This was my blog 2 years ago and published in my other blog site.

As a blogger , I am often asked for my stand onRepublic Act No. 10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 . My stand on the law stays the same as eight months ago when it was still a bill. Cybercrimes are real. Cybercrimes happen everyday. Cybercrimes are offenses committed against a person, or a people, a government— threatening national security, for example or a corporation— disrupting financial institutions. Cybercrimes have criminal motivations. Cybercrimes are meant to harm the reputation of a victim. Cybercrimes can cause physical or mental harm to a victim, whether directly, or indirectly using the amazing technology we have around us like The Internet, chat rooms, emails, message boards, groups, social networking, and even through our mobile phones. There is zero doubt that there is a clear and present need for a cybercrime law. There is no doubt that women’s rights need to be protected. There is no doubt that children need to be protected. There is no doubt that when someone is attacked online, he or she needs to be protected. There is no doubt that fraud, spam, need to be stopped. There is no doubt that government and law enforcement need to be armed to deal with these threats. The need of for a cybercrime law, and the need to protect people’s rights was never in doubt. I, myself was a victim of HACKING and IDENTITY THEFT. I consider it as a crime, digital crime. BUT… The Cybercrime Law as framed in Republic Act 101751 is fundamentally flawed. It centers to the OPPRESSION OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH. Republic Act No. 10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 aims to be the bastion of this freedom. Let me quote my friend “Genie Soriano” on her post regarding the issue. “Utilizing the benefits of cyberspace means one word: RESPONSIBILITY. Everyone should be responsible for what they do to this privilege but since there are some of us who find it difficult to discipline themselves and be responsible, we’ve got to waste time and money just to create this Cyber crime Law. I think RA 10175 has its flaws when it comes to qualifying what should be and should not be posted on the web. Words/statements from other people can be understood differently by various groups hence making a statement libelous to one person and not to another. Libel is a SUBJECTIVE MATTER. There’s a very thin line between constructive criticism and malicious slander. The law should provide an objective parameter from which we can categorize what we see or read from cyberspace. I think our law makers need to think what will benefit not only their political careers but to consider what is the best for the general public.” I strongly believed and agree to her that WE, users have its own RESPONSIBILITY. Social responsibility to whatever we post omline. Wisdom is needed to avoid conflicts. The Cybercrime Law is a guide on how to behave “properly” when using computers (as defined by the law) whether online or offline. It dictates that we only use computers in a positive way. However, there are certain provisions which needs clarification and re-thinking. Like the provision on how to collect real-time traffic and the inclusion of Libel. I vehemently oppose the inclusion of libel as its oppressive characteristic easily paves way for the state and its fellow power-abusive actors to impose exorbitant measures against its citizens.” “It is a dismay to realize that this so-called son of Philippine democracy icons who once gained popularity by accident leads the country to cyber-imperialism.” (another blogger said) “The government can put us in prison for Facebook ‘likes’ or ‘shares’ and they now have the power to listen in on our Skype conversations and take down our blogs and websites for mere suspicion.” In conclusion, the law has loopholes. So, we better THINK BEFORE WE CLICK. But GUARD OUR FREEDOM.