Social and political criticisms
From electronic frontier foundation
The Philippine internet which has been free from censorship suddenly faces trouble with the passage of RA 10175, or the Phil. anti cybercrime law. The law covers such things as cybersex and hacking, but what is troubling is the insertion of the provision of Libel Law, RA 355, into the law. It was alleged by a well known blogger that such was inserted into this anticybercrime law by a lawmaker who was apparently irked by cyber attack on him on his deragatory remarks to blogger in 2 plagiarism issues There was no public hearing....
Who inserted that offending libel law provision.? The senator's chief of staff Villacorta confirmed this. The blogger criticized the cut and paste method used by the lawmaker (his staff) in attaching the RA 355 provision
How could the Senate Leadership have allowed that? Many hearings are conducted in the interest of legislation, but not for this important law that affect so many. In a way, without the hearing, the law is defective from the start because it did not follow the correct procedure to my mind (It is very possible that I could be jailed for this post)
The scope of libel law is increased with the passage of this law. The Phil libel law is called excessive and draconian, that no less than UN Human Rights Council called for its review, wrote the National Union of Journalists.
In the Philippines, libel is not determined by what the writer means but by what the words mean. EFF supports Phil journalists stand.
How come the law was not reviewed well by the office of the President?
How come, after the pledge that "Never again..." statement last Sept 21, 40 years of Martial Law anniversary, could a more repressive law be passed?
How could Senate staff and leadership have overlooked such an important law?
Is there a certain sloppiness in PHL lawmaking process? (Only Sen Guingona voted against the measure)
