Source: Human Rights Watch
Supreme Court to Rule on Act That Worsens Criminal Defamation
September 28, 2012
(New York) – A new Philippine “cybercrime” law drastically increases
punishments for criminal libel and gives authorities excessive and
unchecked powers to shut down websites and monitor online information,
Human Rights Watch said today. President Benigno Aquino III signed the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 into law on September 12, 2012.
The law’s criminal penalties for online libel and other restrictions are a serious threat to free expression in the Philippines.
Several legal cases have been filed in the Philippines Supreme Court,
including for the law to be declared unconstitutional because it
violates guarantees to free expression contained in the Philippines
constitution and human rights treaties ratified by the Philippines.
“The cybercrime law needs to be repealed or replaced,” said Brad Adams,
Asia director. “It violates Filipinos’ rights to free expression and it
is wholly incompatible with the Philippine government’s obligations
under international law.”
The new law defines several new acts of “cybercrime.” Among the acts
prohibited are “cybersex,” online child pornography, illegal access to
computer systems or hacking, online identity theft, and spamming.
A section on libel specifies that criminal libel, already detailed in
article 355 of the Philippines Revised Penal Code, will now apply to
acts “committed through a computer system or any other similar means
which may be devised in the future.” The new law drastically increases
the penalty for computer-related libel, with the minimum punishment
raised twelve-fold, from six months to six years. The maximum punishment
is doubled from six to twelve years in prison.
“Anybody using popular social networks or who publishes online is now
at risk of a long prison term should a reader – including government
officials – bring a libel charge,” Adams said. “Allegedly libelous
speech, online or offline, should be handled as a private civil matter,
not a crime.”
Human Rights Watch called on the Philippines government to repeal its
existing criminal libel law. The Aquino administration has shown little
inclination to support legislation pending in the Philippine Congress to
decriminalize libel.
Aside from the section on libel, the new law has a provision that
grants new powers to the Department of Justice, which on its own and
without a warrant, can order the shutdown of any website it finds
violating the law. It also authorizes police to collect computer data in
real time without a court order or warrant.
The use of criminal defamation laws also has a chilling effect on the
speech of others, particularly those involved with similar issues.
When citizens face prison time for complaining about official
performance, corruption, or abusive business practices, other people
take notice and are less likely to draw attention to such problems
themselves, undermining effective governance and civil society.
Several journalists in the Philippines have been imprisoned for libel
in recent years, leaving a blot on the country’s record on press
freedom. In the case of Davao City radio journalist Alexander Adonis,
who was convicted in 2007 of libel and spent two years in prison, the
United Nations Human Rights Committee determined that
the Philippine government violated article 19 on the right to freedom
of expression and opinion of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights. The committee called on the Philippine government to
decriminalize libel.
“So long as it stands, the new cybercrime law will have a chilling
effect over the entire Philippine online community,” Adams said.