MANILA – The Supreme Court yesterday suspended a controversial cybercrime law amid huge online protests over fears it would impose severe curbs on Internet freedoms.

The court declared in a brief written notice that the law would be suspended for four months while the tribunal studies the arguments for and against it.

“The court resolved...to issue a temporary restraining order, effective immediately and for a period of 120 days, enjoining the respondents from implementing and/or enforcing (the cybercrime act),” it added.

Such an order stops laws from taking effect until further orders from the court, while making no immediate judgment on their legality.

The SC said it will hear the case on January 15, 2013.

The National Union of Journalists of the Philippines said it welcomed the TRO, but called on the High Tribunal to render a final decision declaring Republic Act 10175, or the cybercrime law, null and unconstitutional, a statement emailed to the DAILY STAR said yesterday.

NUJP secretary-general Rowena Paraan said the TRO “is the right thing and the very least that the High Court can do, confronted with a blatantly unconstitutional and repressive law. But the battle to defend our basic rights is far from over (as) the 120-day TRO gives a brief respite (so) the protests must continue”, the press release also said.

It also commended the media, bloggers, netizens, human rights groups, people’s organizations, progressive legislators and many others, who have defiantly stood up, spoke and fought against the “latest assault on our hard-won freedoms”.

Justice Secretary Leila de Lima said the government will follow the SC order. “The TRO is an exercise of the power of judicial review. We respect and will abide by it. Our advocacy for a safe cyberspace and interdiction of organized crime will continue," she added.

The 15-member SC held a meeting behind closed doors yesterday to discuss petitions seeking to outlaw the cybercrime act.

Riot police were deployed outside the court as about 100 of its opponents as well as supporters staged rival but peaceful protests.

The law, which went into force last week, seeks to stamp out non-controversial cybercrimes, like fraud, identity theft, spamming and child pornography.

However, one provision that metes out heavy jail terms for online libel, tougher than for defamation in the traditional media, has caused an uproar.

Equally controversial is a provision that allows the government to shut down websites and monitor online activities, like video conversations and instant messaging, without a court order.

Human rights groups, media organizations and netizens have voiced their outrage at the law, with some saying it echoes the curbs on freedoms imposed by dictator Ferdinand Marcos in the 1970s.

Philippine social media has been alight with protests, while hackers have attacked government websites and petitions have been filed with the SC calling for the law’s overturn.

Brad Adams, Asia director for New York-based rights monitor Human Rights Watch, said in a statement: “The court should now go further by striking down this seriously flawed law.”

A group of Filipino bloggers calling themselves the Philippine Internet Freedom Alliance urged the government to replace it with one that upholds freedom of expression.

But a group called the Responsible Internet Social Empowerment urged the Supreme Court and the Aquino administration to uphold the law as it stands.

“Before the enactment of the new law, how many cybercriminals are enjoying their freedom to escape liability and punishment because there is no law covering their felonious acts?" its spokesman, Alex Deita, said.*AFP

back to top