The Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 - is the first law in the Philippines which specifically criminalizes computer crime,

which prior to the passage of the law had no strong legal precedent in Philippine jurisprudence

What is/are the purpose/s of R.A. no. 10175? To address legal issues concerning internet in the Philippines To prevent misuse, abuse and illegal access of the internet

What are the cybercrime offenses punishable under R.A. no. 10175? Under Sec. 4 of the same act, the following are the cybercrime offenses: 1. Offenses against the confidentiality, integrity and availability of computer data and systems. a. It includes Illegal Access, Illegal Interception, Data Interference, System Interference, Misuse of Devices, Cyber-Squatting 2. Computer-related Offenses a. It includes Forgery, Fraud, Identity Theft, 3. Content-related Offenses a. It includes Cybersex, Child Pornography (an offense under R.A. no. 9779), Unsolicited Commercial Communications 4. Libel - The unlawful or prohibited acts of libel as defined in Article 355 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, committed through a computer system or any other similar means which may be devised in the future. *it has a catch-all clause: SEC. 6. All crimes defined and penalized by the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and special laws, if committed by, through and with the use of information and communications technologies shall be covered by the relevant provisions of this Act. To whom or Where is it applied? The Act has universal jurisdiction: its provisions apply to all Filipino nationals regardless of the place of commission. Jurisdiction also lies when a punishable act is either committed within the Philippines, whether the erring device is wholly or partly situated in the Philippines, or whether damage was done to any natural or juridical person who at the time of commission was within the Philippines.

What court/s has/have jurisdiction?

Regional Trial Court

What are the issues involved in the law? 1. Constitutional issue: a. It threatens the freedom of speech, expression and the press b. Protection against double jeopardy c. The right to privacy and other essential civil liberties What makes the Cybercrime Law controversial? This law is mainly controversial because the interests of netizens are affected. provisions of the Cybercrime Law are feasible and the intentions for passing this law are generally for the protection of the public, their integrity and safety. But, among majority of its clauses, the libel clause is the most disagreeable.

Libel Clause This is disagreeable because of the vague implications of the libel clause, and with this the penalties ranging from imprisonment to fines of P200,000 to P10,000,000. The libel clause can be seen as dangerous and interpreted in many different ways, especially to someone who is ignorant to the law; in effect, making the smallest act of liking a Facebook photo a criminal act.

Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of R.A. no. 10175 Imposition of cyber libel on the original author of the post is constitutional, but clarified the same is unconstitutional insofar as it penalizes those who simply receive the post and react to it. o Only the source of a malicious e-mail, post on social media like Facebook or any website, tweet on Twitter can be held liable under RA 10175.

The following are unconstitutional: The High Court struck down a provision of the law that gives the state the power to take down online content without a court warrant. o Section 4(c)(3), which considers unsolicited commercial communication as a cybercrime offense o Section 12 on collection or recording of traffic data in real-time, associated with specified communication transmitted by means of a computer system o Section 19, which authorizes the DOJ to restrict or block access to data that would be found prima facie in violation of the cybercrime law

o Section 7 on separate prosecutions under the Cybercrime Law and the Revised Penal Code. o Nuances in other provisions Section 5, which pertains to aiding or abetting the commission of a cybercrime and to the attempt to commit a cybercrime, was declared unconstitutional only in the following cases: child pornography, unsolicited commercial communications (or spam), and online libel. Section 5 will apply to all other cybercrimes outlined in the law. Section 7, which pertains to liability of a cyber criminal under other laws, was declared unconstitutional only in the following cases: online libel and child pornography.

The SC cited the guarantee against double jeopardy or being punished more than once for the same offense a guarantee outlined in the Constitution in deciding on Section 7. Libel is punishable by Article 353 of the Revised Penal Code, while child pornography is punishable by RA 9775 or the Anti-Child Pornography Act. A person convicted of libel or child pornography can only be punished once, under the coverage of a single law. Decriminalizing libel Freedom of expression is guaranteed by the Bill of Rights in the 1987 Constitution and Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. libel committed online should be penalized, though not by imprisonment.

Penalties: The high court said that such penalties are the same as those under the libel clauses in the Revised Penal Code and not the stricter penalties as stated in the new measure. Libel offenders may be imprisoned for "minimum and medium periods" or fined from P200 to P6,000 under the Revised Penal Code.