16 Cybercrimes covered under Cybercrime Prevention Act – Republic Act 10175

Republic Act 10175 – Cybercrime Prevention Act was signed into law last September 12, 2012.
This law is already in effect as the Supreme Court uphold its constitutionality (February 18,
2014). Although some provisions were deemed as unconstitutional (struck down) particularly
Sections 4(c)(3), 7, 12, and 19.

It is a law considered to be 11 years in the making as various groups, organizations, and

personalities lobbied for its passage. It took awhile for the law to be passed as legislators and
various stakeholders need to understand the magnitude of cybercrime and whether the penalty
provisions indicated in the E-Commerce Law – Republic Act 8792 is sufficient or not.

At a PTV4 Forum on Anti-Cybercrime Law, Department of Justice Assistant Secretary Geronimo

Sy explained that laws on cybercrime are considered as the 3rd building block of legislations
necessary to protect the people from crimes committed in cyberspace and use of ICT. I always
look at cybercrime as something under the 2nd block or special penal laws (where I think the E-
Commerce Law is in). Although it seems there is now a set of laws in place that are already in that

http://digitalfilipino.com/introduction-cybercrime-prevention-act-republic-act-10175/
3rd block and increasing further (which may already include the E-Commerce Law as it is the first
policy in place against hacking and online piracy). As we use and integrate ICT and Internet in our
lives, perhaps it is possible that new forms of crimes can happen online and where broader or
special legislation will have to be created (that provides mandate for resource allotment too).
Nevertheless, that perspective, whether agreeable or not, brings the importance of having more
organized groups of netizens who can interact with policy makers proactively on Internet / ICT
related policies and do its share of stakeholder consultation.

From my review and understanding, the law:

1. Penalizes (section 8) sixteen types of cybercrime (Section 4). They are:

Types of Cybercrime Penalty

Prision mayor (imprisonment of six years
and 1 day up to 12 years) or a fine of at
least Two hundred thousand pesos
(P200,000) up to a maximum amount
commensurate to the damage incurred or
1. Illegal access BOTH.————————If committed
Unauthorized access (without right) to a computer against critical infrastructure:Reclusion
system or application. temporal (imprisonment for twelve years
and one day up to twenty years) or a fine
of at least Five hundred thousand pesos
(P500,000) up to a maximum amount
commensurate to the damage incurred or
BOTH

http://digitalfilipino.com/introduction-cybercrime-prevention-act-republic-act-10175/
2. Illegal interception
Unauthorized interception of any non-public
– same as above
transmission of computer data to, from, or within a
computer system.
3. Data Interference
Unauthorized alteration, damaging, deletion or
deterioration of computer data, electronic
document, or electronic data message, and
including the introduction or transmission of – same as above
viruses.Authorized action can also be covered by
this provision if the action of the person went
beyond agreed scope resulting to damages stated in
this provision.
4. System Interference
Unauthorized hindering or interference with the
functioning of a computer or computer network by
inputting, transmitting, damaging, deleting,
deteriorating, altering or suppressing computer data
or program, electronic document, or electronic data – same as above
messages, and including the introduction or
transmission of viruses. Authorized action can also
be covered by this provision if the action of the
person went beyond agreed scope resulting to
damages stated in this provision.
5. Misuse of devices
The unauthorized use, possession, production, sale,
procurement, importation, distribution, or
otherwise making available, of devices, computer
program designed or adapted for the purpose of
– same as above except fine should be no
committing any of the offenses stated in Republic
more than Five hundred thousand pesos
Act 10175.Unauthorized use of computer
(P500,000).
password, access code, or similar data by which the
whole or any part of a computer system is capable
of being accessed with intent that it be used for the
purpose of committing any of the offenses under
Republic Act 10175.
6. Cyber-squatting
Acquisition of domain name over the Internet in
bad faith to profit, mislead, destroy reputation, and
deprive others from the registering the same. This
includes those existing trademark at the time of – same as above
registration; names of persons other than the
registrant; and acquired with intellectual property
interests in it.Those who get domain names of
prominent brands and individuals which in turn is

http://digitalfilipino.com/introduction-cybercrime-prevention-act-republic-act-10175/
used to damage their reputation – can be sued
under this provision.Note that freedom of
expression and infringement on trademarks or
names of person are usually treated separately. A
party can exercise freedom of expression without
necessarily violating the trademarks of a brand or
names of persons.
7. Computer-related Forgery
Unauthorized input, alteration, or deletion of
computer data resulting to inauthentic data with the Prision mayor (imprisonment of six years
intent that it be considered or acted upon for legal and 1 day up to 12 years) or a fine of at
purposes as if it were authentic, regardless whether least Two hundred thousand pesos
or not the data is directly readable and intelligible; (P200,000) up to a maximum amount
or The act of knowingly using computer data which commensurate to the damage incurred or
is the product of computer-related forgery as BOTH.
defined here, for the purpose of perpetuating a
fraudulent or dishonest design.
8. Computer-related Fraud
Unauthorized input, alteration, or deletion of – same as aboveProvided, That if no
computer data or program or interference in the damage has yet been caused, the penalty
functioning of a computer system, causing damage imposed shall be one (1) degree lower.
thereby with fraudulent intent.
9. Computer-related Identity Theft
Unauthorized acquisition, use, misuse, transfer,
possession, alteration or deletion of identifying – same as above
information belonging to another, whether natural
or juridical.
10. Cybersex
Willful engagement, maintenance, control, or
operation, directly or indirectly, of any lascivious
exhibition of sexual organs or sexual activity, with
Prision mayor (imprisonment of six years
the aid of a computer system, for favor or
and 1 day up to 12 years) or a fine of at
consideration. There is a discussion on this matter
least Two hundred thousand pesos
if it involves “couples” or “people in relationship”
(P200,000) but not exceeding One million
who engage in cybersex. For as long it is not done
pesos (P1,000,000) or BOTH.
for favor or consideration, I don’t think it will be
covered. However, if one party (in a couple or
relationship) sues claiming to be forced to do
cybersex, then it can be covered.
11. Child Pornography
Penalty to be imposed shall be one (1)
Unlawful or prohibited acts defined and punishable
degree higher than that provided for in
by Republic Act No. 9775 or the Anti-Child
Republic Act 9775, if committed through a
Pornography Act of 2009, committed through a
computer system.
computer system.

http://digitalfilipino.com/introduction-cybercrime-prevention-act-republic-act-10175/
****** Unsolicited Commercial
Communications (SPAMMING)
THIS PROVISION WAS STRUCK DOWN BY
THE SUPREME COURT AS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
12. Libel
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.Revised Penal Code Art. 355 states Libel
means by writings or similar means. — A libel
committed by means of writing, printing,
lithography, engraving, radio, phonograph,
painting, theatrical exhibition, cinematographic
exhibition, or any similar means, shall be punished Penalty to be imposed shall be one (1)
by prision correccional in its minimum and degree higher than that provided for by
medium periods or a fine ranging from 200 to the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and
6,000 pesos, or both, in addition to the civil action special laws, as the case may be.
which may be brought by the offended party.The
Cybercrime Prevention Act strengthened libel in
terms of penalty provisions.

The electronic counterpart of libel has been

recognized since the year 2000 when the E-
Commerce Law was passed. The E-Commerce
Law empowered all existing laws to recognize its
electronic counterpart whether commercial or not
in nature.
Imprisonment of one (1) degree lower
13. Aiding or Abetting in the commission of than that of the prescribed penalty for the
cybercrime – Any person who willfully abets or offense or a fine of at least One hundred
aids in the commission of any of the offenses thousand pesos (P100,000) but not
enumerated in this Act shall be held liable. exceeding Five hundred thousand pesos
(P500,000) or both.
14. Attempt in the commission of cybercrime Any
person who willfully attempts to commit any of the
– same as above
offenses enumerated in this Act shall be held
liable.
15. All crimes defined and penalized by the
Penalty to be imposed shall be one (1)
Revised Penal Code, as amended, and special laws,
degree higher than that provided for by
if committed by, through and with the use of
the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and
information and communications technologies shall
special laws, as the case may be.
be covered by the relevant provisions of this Act.

http://digitalfilipino.com/introduction-cybercrime-prevention-act-republic-act-10175/
Although not exactly a cybercrime, I am including
this here as penalties are also imposed by the law.
16. Corporate Liability. (Section 9)
When any of the punishable acts herein defined are
knowingly committed on behalf of or for the
benefit of a juridical person, by a natural person
acting either individually or as part of an organ of
the juridical person, who has a leading position
within, based on:(a) a power of representation of
the juridical person provided the act committed
falls within the scope of such authority;(b) an
authority to take decisions on behalf of the juridical
person. Provided, That the act committed falls
within the scope of such authority; or(c) an
authority to exercise control within the juridical
person,It also includes commission of any of the
punishable acts made possible due to the lack of
supervision or control.
For sanctioned actions, Juridical person
shall be held liable for a fine equivalent to
at least double the fines imposable in
Section 7 up to a maximum of Ten million
pesos (P10,000,000).For neglect such as
misuse of computer resources that resulted
to cybercrime committed in organization
physical or virtual premises or
resources, juridical person shall be held
liable for a fine equivalent to at least
double the fines imposable in Section 7 up
to a maximum of Five million pesos
(P5,000,000).Criminal liability may still
apply to the natural person.

If you are going to include all provisions in the Revised Penal Code, there can even be more than
16 types of cybercrime as a result.

2. Liability on other laws

Section 7 was struck down by Supreme Court as it violated the provision on double jeopardy.

3. Jurisdiction

(a) The Regional Trial Court designated special cybercrime courts shall have jurisdiction over any
violation of the provisions of this Act including any violation committed by a Filipino national
regardless of the place of commission. Jurisdiction shall lie if any of the elements was committed
within the Philippines or committed with the use of any computer system wholly or partly situation
in the country, or when by such commission any damage is caused to a natural or juridical person
who, at the time the offense was committed, was in the Philippines. (section 21)

(b) For international and trans-national cybercrime investigation and prosecution, all relevant
international instruments on international cooperation in criminal matters, arrangements agreed on
the basis of uniform or reciprocal legislation, and domestic laws, to the widest extent possible for
the purposes of investigations or proceedings concerning criminal offenses related to computer
systems and data, or for the collection of evidence in electronic form of a criminal offense shall be
given full force and effect. (section 21)

This gives the Philippines the ability to participate in treaties and of mutual cooperation with
countries that have counterpart legislation effectively – especially – on cybercrime cases that have
team members or victims residing in the Philippines.

http://digitalfilipino.com/introduction-cybercrime-prevention-act-republic-act-10175/
4. Responsibilities of the Philippine National Police (PNP) and National Bureau of
Investigation (NBI)

The law gave police authorities the mandate it needs to initiate investigation to process the various
complaints / report it gets from citizens. There are instances of online attacks, done anonymously,
where victims approach police authorities for help. They often find themselves lost in getting
investigation assistance as police authorities can’t effectively initiate an investigation (only do
special request) – as their legal authority to request for logs or data does not exist at all unless a
case is already filed. (which in case of anonymously done – will be hard to initiate)

I truly believe in giving citizen victims, regardless of stature, the necessary investigation assistance
they deserve. This law – gave our police authorities just that.

The PNP and NBI shall be responsible for the enforcement of this law. This includes:

(a) The PNP and NBI are mandated to organize a cybercrime unit or center manned by special
investigators to exclusively handle cases involving violations of this Act. (Section 10).

(b) The PNP and NBI are required to submit timely and regular reports including pre-operation,
post operation, and investigation results and such other documents as may be required to the
Department of Justice for review and monitoring. (Section 11)

(c) THE SUPREME COURT STRUCK DOWN SECTION 12 THAT IS SUPPOSED TO

authorize law enforcement authorities, without court warrant, to collect or record by
technical or electronic means traffic data in real time associated with specified communications
transmitted by means of a computer system. (Section 12) Getting a COURT WARRANT is a must.

(d) May order a one-time extension of another six (6) months on computer data requested for
preservation. Provided, That once computer data preserved, transmitted or stored by service
provider is used as evidence in a case, the mere furnishing to such service provider of the
transmittal document to the Office of the Prosecutor shall be deemed a notification to preserve the
computer data until the termination of the case. (Section 13)

(e) Carry out search and seizure warrants on computer data. (section 15) Once done, turn-over
custody in a sealed manner to courts within 48 hours (section 16) unless extension for no more
than 30 days was given by the courts (section 15).

(f) Upon expiration of time required to preserve data, police authorities shall immediately and
completely destroy the computer data subject of a preservation and examination. (section 17)

5. Responsibility of service providers (SP)

Service provider refers any public or private entity that provides to users of its service the ability
to communicate by means of a computer system, and processes or stores computer data on behalf
of such communication service or users of such service. (Section 3(n).

http://digitalfilipino.com/introduction-cybercrime-prevention-act-republic-act-10175/
(a) SP upon receipt of a court warrant from police authorities to disclose or submit subscriber’s
information, traffic data or relevant data in its possession or control shall comply within seventy-
two (72) hours from receipt of the order in relation to a valid complaint officially docketed and
assigned for investigation and the disclosure is necessary and relevant for the purpose of
investigation. (section 14)

(b) The integrity of traffic data and subscriber information relating to communication services
provided by a service provider shall be preserved for a minimum of six (6) months period from
the date of the transaction. Content data shall be similarly preserved for six (6) months from the
date of receipt of the order from law enforcement authorities requiring its preservation.(Section
13)

(c) Once computer data preserved, transmitted or stored by service provider is used as evidence in
a case, the mere furnishing to such service provider of the transmittal document to the Office of
the Prosecutor shall be deemed a notification to preserve the computer data until the termination
of the case. (Section 13)

(d) Upon expiration of time required to preserve data, SP shall immediately and completely destroy
the computer data subject of a preservation and examination. (section 17)

(e) Failure to comply with the provisions of Chapter IV specifically the orders from law
enforcement authorities shall be punished as a violation of Presidential Decree No. 1829 with
imprisonment of prision correccional in its maximum period or a fine of One hundred thousand
pesos (P100,000) or both for each and every non-compliance with an order issued by law
enforcement authorities.

Service Provider protection insofar as liability is concern is already covered under the E-
Commerce Law.

6. Responsibility of individuals

(a) Individuals upon receipt of a court warrant being required to disclose or submit subscriber’s
information, traffic data or relevant data in his possession or control shall comply within seventy-
two (72) hours from receipt of the order in relation to a valid complaint officially docketed and
assigned for investigation and the disclosure is necessary and relevant for the purpose of
investigation.

(b) Failure to comply with the provisions of Chapter IV specifically the orders from law
enforcement authorities shall be punished as a violation of Presidential Decree No. 1829 with
imprisonment of prision correccional in its maximum period or a fine of One hundred thousand
pesos (P100,000) or both for each and every non-compliance with an order issued by law
enforcement authorities.

7. Inadmissible evidence

http://digitalfilipino.com/introduction-cybercrime-prevention-act-republic-act-10175/
(a) Any evidence procured without a valid warrant or beyond the authority of the same shall be
inadmissible for any proceeding before any court or tribunal. (section 18)

8. Access limitation

The Supreme Court struck down Section 19 of the law that gives the Department of Justice powers
to order the blocking of access to a site provided there is prima facie evidence supporting it.

9. Cybercrime new authorities

(a) Office of Cybercrime within the DOJ designated as the central authority in all matters relating
to international mutual assistance and extradition. (section 23)

(b) Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center (CICC) an inter-agency body to be created
under the administrative supervision of the Office of the President, for policy coordination among
concerned agencies and for the formulation and enforcement of the national cybersecurity plan.
(section 24)

CICC will be headed by the Executive Director of the Information and Communications
Technology Office under the Department of Science and Technology as Chairperson with the
Director of the NBI as Vice Chairperson; the Chief of the PNP, Head of the DOJ Office of
Cybercrime; and one (1) representative from the private sector and academe, as members. (section
25)

The CICC is the cybercrime czar tasked to ensure this law is effectively implemented. (section 26)

Although the law specifically stated a fifty million pesos (P50,000,000) annual budget, the
determination as where it would go or allotted to, I assume shall be to the CICC.

DEBATE / DISPUTE on the Cybercrime Prevention Act.

In my discussion with lawyers, journalist, bloggers, among others, concerns were raised on how
the law can be in violation of the Constitution and other laws. This includes:

1. Discrimination against online crime.

In crimes committed online, the law gives higher penalty compared to its offline counterpart. This
is seen as violation of principles within the E-Commerce Law where both offline and online
evidence is given equal weight. In its implementing rules and regulations, it also indicated not to
give special benefit or penalty to electronic transactions just because it is committed online.

However, I note that perhaps the reason for this also is to increase the penalties. The original
Revised Penal Code for example gives penalty for libel in the amount of up to six thousand pesos
(P6,000).

2. Did the Cybercrime Law criminalize online libel? Will it result to double jeopardy?

http://digitalfilipino.com/introduction-cybercrime-prevention-act-republic-act-10175/
Some see the Cybercrime Law as enabling criminalization of online libel. I think that is not correct.

Libel being a criminal offense was defined under the Revised Penal Code.

The E-Commerce Law empowered all existing laws to recognize its electronic counterpart. It
recognized both commercial and non-commercial in form. This made electronic documents (text
message, email, web pages, blog post, etc) admissible as evidence in court (and can’t be denied
legal admissibility just because it is electronic form and have the same primary evidence weight).
Existing penalties under the laws where offense fall in shall apply. That is why filing of libel cases
committed electronically became possible in the past years (and there were cases filed, some won,
some lost, and some are ongoing).

Libel is already a criminal offense under the Revised Penal Code as is. Then it got extended to its
electronic form since 2000 (with the recognition of its electronic form provided by the E-
Commerce Law) with existing penalties applying to it. With the Cybercrime Law, it increased the
penalty further if committed with the use of ICT.

According to Atty. Geronimo Sy (Department of Justice), during the PTV4 Forum on Anti-
Cybercrime Law, a complaint on electronic libel will only have one (1) case to be filed. The
maximum penalty for electronic libel is 8 years.

Hitting the “Like” button on Facebook does not make you commit the act of libel. In this ANC
interview, Senator Ed Angara clarified that posting a comment where you get to share your
thoughts is covered under “protected expression”.

The amount of penalty is still to be set by the DOJ as there is usually no automatic degree scaling
in special penal laws. If a person who got accused of committing electronic libel also did the same
in traditional (offline) form, only one case shall be filed. It will be interesting to see how the DOJ
will implement the scaling in effect as a result of this.

The mention of libel in the Cybercrime Law is the most contested provision in the law. The
additional penalties is seen to curtail freedom of expression. Most of the petitions against the
Cybercrime Law focused on this provision.

Numerous legislators are already expressing interest as well in amending the Cybercrime Law
and Revised Penal Code.

3. Real time data access

I appreciate the need for real-time access to data, such as cellular traffic data, especially in tracking
scammers and any critical incident as it happens (such as kidnapping and other in-progress crimes)
where immediate access is important.

However, the mining of this data for surveillance can be seen as subject abuse. Furthermore, if no
intervention such as a judge approval, comes first before getting access where need can be justified.

http://digitalfilipino.com/introduction-cybercrime-prevention-act-republic-act-10175/
Although I think this will slow down the process if anything needs court approval first. But other
parties believe that this is a must requirement. As the Supreme Court struck down Section 12,
I hope processes will be set-up to assist law enforcement with its investigation, to fasten court
warrant issuance, especially as it receives complaints from victims of cybercrime.

As the Cybercrime Law gets upheld by the Supreme Court, here are my personal
notes on the development of its implementing rules and regulations:

1. Ensure that procedures for police assistance and securing court orders will be fair regardless
whether complainants can afford a lawyer or not to assist them.

2. Make the process for data access efficient so that text and online scams culprits can be made
accountable soon while ensuring that the data collected won’t be abused.

I am glad that lobbying moves to strike down the whole Cybercrime Prevention Act
(Republic Act 10175) did not prosper. The law has greater purposes and intentions that can
be helpful in protecting the interest of our netizens and country online.

http://digitalfilipino.com/introduction-cybercrime-prevention-act-republic-act-10175/