Skip to content
February 18, 2014

Supreme Court upholds Internet Libel of RA 10175

In a decision made by the Supreme Court, the petition to call the Anti-Cybercrime Law (RA 10175) as unconstitutional was clarified today with mixed results. Among the ones that were declared constitutional was “internet libel“.

Also included int he decision to make constitutional the section on “aiding and abetting crimes” in relation to the following offenses — Illegal Access, Illegal Interception, Data Interference; System Interference; Misuse of Devices; Cyber-squatting; Computer-related Offenses such as Computer-related Forgery and Computer-related Identity Theft; and Cybersex.

However, other provisions of the Anti-Cybercrime Law were declared unconstitutional, including the take-down clause, the sending of unsolicited commercial messages (this means SMS spam is still considered legal) and some double-jeopardy clauses.

Likewise, the provisions on internet libel only covers the original author of a libelous posting or comment and does not include persons that shared, Liked or re-tweeted the same.

In September 2012, the Anti-Cybercrime Bill was passed into a law and signed by Pres. Noynoy Aquino.

The law was then challenged and a TRO was filed before the Supreme Court which has since held off making any decisions as far back as January 2013.

Since the Supreme Court has finally decided on this TRO, this means some parts of the RA 10175 is now enforceable and that includes internet libel.

Anti-Cybercrime Law: What you can or cannot do?
Did you know Online Libel has been around since 2001?
Supreme Court extends TRO on RA 10175

14 Responses to “Supreme Court upholds Internet Libel of RA 10175”

  1. evollove says:

    So, the touchy-feely politicians finally got their way. I wonder though, if I posted something libelous about a politician with the simple cover of anonymity by using a handle and a proxy, and said libelous comment somehow got viral, would they even bother to pursue the matter by filing charges to an unsub, get a warrant, demand the web hosting provider to backtrack my address and arrest me to be prosecuted? Sounds like a big waste of taxpayer money to me.

    • evollove says:

      Of course, wasting and stealing taxpayer money is actually something they’re be good at. /sarcasm

    • evollove says:

      And before any grammar Nazis get on my case, that’s a typo. Go shove that unabridged dictionary up your ass.

  2. abuzalzal says:

    Too self-serving

    Only applicable to the rich and powerful

    Does this include internet memes?

  3. jojo logs says:

    ibig sabihin ba nito pag minura ko sila tanda, sexy, and pogi e pwede n ko makulong?

  4. KodinPH says:

    try natin… “ang tatanga niyo!”

  5. Uchiha Itachi says:

    seriously?

  6. abuzalzal says:

    …and what IF totoo naman ang mga sinasabi ng mga ‘naninira’ sa yo? like :

    ”p%tangna ninyo mga — (insert famous political dynasty apelyido here)— lahi kayo ng mga corrupt at kademonyohan!!!! P%tangna nyo!!! mamatay na sana kayong lahat!!!”

    I don’t get it…in a way it just suppresses freedom of speech and nothing else

    • Miss Call says:

      “Libel” must be something that is not truthful but published as a fact. If you post something that is an opinion, then that is not libel. Nothing in the law says you will be accused of libel if you do that.

    • Milhouse says:

      @Miss Call. indeed. expressing an opinion is not necessarily libelous. i dont know why some people are so paranoid regarding this online libel issue. Prior to the cybercrime law, someone can already be sued for libel for creating and spreading outright misinformation against another person.

      Netizens, THINK BEFORE YOU CLICK and take responsibility for whatever you say or post!

  7. ilagab says:

    where’s democracy now? hinahangaan pa naman tayo ng ibang bansa dahil sa demokrasya na ating ipinakita tapos biglang may ganito…..nasaan na ang freedom of expression ngayon?

  8. Leroy Lapastangan says:

    But we can still call them a**holes right? I mean who would deny that they don’t have one?

  9. anu gayahin na natin ung Arab Spring? kaya nyu pa ba?

Leave a Reply

*
*