Thoughts on the Republic Act 10175
I guess there’s no stopping the government from implementing the Cybercrime Law of 2012.
Been doing some reading on this topic and, besides posts on Twitter and Facebook, you can check out these links:
In my opinion (and I hope I don’t offend anyone’s sensibilities here — I have a toddler to feed, you know), there is a need to protect our citizens against cybercrime: hacking personal Internet/ social media accounts, posting lewd photos without people’s knowledge, pornography, etc. The main reason why people are against this Republic Act is because of the provision on online libel, which has a grave punishment and allows for double jeopardy — which is, by the way, unconstitutional.
And because, as my kumpare said, libel is in the eye of the offended, anyone can say that this post or that tweet was done in bad taste and file libel charges against the poster under the Cybercrime Law, even if the poster posted it in good faith.
So does that mean, for example (and I stress: EXAMPLE): I can’t complain on my Facebook that the local grocer keeps on shortchanging me of 10 centavos everytime I buy from them? I can’t call the attention of people in authority via Twitter regarding a photo of a person’s act of indecency? I can’t blog about how upset I am with this establishment that does not give good service? And so on?
I know that freedom has its limits, and that it requires responsibility to those that hold them. I know this freedom is somewhat getting out of hand, too. But does it really need to be curtailed this way? Do we resort to this kind of policy where people are first found guilty before proven otherwise?
Libel is too big and too loose a word. It is also an avenue for abuse. There should be a clear definition on committing libel and freedom of expression. Else, all hell is going to break lose, and we’re going to the dogs.
That’s just my two cents.
How everything will play out will be seen in the coming days.