 |
| Whitewashing (Illustration by Kenneth Garcia) |
“We are
willing enough to praise freedom when she is safely tucked away in the past and
cannot be a nuisance. In the present, amidst dangers whose outcome we cannot
foresee, we get nervous about her, and admit censorship.” – Edward M. Forster, English essayist
The 120-day temporary restraining order (TRO)
on Republic Act 10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 shall expire on
February 6. We may not feel the effect of the Act at this point of time, but
our youth leaders and bloggers think otherwise. In fact, the Supreme Court
started hearing oral arguments regarding a number of RA 10175’s vague and
unconstitutional provisions from these petitioners’ lawyers last January 15.
While the Act aims to stop child pornography, cybersex, illegal access
(hacking), identity theft, cybersquatting and other computer-related offenses,
some of its sections clearly violate our most precious right: the freedom of
expression.
Section 4 of RA 10175 includes libel, damage
of an individual or organization’s reputation through publicized malicious
statements, as one of its punishable acts. Anyone can cry foul and file a libel
case, whether that person is innocent or guilty of what he is being accused of.
Would this mean that we cannot openly assess a corrupt public servant anymore,
for he can claim that he is being defamed? In addition, Section 5 (a) says that
people who aided in the commission of a cybercrime shall be held liable. This
would turn a netizen who retweeted a libelous statement into a cybercriminal,
too.
Where is the freedom here then? Yes, the Act
wants to protect Internet users from rampant cybercrimes but at the same time,
its good intention tries to cover up its faulty parts. How do we exercise
democracy if such law represses the very right that establishes democracy:
public opinion?
Also, RA 10175 does not truly intend to
punish but instead, it wills to whitewash issues plaguing the nation. Why exert
so much time and effort to catch criminals online when we still cannot catch
the real-life ones? Why punish people who kill reputations when we still cannot
punish those who killed others many years ago? Is it not better to make the
real world crime-free, not just its virtual counterpart?
We Filipinos have already defeated Martial
Law, a period of our history that nearly killed the same freedom that is once
again being threatened today. We may not be facing soldiers and tanks and tear
gas, but we will be facing a fiercer and darker enemy: an unseen hand that will
choke our freedom of expression to death if we allow it to. Ultimately, RA
10175 will conceal what is really happening in our country. If we allow the Act
to have power over us, our socio-political issues will be buried deep, along
with our freedom to clamor for these issues to be resolved.
Repression is a crime; to be repressed is a
choice. It is either we remain apathetic and suffer the consequences, or fight
for what is duly ours. Ma. Gladys Repollo
