PHNO-HL: AQUINO MAY BE OUSTED FOR CYBERCRIME LAW, SAYS LAWMAKER

AQUINO MAY BE OUSTED FOR CYBERCRIME LAW, SAYS
LAWMAKER

MANILA, OCTOBER 8, 2012 (INQUIRER) By Jerome Aning, Cathy
Yamsuan - Kabataan party-list Rep. Raymond Palatino, one of the complainants
against newly enacted Republic Act No. 10075 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of
2012, on Sunday said President Benigno Aquino could be impeached for enforcing
the controversial law.
Palatino said the President's insistence on the retention of the libel
provisions in the law would result in the abridgement of the freedom of speech,
which would made the Chief Executive liable for impeachment on the grounds of
culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayal of the public trust.
"If Aquino is insisting that we accept the new law, not only is he violating
the Constitution, he is also betraying the public's trust, both of which are
impeachable offenses," Palatino said.
The Supreme Court is expected to tackle over 10 petitions against the
cybercrime law during an en banc session tomorrow. Yet another petition will
reportedly be filed Monday by Bayan Muna led by Rep. Neri Colmenares.
"We warn you P-Noy (Aquino), masquerading as a 'clean' President doesn't make
you unimpeachable. If you continue to betray the public's trust, the masses are
ready to call not only for your impeachment but for your ouster," Palatino said.

Palatino did not say if he would initiate the impeachment complaint against
the President.
Both the House and the Senate, which would act as the impeachment prosecutor
and court, respectively, are dominated by Aquino allies.
The President on Friday said he did not agree that the provision on online
libel should be removed and that he had to enforce the law—otherwise he could be
"impeached for dereliction of duty."
Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago, chairperson of the Senate committee on
constitutional amendments and revision of laws, predicted the Supreme Court
would declare it unconstitutional, citing the "overbroad and too vague" language
used in the law's provisions.
Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile urged the public to let the Supreme Court
deal with the Cybercrime Prevention Act.
"Let's leave it in the hands ("ipaubaya na natin") of the Supreme Court.
That's how the system works. Besides, we (lawmakers) cannot say we are always
right. We are not gods. If something goes wrong in the executive or legislature,
there is the Constitution and the Supreme Court to make a decision," Enrile said
in Filipino.
But Enrile insisted that the Senate observed proper procedures when it
debated on and eventually approved its version of the cybercrime bill.
However, he lamented that he was not able to fully monitor the debates that
happened in December.
Enrile admitted he was not an expert on the Internet or information
technology. Also, he said he was too busy preparing for his role as presiding
officer of the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona when the debates
took place.
Earlier reports said that during the December interpellations, the debates
centered on the definition and penalties for sex-related offenses like cybersex.
The online libel provision was not discussed extensively at the time.
Anti-cybercrime law: It may be harsh to call me a
cybercriminal, but the new law says I am By Alfredo Morales-Santos
Philippine Daily Inquirer 11:06 pm | Thursday, October 4th, 2012
Most people would agree that there is a need to curb the prevalence
of cyberbullying. But should it be at the expense of free speech?
Like the lights on a building going out one by one, I watched my newsfeed on
Facebook and Twitter get crowded with black squares as people switched their
headers and profile pictures to demonstrate their protest against the
anti-cybercrime law.
A screen capture of an inane question from a senatorial aspirant, on whether
the law infringes on the freedom of expression, was immediately trending.
Sen. Tito Sotto, everyone's favorite punching bag, was immediately at the
forefront of the discussion, landing in Forbes. National heroes like José Rizal
and Apolinario Mabini were pictured gagged with a censoring black bar. The
Internet Armageddon is about to hit Philippine cyberspace.
The anti-cybercrime law received outright condemnation from various sectors
in and outside the Philippines. The primary issue against it is the provision on
cyberlibel snuck in by Sen. Tito Sotto, who proudly admitted it, and sees
nothing wrong with having done so.
A columnist in Forbes magazine said the law, due to the provision on
cyberlibel, makes the Stop Online Piracy Act (Sopa) in the US seem reasonable,
as the latter only seeks to take down "file-sharing." International
organizations, along with the local human rights watch, had expressed concerns
that this is a step backward for the Philippines, which is already behind the
international community in decriminalizing libel.
Exception
Under the new law, cyberlibel imposes a penalty of reclusion perpetua, a
greater penalty than ordinary libel. Sotto reasoned that if mainstream media are
liable for ordinary libel, what is so special with bloggers and users of social
media that merits exception to the threat of penalty? He says the law will make
the people act more responsibly on cyberspace. He is on a mission to civilize,
to single-handedly change the culture on the Internet.
"Yes, I did it. I inserted the provision on libel. Because I believe in it
and I don't think there's any additional harm."—Sen. Vicente "Tito" Sotto III
(in an article written by Paul Tassi, published in www.forbes.com, Oct. 2).
Statements like this, in the word of the Forbes columnist, only reveals a
lack of understanding of how the Internet works. It is saddening because it also
shows a disconnect between the upper rung of the power structure in the
Philippines and the general populace, particularly with the middle class, who
use the Internet to express grievances against the government.
This does a great disservice to the cause. Most people would agree that there
is a need to curb the prevalence of cyberbullying. But should it be at the
expense of free speech? The problem with the provision on cyberlibel is, it is
vague, with enough wiggle room to enable the government to crack down on
dissenters.
Internet giant Google, the second most valuable company in the world,
decreed, "Democracy works on the Web." Cyber-space recently showed this in
action on Reddit, when a college student posted a photo of a Sikh woman sporting
body hair. It immediately received a backlash, and overturned the table in favor
of the woman who shared her belief with the users of the social media.
There are studies that show that anonymity on the Internet makes people more
mean, because it allows them to escape accountability. Websites, especially news
outlets, responded to this problem by installing the service Disqus, which
obliges readers to use Facebook and other social media to identify themselves,
to allow readers to comment. This has resulted in more intelligible discourses
on the web.
There is still the problem of fictitious accounts. But it's a problem that is
nearing a solution, too. Facebook has recently cracked down on fake accounts on
their website. The point is, like a free market, the Web has a way of regulating
and correcting itself without need for too much interference from the
government.
Jeff Jarvis, in his book "What Would Google Do," documents how netizens use
the Internet to express their dissatisfaction with corporation. Jarvis popularly
took on hardware maker Dell due to its bad customer service. He subsequently
collaborated with the tech giant on how to make their product better. Jarvis
continues on this theme, expounding on how the Internet enables "power sharing"
between corporations and the ordinary consumer. The concentration of power in
corporation is democratized through the Internet—and it works!
This is the same thing that's happening in the Philippines. Filipinos are the
top users of social media websites like Facebook. We have shifted from being the
text capital of the world to being the social-media capital of the world. It was
only a matter of time when this shift also influenced how we govern ourselves.
Filipinos quickly express their grievances against the government on Facebook
newsfeed, instead of physically taking it to the parliaments of the streets.

Government leaders and officers were quickly dumbfounded by the instant
publicity for their inactions and mistakes. They found themselves in a situation
where their power meant nothing. The Internet has shifted control to the
Filipinos on Facebook and Twitter.
But there are government leaders who quickly acknowledged this reality. Sen.
Pia Cayetano and Sen. Chiz Escudero are among the popular politicians on
Twitter, and they engage their followers and address their grievances.
Escudero said the cyberlibel provision was a mistake, while Cayetano
admitted, on Twitter, that she missed out on the provision.
New media
President Aquino actively used social media in his 2010 campaign, even
installing a New Media group under Leah Navarro of the Black and White Movement.
Interestingly, Sotto is inactive on social media.
To be fair to President Aquino, his only course of action is to sign the law
or veto it as a whole (line vetoing is only allowed in budget acts). He must
have weighed the good and the bad of the law, and found that there is a pressing
need to curb evils like child pornography, piracy and hacking, among others. The
ball is now with the Supreme Court, and it is up to them to strike down
provisions that it deems in conflict with the Constitution. Escudero and
Cayetano have already filed an amending bill.
The fiasco over the anti-cybercrime law only goes to show the ability of
Internet users to influence government and serve as a platform to counter
legislation and policies that are deemed detrimental to the people. Leaders are
able to quickly see the clamor for it, and respond. Not only does the Internet
make for a participative government; it also compels the government to be more
responsive.
My newsfeed is still on a blackout. It makes chatting a little tricky, but
it's a small sacrifice to make to take a stand against the provision on
cyberlibel.


Chief News Editor: Sol Jose Vanzi
© Copyright, 2012 by PHILIPPINE HEADLINE NEWS ONLINE
All
rights reserved




PHILIPPINE
HEADLINE NEWS ONLINE [PHNO] WEBSITE


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------
Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/phnotweet

This is the PHILIPPINE HEADLINE NEWS ONLINE (PHNO) Mailing List.

To stop receiving our news items, please send a blank e-mail addressed to: phno-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Please visit our homepage at: http://www.newsflash.org/

(c) Copyright 2009. All rights reserved.
-------------------------------------------------------------Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/phno/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/phno/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
phno-digest@yahoogroups.com
phno-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
phno-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/