1) A man was “arrested/invited/questioned” for violating a non-existent law. A search warrant was produced for said man, based on said non-existent law.

2) The said man’s private property was confiscated, on the grounds that he is a “suspect” engaged in “criminal” activities of “sexual” nature, albeit the “crime” was supposedly committed online.

3) How can a “crime” exist when no law defines it as such? I cannot say it is illegal to enter another man’s home unless the trespassing law exists. With regards to the issue at hand - IF the said man was engaged in hosting and distributing pornography through the internet, why should be arrested + investigated + his private property be confiscated when he has not broken any laws? (Please bear in mind that his belongings have not yet been returned, nor is there a guarantee that IF they are returned, they would still be in working order).

4) In fact, shouldn’t said man be able to sue the government of the Philippines for trespassing, kidnapping, robbery, libel, and slander? Legally speaking, since he has broken no crime, the very basis for the search warrant is null and void (this is of course, assuming that the basis for the search warrant was peddling pornography online), which makes the entire situation a series of illegal acts on the part of the Philippine Government!

5) Isn’t it amusing that by using an example/scapegoat, the bill being pushed by the senator in question suddenly became a priority?

In the end, I shall say this:
I am not defending Mr. Verzo, far from it. In fact, I can sympathize with the many parents out there who would like to see legislation enacted with regards to apparent ease of access with regards to online smut. I know how they feel, I have a daughter who I love and try to protect as best I can.

HOWEVER.

I am a firm believer in the line of thought which says: “If you cannot be responsible, don’t blame the product of your irresponsibility on others.”

There are hundreds of 3rd party software available which does exactly what parents need for their impressionable children - they filter out content unsuitable for minors. Most modern internet browsers even have them installed on default.

The issue I have with this whole mess is the fact that we have a small group of people (who do not have enough knowledge of how the I.T. industry works) that are trying to regulate it as how they see fit. Could you imagine the repercussions if this is simply ignored? It is tantamount to having Fire safety laws drafted by people who do not even know that gasoline fire can be put out by (wet) sand.

It will be a big and ugly mess of haphazard legislature. Imagine if the law that Sen. Legarda had drafted requires ISP’s to filter out smut content? Again, with no real defintion of “smut”, that leaves an incredibly disturbing grey area - so who defines what is “smut”? The government? The ISP? The judiciary? A committee?

Tsk.

Maybe the blogging community should start voicing out? Maybe along the lines of: “We are intelligent adults, and any regulation that requires the filtering and censorship of information should be first carefully studied, debated, and discussed.”

Amen? Amen.

even if there was a law regarding his site in the Philippines, it should only apply to locally hosted sites.

Thats why there are servers that’s located in some countries thats allows porn, gambling, and warez to be hosted.

i wonder which site is next?
iyottube.com
uploads.ph
pinoyspy.net
what else?

Egg-saktimo. Bottom line is somebody got pissed and started to bully somebody! That wasn’t very presidential, ai’nt it?

Well, let’s see what happens next if HER intent was truly pornography regulation!

Who is next? and When?

1) They always think the Philippines is 99.99% corrupt and so:
2) We have “useless” laws, that are:
3) Not implemented by the authorities.
4) We are on a democratic country, and
5) We have laws about Freedom-of-Speech and Human Rights.

Been telling as many people as I can that these kind of mindset is wrong and if they don’t lie low, they are only inviting the people with connections, power, and money, including the Law itself to their doorsteps, no, lives.

This incident is one example.
I wasn’t even surprised with another incident where a home torrenter was arrested a year ago. It wasn’t on the news because the torrenter got connections.

So I agree with what was posted especially:

Yes, we can always claim freedom of expression and the lack of provisions in the penal code for such internet activities, still we can’t avoid the fact that bullying is one trick people in high places have mastered over the years.

So, who’s next?

All I can say is this: This incident simply gave the “group of people” more evidence why Bloggers should be controlled in this country. The fight is becoming even harder.

Seriously, bloggers should start gathering together to discuss this matter. Blog-censoring like it is in our neighboring countries is just around-the-corner.

Btw, you forgot to include one important tip: Change your writing style and choice of words.

Gratuitous offensiveness is counterproductive. But firm defiance is called for here. Yuga is partly right that we shouldn’t be insulting or taunting… I think there’s a place for being insulting or challenging to politicians like Loren. But only if some good can come out of it, if this can kickstart a productive dialogue about “obscenity” in society. If you’re just insulting her to feed your ego, no thanks.

I agree with you!!!

In my case, somebody is trying to taunt me by posting a comment and leaving the senator’s signature and i know that the senator won’t even spend time in my blog. Someone is out there to taunt!

http://reynaelena.com/2007/09/10/loren-legarda-is-that-you/

” Don’t insult or taunt Loren, or anyone with political power, authority, clout or influence for that matter.”

I guess this won’t be heard by bloggers with balls and backbones, IMO.

I am pissed at those wannabe ANGELS!

As Cat has already explained here, a mugshot is highly irregular if you’re just there “by invitation”. Maybe we should get more lawyers’ opinions on this before we rashly conclude that fingerprinting and mugshots are SOP for those who are invited for questioning.