Anti-cybercrime law groups start vigil at SC

A+
A
A-

Students, bloggers troop to the Supreme Court on the eve of the oral argument on the petition against the Cybercrime law. INQUIRER.net/Tetch Torres

MANILA, Philippines—A day before the face-off between the government and the anti-Cybercrime law advocates before the Supreme Court, protesters started a vigil at the Supreme Court Monday.

Called “we’re watching you” vigil, participants include members of the College Editors Guild of the Philippines (CEGP), Kabataan partylist, bloggers and cultural performers.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will conduct the oral argument on the 16 petitions filed against Republic Act 10175 or the Anti-Cybercrime Law.

Anti-Cybercrime activities will continue on Tuesday morning with protesters gathering before the Supreme Court as early as 9 a.m.

“Protesters are set to gather as early as 9am along Padre Faura. Black is our color and #notocybercrimelaw our hashtag,” Bayan Secretary General Renato Reyes said in a text message.

“We remind the public that this is Aquino’s cybercrime law. He’s the reason why we are before the high court. We’re not hoping at this point for any congressional amendments, not with the upcoming elections and with Aquino’s stubborn defense of the law. The ball is now with the SC,” Reyes further stated.

The high court, in its advisory, included the cybersex provision under RA 10175 as among the issues to be tackled during the oral argument and whether or not the law that penalizes cybersex violates the constitutional right to free expression.

Those who will argue on Tuesday are UP law Professor Harry Roque Jr., Bayan Muna Rep. Neri Colmenares, Philippine Bar Association legal counsel Rodel Cruz, UP Prof. Jesus Disini, and Julius Matibag of the National Union of People’s Lawyers.

Roque, who was one of the petitioners, will discuss the libel provisions in the law and if such provision violated the due process of law, equal protection of the law, right to free expression and protection against double jeopardy. He will also discuss the cybersex provision.

Colmenares meanwhile will discuss the unconstitutionality and vagueness of the cybercrime law’s Sections 6 and 7, which pertains to “abetting or aiding” in the commission of a cybercrime, as well as separate conviction for the same crime under the Revised Penal Code. On the other hand, Disini will tackle Section 12 which authorizes the real-time collection of traffic data, while Cruz will discuss Section 19 or the “take-down” clause in the law empowering the Department of Justice to restrict or block access to computer data found to be in prima facie in violation of provisions of RA 10175.

Matibag will argue about Section 5, which was about allegedly undermining the constitutionally guaranteed right to free speech.

Each counsel will have 10 minutes to present their argument while the justices will take turns interpellating them.

The Office of the Solicitor-General will argue on Jan. 22.

Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of INQUIRER.net. We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.

  • http://twitter.com/erncastillo ern

    tanungin nyo nga ang mga nasa rally kung alam nila ang ibig sabihin ng cybercrime.

    • Tigsik

      Go ahead, you can ask me. You have all my attention.

    • Jhonry C. Dela Cruz

      Sige. Tanungin mo kami anytime. Alam na alam naman namin eh.
      Di kami tanga. Inaalam naman namin ang mga pinaglalaban at nilalabanan namin. :)

    • commentsandsuggestions

      tara, pagusapan natin! baka mas marami pang alam yung bata naming kasama kesa sayo

  • rayingga

    Pabor na sana ako sa mga petitioner ng bigla kung nabasa ang pangalan ni Renato Reyes kaya kalaban na uli nila ako. Cong. Colmenares kung di mo sinama si Renato Reyes wala ka sanang problema. I hate that man… cummie.

    • Rally sa Chinese Embassy

       that makes you an ignorant jologs

    • Tigsik

      No, you are not that important to even be worthy of anyone’s attention. No one cares who you hate. And what is “cummie” anyway?

  • Albert Einstien

    ina-alis na nga halos sa BOUNG MUNDO yan crime of libel….ALAM naman ng SC na unconstitutional yan …masyado lang TAKOT sa MULTO ng PAGNANAKAW ang mga POLITIKO natin kaya AYAW nila mabanatan ng PUNA sa cyberspace ng taong bayan…at MABULGAR mga BAHO nila..pati .yan FOI sa lower house ina-amag na..si pnoy PLASTIC ELEKSYON 2010 pa nya IPINAG-MAMALAKI yan..ng NAUPO naging OROCAN na FOI…si corona nga HALF DAY lang napa-IMPEACHED na nila….GRABE

    DOUBLE is the NEW NORMAL under pnoy’s watch: DOUBLE STANDARD, DOUBLE TALK, DOUBLE FACE, DOUBLE LIES… hayahay…

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1353007393 Eugene Japsay

    Bakit yung cybersex ang dinadahilan nila eh sila nga yung nag pass ng RH bill ? isn’t ironic to think it through ? It’s a desperate move to pass that libel , is it because the pigs want more ?

  • disqusted0fu

    The anti cybercrime law is just another way for the administration to take advantage of their power. As the rest of the people are limited in expressing their opinions online, the administration will continue to do so because they see themselves being above the law.

  • bugoybanggers

    Hala ka? Ano to papogi? Aba mga aktibista gusto ng Freedom of the Internet? FREEDOM ng mga COMMUNIST? Nakakapagtataka, bakit hindi sila papuntahin ng North Korea at subukan nilang mga rally doon o sa Beijing, China.. bakit sa Manila sila dumadakdak ng FREEDOM!  Iyan kasi ang mali ng GOBIERNO ng Pilipinas, matagal ng minumungkahi na bigyan ng airplane ticket o ihatid na lang ng Philippine Airforce ang lahat ng mga aktibistang maka kaliwa pa NORTH KOREA at doon na sila patirahin, damain nila ang pagiging komunista nila eh itong Gobierno naman ay patulog tulog pa yata sa pansitan?

To subscribe to the Philippine Daily Inquirer newspaper in the Philippines, call +63 2 896-6000 for Metro Manila and Metro Cebu or email your subscription request here.

Factual errors? Contact the Philippine Daily Inquirer's day desk. Believe this article violates journalistic ethics? Contact the Inquirer's Reader's Advocate. Or write The Readers' Advocate:

c/o Philippine Daily Inquirer Chino Roces Avenue corner Yague and Mascardo Streets, Makati City,Metro Manila, Philippines Or fax nos. +63 2 8974793 to 94