RIGHT TO PRIVACY
• (Art. III, Secs. 1 &3)
Section 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or
property without due process of law, nor shall any person be
denied the equal protection of the laws.
Section 3. (1) The privacy of communication and
correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of
the court, or when public safety or order requires otherwise, as
prescribed by law.
(2) Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding
section shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any
proceeding.
• Art. 26, Civil Code
Every person shall respect the dignity, personality, privacy and
peace of mind of his neighbors and other persons. The
following and similar acts, though they may not constitute a
criminal offense, shall produce a cause of action for damages,
prevention and other relief:
(1) Prying into the privacy of another's residence;
(2) Meddling with or disturbing the private life or family
relations of another;
(3) Intriguing to cause another to be alienated from his friends;
(4) Vexing or humiliating another on account of his religious
beliefs, lowly station in life, place of birth, physical defect, or
other personal condition.
• Electronic Commerce Act of 2000
• SECTION 7(7). Legal Recognition of Electronic
Documents. — Electronic documents shall have the
legal effect, validity or enforceability as any other
document or legal writing, and —
• (a) Where the law requires a document to be in
writing, that requirement is met by an electronic
document if the said electronic document
maintains its integrity and reliability and can be
authenticated so as to be usable for subsequent
reference, in that —
• (i) The electronic document has remained
complete and unaltered, apart from the addition of
any endorsement and any authorized change, or
any change which arises in the normal course of
communication, storage and display; and
• (ii) The electronic document is reliable in the light
of the purpose for which it was generated and in
the light of all relevant circumstances.
• (b) Paragraph (a) applies whether the requirement
therein is in the form of an obligation or whether
the law simply provides consequences for the
document not being presented or retained in its
original form.
• (c) Where the law requires that a document be
presented or retained in its original form, that
requirement is met by an electronic document if —
• i) There exist a reliable assurance as to the integrity
of the document from the time when it was first
generated in its final form; and
• ii) That document is capable of being displayed to
the person to whom it is to be
presented: Provided,That no provision of this Act
shall apply to vary any and all requirements of
existing laws on formalities required in the
execution of documents for their validity.
• For evidentiary purposes, an electronic document
shall be the functional equivalent of a written
document under existing laws.
• This Act does not modify any statutory rule relating
to the admissibility of electronic data messages or
electronic documents, except the rules relating to
authentication and best evidence.
• SECTION 31(30). Lawful Access. — Access to an
electronic file, or an electronic signature of an
electronic data message or electronic document
shall only be authorized and enforced in favor of
the individual or entity having a legal right to the
possession or the use of the plaintext, electronic
signature or file and solely for the authorized
purposes. The electronic key for identity or
integrity shall not be made available to any person
or party without the consent of the individual or
entity in lawful possession of that electronic key.
• SECTION 32(31). Obligation of Confidentiality. —
Except for the purposes authorized under this Act,
any person who obtained access to any electronic
key, electronic data message or electronic
document, book, register, correspondence,
information, or other material pursuant to any
powers conferred under this Act, shall not convey
to or share the same with any other person.
• SECTION 33. Penalties. — The following Acts
shall be penalized by fine and/or imprisonment, as
follows:
• a)(32) Hacking or cracking which refers to
unauthorized access into or interference in a
computer system/server or information and
communication system; or any access in order to
corrupt, alter, steal, or destroy using a computer or
other similar information and communication
devices, without the knowledge and consent of the
owner of the computer or information and
communication system, including the introduction
of computer viruses and the like, resulting in the
corruption, destruction, alteration, theft or loss of
electronic data messages or electronic documents
shall be punished by a minimum fine of One
hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) and a
maximum commensurate to the damage incurred
and a mandatory imprisonment of six (6) months
to three (3) years;
• b)(33) Piracy or the unauthorized copying,
reproduction, dissemination, distribution,
importation, use, removal, alteration, substitution,
modification, storage, uploading, downloading,
communication, making available to the public, or
broadcasting of protected material, electronic
signature or copyrighted works including legally
protected sound recordings or phonograms or
information material on protected works, through
the use of telecommunication networks, such as,
but not limited to, the internet, in a manner that
infringes intellectual property rights shall be
punished by a minimum fine of One hundred
thousand pesos (P100,000.00) and a maximum
commensurate to the damage incurred and a
mandatory imprisonment of six (6) months to
three (3) years;
RA 4200
SECTION 31(30). Lawful Access. — Access to an electronic
file, or an electronic signature of an electronic data message or
electronic document shall only be authorized and enforced in
favor of the individual or entity having a legal right to the
possession or the use of the plaintext, electronic signature or
file and solely for the authorized purposes. The electronic key
for identity or integrity shall not be made available to any
person or party without the consent of the individual or entity
in lawful possession of that electronic key.
SECTION 32(31). Obligation of Confidentiality. — Except for the
purposes authorized under this Act, any person who obtained
access to any electronic key, electronic data message or
electronic document, book, register, correspondence,
information, or other material pursuant to any powers
conferred under this Act, shall not convey to or share the same
with any other person.
SECTION 33. Penalties. — The following Acts shall be
penalized by fine and/or imprisonment, as follows:
a)(32) Hacking or cracking which refers to unauthorized access
into or interference in a computer system/server or
information and communication system; or any access in order
to corrupt, alter, steal, or destroy using a computer or other
similar information and communication devices, without the
knowledge and consent of the owner of the computer or
information and communication system, including the
introduction of computer viruses and the like, resulting in the
corruption, destruction, alteration, theft or loss of electronic
data messages or electronic documents shall be punished by a
minimum fine of One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00)
and a maximum commensurate to the damage incurred and a
mandatory imprisonment of six (6) months to three (3) years;
b)(33) Piracy or the unauthorized copying, reproduction,
dissemination, distribution, importation, use, removal,
alteration, substitution, modification, storage, uploading,
downloading, communication, making available to the public,
or broadcasting of protected material, electronic signature or
copyrighted works including legally protected sound
recordings or phonograms or information material on
protected works, through the use of telecommunication
networks, such as, but not limited to, the internet, in a manner
that infringes intellectual property rights shall be punished by
a minimum fine of One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00)
and a maximum commensurate to the damage incurred and a
mandatory imprisonment of six (6) months to three (3) years;
Privileged Communication (Rule 130, Sec. 24(c)
A person authorized to practice medicine, surgery or obstetrics cannot in a
civil case, without the consent of the patient, be examined as to any advice
or treatment given by him or any information which he may have acquired
in attending such patient in a professional capacity, which information was
necessary to enable him to act in capacity, and which would blacken the Since the object of the privilege is to protect the patient, it may
reputation of the patient. be waived if no timely objection is made to the physician's
testimony. (OMNIBUS MOTION RULE)
Lim v. CA
REQUISITES:
In order that the privilege may be successfully claimed, the
Facts:
following requisites must concur:
Juan Sim filed for a petition for annulment with the RTC of
Pangasinan on the ground that P has been suffering from a
mental illness called schizophrenia before, during, and after the 1. the privilege is claimed in a civil case;
marriage and until present. PR announced that he would
present as his next witness the Chief of Female Services of the
2. the person against whom the privilege is claimed is one duly
National Mental Health Hospital, Dr. Lydia Acampado, who
specializes in psychiatry. The counsel forthwith orally applied authorized to practice medicine, surgery or obstetrics;
for the issuance of a subpoena ad testificandum requiring the
doctor to testify. P’s counsel opposed on the motion on the 3. such person acquired the information while he was
ground that any testimony from the doctor will violate the attending to the patient in his professional capacity;
doctor-client privileged communication since the latter
personally examined the P in her professional capacity. Despite
such opposition, the subpoena was issued. P’s counsel filed for 4. the information was necessary to enable him to act in that
capacity; and
a motion to quash the subpoena. Counsel for PR contended,
however, that Dr. Acampado would be presented as an expert
witness and would not testify on any information acquired 5. the information was confidential, and, if disclosed, would
while attending to the petitioner in a professional capacity.
blacken the reputation (formerly character) of the patient.
Respondent Judge denied the urgent motion and allowed the
doctor to testify.
These requisites conform with the four (4) fundamental
conditions necessary for the establishment of a privilege
P’s counsel filed with the public respondent to annul the order against the disclosure of certain communications, to wit:
of the RTC judge. The CA denied the petition on the ground
that P’s counsel failed to prove the confidential nature of the
1. The communications must originate in a confidence that
testimony given by or obtained from Dr. Acampado. CA
they will not be disclosed.
further ruled that the doctor was summoned only to testify as
an expert witness and not as an attending physician of P.
2. This element of confidentiality must be essential to the full
Issue: WoN the case at bar falls within the PC under Rule 130. and satisfactory maintenance of the relation between the
parties.
RULING:
3. The relation must be one which in the opinion of the
community ought to be sedulously fostered
This rule on the physician-patient privilege is intended to
facilitate and make safe full and confidential disclosure by
the patient to the physician of all facts, circumstances and 4. The injury that would inure to the relation by the disclosure
symptoms, untrammeled by apprehension of their of the communications must be greater than the benefit
subsequent and enforced disclosure and publication on thereby gained for the correct disposal of litigation.
the witness stand, to the end that the physician may form a
correct opinion, and be enabled safely and efficaciously to The physician may be considered to be acting in his
treat his patient. It rests in public policy and is for the general professional capacity when he attends to the patient for
interest of the community. curative, preventive, or palliative treatment. Thus, only
disclosures which would have been made to the physician to
enable him "safely and efficaciously to treat his patient" are
covered by the privilege. It is to be emphasized that it is the
tenor only of the communication that is privileged. The mere
fact of making a communication, as well as the date of a
consultation and the number of consultations, are therefore
not privileged from disclosure, so long as the subject
communicated is not stated.
One who claims this privilege must prove the presence of these
aforementioned requisites. There is authority to the effect that
information elicited during consultation with a physician in the
presence of third parties removes such information from the
mantle of the privilege. It is quite clear from Dr. Acampado's
testimony that the petitioner was never interviewed alone. Said
interviews were always conducted in the presence of a third
party, the father of Nelly Lim who is also a doctor.
While it may be true that counsel for the petitioner opposed
the oral request for the issuance of a subpoena ad
testificandum to Dr. Acampado and filed a formal motion for
the quashal of the said subpoena a day before the witness was
to testify, the petitioner makes no claim in any of her
pleadings that her counsel had objected to any question
asked of the witness on the ground that it elicited an
answer that would violate the privilege, despite the trial
court's advice that said counsel may interpose his objection to
the testimony "once it becomes apparent that the testimony,
sought to be elicited is covered by the privileged
communication rule." The particular portions of the
stenographic notes of the testimony of Dr. Acampado quoted
in the petitioner's Petition and Memorandum, and in the
private respondent's Memorandum, do not at all show that any
objections were interposed. Even granting ex gratia that the
testimony of Dr. Acampado could be covered by the privilege,
the failure to seasonably object thereto amounted to a waiver
thereof.
WHAT SHOULD BE KEPT CONFIDENTIAL
1) RA 9165 (Dangerous Drugs Act)
a. SEC. 60. Confidentiality of Records Under the Voluntary
Submission Program. — Judicial and medical records
of drug dependents under the voluntary submission
program shall be confidential and shall not be used
against him for any purpose, except to determine
how many times, by himself/herself or through
his/her parent, spouse, guardian or relative within
the fourth degree of consanguinity or affinity,
he/she voluntarily submitted himself/herself for
confinement, treatment and rehabilitation or has
been committed to a Center under this program.
b. SEC. 64. Confidentiality of Records Under the
Compulsory Submission Program. — The records of a
drug dependent who was rehabilitated and
discharged from the Center under the compulsory
submission program, or who was charged for
violation of Section 15 of this Act, shall be covered
by Section 60 of this Act. However, the records
of a drug dependent who was not rehabilitated,
or who escaped but did not surrender
himself/herself within the prescribed period,
shall be forwarded to the court and their use shall
be determined by the court, taking into
consideration public interest and the welfare of the
drug dependent.
c. SEC. 67. Discharge After Compliance with Conditions of
Suspended Sentence of a First-Time Minor Offender. — If
the accused first time minor offender under
suspended sentence complies with the applicable
rules and regulations of the Board, including
confinement in a Center, the court, upon a
favorable recommendation of the Board for the
final discharge of the accused, shall discharge the
accused and dismiss all proceedings. Upon the
dismissal of the proceedings against the accused,
the court shall enter an order to expunge all official
records, other than the confidential record to be
retained by the DOJ relating to the case. Such an
order, which shall be kept confidential, shall restore
the accused to his/her status prior to the case.
He/she shall not be held thereafter to be guilty of
perjury or of concealment or misrepresentation by
reason of his/her failure to acknowledge the case
or recite any fact related thereto in response to any
inquiry made of him for any purpose.
2) RA 9262 – VAWC
SECTION 44. Confidentiality. – All records pertaining to cases
of violence against women and their children including those
in the barangay shall be confidential and all public officers and
employees and public or private clinics to hospitals shall
respect the right to privacy of the victim. Whoever publishes
or causes to be published, in any format, the name, address,
telephone number, school, business address, employer, or
other identifying information of a victim or an immediate
family member, without the latter’s consent, shall be liable
to the contempt power of the court.