Criminal Law; Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012

In its Declaration of Policy, the State recognizes the following:

a. The vital role of information and communications industries such as content production,
telecommunications, broadcasting electronic commerce, and data processing, in the nation’s
overall social and economic development;
b. The importance of providing an environment conducive to the development, acceleration, and
rational application and exploitation of information and communications technology (ICT) to
attain free, easy, and intelligible access to exchange and/or delivery of information; and the
need to protect and safeguard the integrity of computer, computer and communications
systems, networks, and databases, and the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of
information and data stored therein, from all forms of misuse, abuse, and illegal access by
making punishable under the law such conduct or conducts.

Hence, this law aims to effectively prevent and combat such offenses by facilitating their detection,
investigation, and prosecution at both the domestic and international levels, and by providing
arrangements for fast and reliable international cooperation.

Disini v. Secretary of Justice

Petitioners challenge the constitutionality of the provisions of the law. The summary of the ruling are as
follows:

Valid and Constitutional:

a. Provision that penalizes accessing a computer system without right;

b. Provision that penalizes data interference, including transmission of viruses;
c. Provision that penalizes cyber-squatting or acquiring domain name over the internet in bad
faith to the prejudice of others;
d. Provision that penalizes identity theft or the use or misuse of identifying information
belonging to another;
e. Provision that penalizes cybersex or the lascivious exhibition of sexual organs or sexual
activity for favor or consideration;
f. Provision that penalizes the production of child pornography;
g. Provision that imposes penalties one degree higher when crimes defined under the Revised
Penal Code are committed with the use of information and communications technologies;
h. Provision that permits law enforcement authorities to require service providers to preserve
traffic data and subscriber information as well as specified content data for six months;
i. Provision that authorizes the disclosure of computer data under a court-issued warrant;
j. Provision that authorizes the search, seizure, and examination of computer data under a
court-issued warrant;
k. Provision that authorizes the destruction of previously preserved computer data after the
expiration of the prescribed holding periods;
l. Provision that penalizes obstruction of justice in relation to cybercrime investigations;
m. Provision that establishes a Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center (CICC);
n. Provision that defines the CICC’s Powers and Functions; and
o. Articles 353, 354, 361, and 362 of the Revised Penal Code that penalizes libel .

Void and Unconstitutional:

a. Provision that penalizes posting of unsolicited commercial communications;

b. Provision that authorizes collection or recording of traffic data in real-time; and
c. Provision that authorizes the DOJ to restrict or block access to suspected computer data.

Valid but Qualified:

a. Provision that penalizes online libel is VALID and CONSTITUTIONAL with respect to the
original author of the post; but VOID and UNCONSTITUTIONAL with respect to others who
simply receive the post and react to it;
b. Provisions that penalizes aiding or abetting and attempt in the commission of cybercrimes:
a. VA L I D and CONSTITUTIONAL only in cases of Illegal Access, Illegal Interception,
Data and System Interference, Misuse of Devices, Cyber-squatting, Computer-
related Forgery, Computer-related Fraud, Computer-related Identity Theft, and on
Cybersex; but
b. VOID and UNCONSTITUTIONAL with respect to on Child Pornography, Unsolicited
Commercial Communications, and on online Libel.

Case to case basis:

a. General rule: The authority to prosecute of the offender under RPC and the Cybercrime
Prevention Act is left at the discretion of the court depending on the circumstances.
b. Exception: Double jeopardy cases
a. Online libel (RPC and Cybercrime Prevention Act)
b. Child pornography (Cybercrime Prevention Act and Anti-Child Pornography Act)