Monthly Archives: September 2012

Students’ take: Body scanners, and Copyright viz Public Monuments (Summer 2011)

During summer 2012, my students in Technology and the Law were given the task of discussing (1) the legal implication of body scanners and (2) the dynamics of copyright in relation to public sculptures and monuments, for additional class standing credits. These are their opinions on the subject matters:

Batch 9′s contents are mirrored in AUSL Tech & Law blog.

Who do you think is persuasive? on point?

Note: External articles are properties of their respective authors. No endorsement on accuracy or correctness of said articles is being made here. No guarantee that external links will remain active.

Republic Act 10175: Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012

Licensed under CC Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivative 3.0 Philippine license.

I. Introduction
    > Past proposals for an Anti-CyberCrime Law
II. Offenses under RA 10175
    > Child pornography under RA 9775, viz Section 4(c)(2) of RA 10175
    > Section 33 (a) of RA 8792, viz Section 4(a)(1) to (5) of RA 10175
    > New offenses under RA 10175
    > Other offenses under Section 5, RA 10175
    > Applicability to other penal laws, when crime committed using ICT, under Section 6, RA 10175
III. Contentious issue: Libel viz Freedom of Expression
    > Libel under Chapter 1, Title XIII of the Revised Penal Code (Act 3815 [RPC], 8 December 1930)
    > Libel under Section 4(c)(4), RA 10175
    > Freedom of Expression viz libel
    > Doctrine of privileged communication
    > ICCPR and General Comment No. 34
IV. Contentious issue: Privacy
    > Right to privacy
    > Section 12 to 17, RA 10175
    > Privacy in relation to Section 12, RA 10175
    > International Cooperation
V. Jurisdiction
VI. Admissibility of Evidence
VII. Takedowns
VIII. Conclusion


There has been a lot of discussions observed days subsequent to the promulgation of Republic Act 10175, or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, on 12 September 2012. There are some who assail the law to be unconstitutional as it acts as a prior restraint to freedom of speech, or that it provides undue expanded interference of private activities in the Internet by the Philippine Government, among others. Let me form my opinion herein, without providing legal advice, regarding the present law in its final form.

Past proposals for an Anti-CyberCrime Law

The Anti-Cybercrime law was not a recent proposal. Prior versions have been introduced in previous Congresses but which have been archived when the previous Congresses adjourned, including the 14th Congress. It appears that prior versions were being pushed to meet (1) the urgency to penalize child pornography; (2) rectify the perceived weakness of provision(s) on computer-related crimes in Republic Act 8792, or the Electronic Commerce Act (2000); (3) the necessity of expanding the coverage of the applicability of electronic documents, or ITC-enable acts, to criminal/penal laws, especially those in the Revised Penal Code, where documents, or in which a computer may be used in the commission thereof, are involved; (4) the necessity to provide an efficient legal procedure/allowance in the acquisition of evidence by government agencies when crimes are being committed, or have been committed, through electronic means; and (5) arrangement towards international cooperation, as acts may be transnational.

Continue reading

Notes Repository (AUSL 2002-2006; Narratives; Political Law)

Constitutional Law II, Political Review [SY 2005-2006, Dean Mariano Magsalin Jr.]

These narratives were part of the content of “Notes in Constitutional Law II based on Dean Magsalin’s 2004-2005 syllabus” (2005; referred as “NCL2,” hereafter). There are a total of 472 case narratives in the linked documents.

The foreword in said compilation provided, in part:


This work was created as Berne’s personal notes for Constitutional Law II, during the summer of 2005, in anticipation of the reading requirements for the second part of Political Law Review. The facts in the cases were deliberately longer than standard digests to allow a semi-detailed and chronological statement of facts, allowing in turn, a better understanding of the circumstances antecedent to the cases.

This work is shared to Arellano University School of Law students to allow those who do not have the luxury of time to completely read the full text of the cases assigned with an alternative source of materials to comply with the minimum requirements to prepare in class. The efforts aimed to aid co-students in their studies should not be a signal for students’ laxity in their studies. This work is designed as a suppletory, not a primary, material for studies involving the Bill of Rights. Students are encouraged to read the original text of the cases and the books of various authorities tackling the subject matter, for proper guidance. Students are further encouraged to create their own notes to develop their own methods of synthesis of the assigned readings.


I. General Considerations (PDF, 128.7 KB; NCL2, pp. 3-4)

II. Powers of the State

III. Bill of Rights

Continue reading