Noy backs SC decision upholding online libel
President Aquino expressed support yesterday for online libel, saying it would not curtail freedom of expression.
The President said he has not read the entire Supreme Court (SC) decision, which upheld the constitutionality of online libel in Republic Act 10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act, but noted that it does not intend to suppress freedom of expression.
“I suppose that is not the objective. You, as responsible journalists, have rights, but everybody’s rights have limits,” Aquino told reporters in an ambush interview after inspecting the micro medium-rise building model units for informal settlers in Manila.
“It was taught in school that your right ends when they impinge on the rights of others… If there is something wrong stated on TV... radio and written in the newspapers and magazine, should it be exempted when you move to another format? Maybe you will not agree to that. Why? Because it will be unequal protection,” he added.
Aquino said equal protection should not be violated, adding that libel should not be an issue with anyone telling the truth.
Presidential Communications Operations Office Secretary Herminio Coloma Jr. said they would await the SC ruling to understand its implications on public policy.
“We hope that this decision will strengthen government’s position in fighting cybercrime and upholding the people’s welfare,” he said.
SC justices ruled that the imposition of cyber libel on the “original author of the post” is constitutional, but said those who simply received the post and reacted to it should not be punished.
This means only the source of a malicious e-mail, post on social media like Facebook or Twitter could be held liable
under RA 10175.
Legislative solution
Akbayan party-list lawmakers vowed to remove the provision on Internet libel in the cybercrime law, saying it violates the freedom of speech and expression.
They urged the President to certify as urgent House Bill 3859, which seeks to amend the law by removing the provision on online libel.
Rep. Ibarra Gutierrez said the “legislative solution” is now the only option to scrap it.
“In the wake of the Supreme Court’s disappointing response to widespread calls to keep discussion on the Internet free from unwarranted threats of criminal prosecution, it is now up to Congress to step up and uphold freedom of speech online,” he said.
“From the beginning, Akbayan has taken the position that the best solution to the flawed cybercrime law is new legislation repealing objectionable provisions, and with the SC now failing to step up, it seems that this is now the only viable option remaining,” he added.
He urged his colleagues in the House of Representatives to expedite deliberation on House Bill 3859 and similar measures seeking to remove objectionable provisions in the law.
“It is clear that there is widespread public clamor against this impending restriction on free speech, and we must respond to it decisively,” he said.
Gutierrez said the SC decision could “open the floodgates for possible criminal action against citizens who make statements in social media and other online forums.”
“This is an unprecedented and unwelcome expansion of previous libel laws into what was once a free and open space for discussion, and constitutes a dangerous move towards a more restrictive regime governing the online exchange of views and ideas,” he said.
“It may ultimately limit the exercise of the freedom of speech, restraining public discourse and narrowing the public space for political engagement online,” he also pointed out.
Representatives of other party-list groups led by Bayan Muna said they would first appeal the SC ruling before filing their own bills that would lift the libel provision in the law.
2nd draft
Assistant Secretary Geronimo Sy, head of the Department of Justice’s office of cybercrime, said they would send to Congress a draft bill without the provision on online libel.
“It’s never an issue with us in the department that libel should be part of the cybercrime law. Libel is just a traditional form of crime, it’s a sociopolitical legal discussion that we don’t need in a cybercrime law,” he told reporters yesterday.
Sy said their office has limited resources that should rather be spent on more pressing crimes like hacking, phishing and child pornography.
“In the Philippines there are many cases of gossips, rumors and fights so there would be many online libel cases. Isn’t the case, for example, of the six-year-old child being abused for pornography more pressing? Let us not waste resources of taxpayers,” he said.
He said the DOJ believes libel as defined in the Revised Penal Code would suffice, and that a similar provision in the cybercrime law would no longer be necessary.
“Our stand on libel is consistent in a sense that we will value all this free speech and free expression, but at the same time we should protect people’s right to their reputation. Not because there is free speech, one already has the right to say anything about everything,” Sy pointed out.
“Just because you have a hand means you can slap everyone. That’s not how our society goes. It’s always a balance,” he added.
‘Half-inch forward, century backward’
The National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP) slammed the SC ruling as “a half inch forward, but a century backward.”
“By extending the reach of the antediluvian libel law into cyberspace, the Supreme Court has suddenly made a once infinite venue for expression into an arena of fear, a hunting ground for the petty and vindictive, the criminal and autocratic,” the NUJP said in a statement posted online and was shared by journalists and other online users on the social media account.
“We can only hope that the Supreme Court will not remain blind to this when appeals to the ruling are filed. But if it does, then there can only be one response lest we be forced to surrender all our other rights – resistance,” it added.
In a text message to The STAR, lawyer Harry Roque said they would file a motion for reconsideration, seek the repeal of the online libel provision and bring the case to an international human rights body.
Online petition
In protest of the SC ruling, more than 78,600 Internet users have signed the Change. org petition (http://chn. ge/1fxyyOH) seeking the repeal of the law as of yesterday afternoon.
“While the Cybercrime Law was supposedly enacted to ward off hacking, identity theft, data manipulation, cybersex and other nefarious activities in the Internet, the insertion of provisions regarding online libel and vague sections on data collection and sanctions have transformed the legislation into an online censorship law,” read the online petition initiated by Kabataan party-list.
The online petition was filed in 2012 after the President signed RA 10175. The clamor for its repeal resulted in 19 petitions filed before the high court.
A number of netizens also turned their profile photos black as sign of protest against the ruling, and urged the use of hashtags #fierce and #fearless to fight the law.