‘Vague’ proposal to regulate social media use not provided by anti-terror law — CHR
MANILA, Philippines — A proposal to regulate social media use supposedly to counter terrorist activities and plans may have an effect on free speech and is not provided under the anti-terrorism law, the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) said.
CHR said on Tuesday that including restrictions on social media in the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of the said law may overreach into the constitutionally-guaranteed rights of the people, like the right to express their ideas without being compromised.
According to CHR spokesperson Jacqueline de Guia, such measures would only justify the fears of people who voiced displeasure over the said legislation.
“[…] The Commission on Human Rights expresses grave concerns over the proposal to include the regulation of social media in the IRR of the aforementioned law. Not only is the current proposal vague, it is also broad and susceptible to overreach in terms of guaranteeing the right to privacy and right of individuals to freely express their ideas,” De Guia said in a statement.
“Furthermore, as there is nothing in the law that allows for the regulation of social media, to push for the inclusion of such questionable provision would go beyond the legislative intent of the law, justifying instead the fears of the people already against the law,” she added.
Suggestions to include the regulation of social media in the still incomplete IRR came after Lt. Gen. Gilbert Gapay, the new Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), said that the military should capitalize on the “very good” Anti-Terror Law as it would mean the government preventing terrorist activities even before they are implemented.
“We will capitalize on this very, very good anti-terror law. It is comprehensive, it is proactive, it is geared to prevent the occurrence of terroristic acts,” Gapay said.
“They’re still planning but we should be able to stop already, deny them already,” he said in Filipino. “We will capitalize on that very good aspect of this anti-terror law.”
Gapay’s suggestions garnered various responses, with opposition Senator Franklin Drilon — who voted in favor of the said law when it was a bill — said that such restrictions are illegal and unconstitutional.
CHR said that measures intended to curtail crime and terrorism must never target legitimate dissent, which is the essence of democracy like one that the Philippines has.
“A free democratic society accepts and welcomes the free exchange of ideas […] Redress for wrongdoing, however, must not target legitimate dissent and honest opinions,” De Guia noted.
“At times when the discourse is critical and may seem discomforting, let critical points be taken in with an eye towards improvement. As development and nation-building is a collective effort, let us remember that the protection of fundamental freedoms are important to ensure that all voices are heard,” she added. [ac]
