War vs. online libel shifts back to Congress – advocacy groups

(Updated 4:28 p.m.) Groups seeking the abrogation of the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 have decided to take their legal battle back to Congress after the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of online libel.

 

The Philippine Internet Freedom Alliance said on its website Friday that it "must now shift its advocacy to the arena of Congress to get legislators to repeal [Republic Act] 10175." 

 

Another group, Democracy.net.ph (PHNetDems) said that with the Supreme Court decision already out, there is a need for a law to replace the Cybercrime Prevention Act, which it said is fundamentally flawed.

 

In an online statement, PHNetDems said Filipinos “need a law that is passed with due deliberation and wide stakeholder consultation. We need a law that will help us harness information and communication technology for national development. We need a law that will truly empower the people against cybercrimes and cyberterrorism without compromising our rights in cyberspace." 

 

However, National Union of Journalists of the Philippines chair Rowena Paraan said petitioners against the Cybercrime Prevention Act—which includes PCIJ and NUSP—have yet to come up with a common stand on the decision. 

 

"We will hold consultations with other groups that filed petitions and come up with a consensus kung anong action ang puwedeng gawin ng lahat ng mga petitioners," she said.

 

SC legal battle

 

The Supreme Court ruled last Tuesday, Feb. 18 that the online libel provision of RA 10175 is constitutional, although it struck down some provisions, including one that empowers the Department of Justice (DOJ) to restrict or block access to data violating the law.

 

But PIFA will not yet close the chapter on its fight in the courts. The group said it will prepare and submit a motion for reconsideration to the high court although it is unlikely the justices will reverse their ruling.

 

"The legal arguments why the majority opinion is wrong must be shown to the public and be recorded for posterity, in hopes that the high court in some future date will realize how wrong it was to uphold Cyber Martial Law."

 

PIFA maintained that the law is a “repressive encroachment on the freedom of expression propagates a chilling effect across cyberspace, muting or outright silencing dissent and discourse on public matters."

 

The court struck down certain provisions of the Cybercrime Prevention Act but upheld the provision on online libel, holding the author of potentially libelous content liable under the law.

 

Revise law on libel
 

At a roundtable on Friday, Malou Mangahas, executive director of the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism, said the nature of the Internet exposes ordinary citizens to libel charges.

 

“Dati, media lang yung affected community [sa] criminal libel. Ngayon, everybody else is a party to it or vulnerable to it,” she said. 

 

Media watchdog Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility (CMFR), also a petitioner, has already issued a statement warning the law threatens free speech. 

 

"While crimes committed over the Internet such as child pornography need legal sanctions, the Cybercrime Act throws such a wide net it penalizes even legitimate expressions of opinion online," CMFR said Thursday.

 

For Right to Know, Right Now! convenor Nepomuceno Malaluan, who also attended the roundtable discussion, criminal libel, whether online or offline, “is already contrary [to] international norms.”

 

In 2012, the United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC) declared criminal libel laws in the Philippines “incompatible with the freedom of expression protected under international human rights law,” and that the nation “should take appropriate actions to reform its libel laws to conform with international standards.” 

 

The UNHRC also said that libel defined under Article 355 of the Revised Penal Code is “incompatible with Article 19, paragraph three of the International Covenant on Civil Political Rights.”

 

“Libel itself should be reviewed,” Malaluan said.

 

Magna Carta on Internet freedom

 

PHNetDems said getting Congress to enact a Magna Carta for Philippine Internet Freedom is an approach that is better than curing the flaws of the Cybercrime Law.

 

The group helped write the bill which Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago has filed at the Senate.

 

Santiago asked Senate majority leader Senator Ralph Recto on Friday to immediately schedule hearings on the bill.  She also offered to co-sponsor the bill with Recto, chairman of the Senate Committe on Science and Technology, in plenary.

 

"My bill—in stark contrast to the Supreme Court ruling—in effect characterizes the crime of online libel as unconstitutional, because the provision violates both the 'void for vagueness', and 'overbreadth' doctrines in constitutional law. Moreover, the Supreme Court ruling appears to go against the global inclination to decriminalize libel," she said in a letter to Recto.

 

Recto said in an advisory Friday that his committee will hold hearings on "various cybercrime bills" on the morning of March 3. 

 

"To accommodate all interested parties, a request has been made to use the plenary hall of the Senate of the Philippines," his office said. — ELR/JDS, GMA News