Tag Archives: political law

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 Prior versions have been introduced in previous Congresses but which have been archived when the previous Congresses adjourned, including the 14th Congress.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

Students’ take: Laptop search in ports, Private information on legal repositories, and Online OG (2S, SY11-12)

During the second semester of SY 2011-2012, my students in Technology and the Law were given the task of discussing (1) whether laptop searches in airports are valid, (2) whether persons/litigants can ask online repositories containing decisions of the Supreme Court to remove information therein as it affects their rights of privacy, and (3) whether publication in gov.ph is sufficient publication under the law. These are their opinions on the subject matters:

(1) Gov.ph and the Official Gazette (10 December 2011), (2) Information in legal posts (3 March 2012), (3) Laptop searches (15 March 2012)

No verifiable post(s): Badillo (3), Cureg (1,2,3) Olano (1,2,3), Sala (1,2,3), Salaum (1), Tolentino (3). Unposted, but submitted: Badillo (1), Buhay (1,2,3), Gonzalbo (2), Oleriana (1,2,3), Tolentino (2)

Batch 11′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.

Students’ take: Private information on legal repositories, Wikileaks, and Media’s social network preference (1S, SY11-12)

For the first semester of SY 2011-2012, my students in Technology and the Law are given the task of discussing the legal implications of (1) Private information on legal repositories, (2) Wikileaks, and (3) Media’s social network preference. These are their opinions on the subject matters:

Media preference on social network (18 July 2011), Wikileaks and the Right to Information (2 September 2011), Information in legal posts (18 September 2011)

No verifiable post(s): Cervantes (3), Gacutan (3), Lopez (1), Martinez (2,3), Mercado G (1,2), Nabua (2,3), Penachos (3), Rivera (1), Serrano (1,2,3), Suanino (2,3), Valencia (1,2,3), Vasquez (1). Unposted, but submitted: Adriano (1,2,3), Alejo (3), Castillejo (3), Cervantes (2), Delos Reyes (2,3), Faustino (2,3), Lim (2,3), Mercado G (3), Vasquez (2,3).

Batch 10′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.

Notes Repository (AUSL 2002-2006; Haystacks)

It was during the second year of my law school studies (SY 2003-2004) that I started to create a new format for my case notes, since I observed that some cases in the previous year were reiterated in the higher subjects. Resort to previously made digests was inappropriate, since the issues focused were different. I created these notes, which I called “Haystacks,” to outline all legal details provided in the cases’ discussions, to serve as source documents when I would need to create case digests, appropriate to the issues relevant to the subjects in which the cases could be reiterated anew.


Continue reading

Law Compilation (AUSL Constitutional Law I, 2011)

I started to teach a minor subject “Technology and the Law” during the first semester of SY 2008-2009, in Arellano University School of Law. It was only in June 2011, for the first semester of SY 2011-2012, when I was offered to teach a foundation subject, that is Constitutional Law I. I compiled the relevant laws outlined in the preliminary chapters of the syllabus therein for my own preparation. Such compilations are shared similarly below.

  • Annex 2 (PDF, 779.9 KB)
    • Contains the English text of 1899 Malolos Constitution, McKinley’s Instructions (7 April 1900), The Philippine Bill of 1902, The Philippine Autonomy Act (1916, Jones Law), The Philippine Independence Act (1934, Tydings-McDuffie Law), 1935 Philippine Constitution, 1943 Philippine Constitution, 1973 Philippine Constitution, Proclamation 1 (1986), Proclamation 3 (1986), Proclamation 58 (1987), and the 1987 Philippine Constitution.
  • Annex 3 (PDF, 919.2 KB)
    • Contains the English text of the Treaty of Paris of 1898, Treaty Between Spain and the United States for the Cession of Outlying Islands of the Philippines, Convention regarding the Boundary between the Philippine Archipelago and the State of North Borneo, Republic Act 3046, Republic Act 5446, Republic Act 5446, Presidential Decree 1596, Presidential Decree 1599, and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982.
    • Should include Republic Act 9522, among others, on the next update.
  • Annex 4 (PDF, 169.4 KB)
    • Contains Commonwealth Act 63, Republic Act 106, Republic Act 2639, Republic Act 3834, Commonwealth Act 473, Republic Act 530, Presidential Decree 725, Republic Act 8171, Republic Act 9139, and Republic Act 9225.

Notes Repository (AUSL Project Phoenix 2008)

When I passed the bar in 2007, Atty. Jaime “Jimmy” N. Soriano took me under his wing, at the e-Law Center of the Arellano University School of Law. In 2008, in anticipation of the 2008 bar examination, Jimmy pursued a project, called “Project Phoenix,” which was aimed to assist a very special set of bar examinees for that year. He tasked me to gather doctrinal updates or reiteration, for Political Law and Civil Law, from cases decided in 2007. The contents of the documents below were the one submitted to Jimmy.

I take this opportunity to thank Jimmy, who has been an older brother to me. May he rest in peace.

[+] Atty. Jaime N. Soriano (3 January 1961 – 30 July 2012)

For those who may not be aware, he introduced Creative Commons in the Philippines (being its first Project Lead in the country); and was a primary proponent (being the copyright holder of optical-based legal resource “PhilJuris”) of the free online legal resource “LawPhil ,” the latter being maintained and further developed by the Arellano Law Foundation .