Pacific