DEBATE POINTERS

1st Argument

Private lives or privacy is a requisite of a democratic state like in the Philippines.

It is a fundamental human right

Presidential candidates are entitled to the right to privacy and their individual personal information is
protected by Republic Act. 10173 – The Data Privacy Act of the Philippines.

it is the State’s policy to protect the fundamental human right of privacy, of communication while
ensuring the free flow of information to promote innovation and growth. The State recognizes the vital
role of information and communications technology in nation-building and its inherent obligation to
ensure that personal information in information and communications systems in the government and in
the private sector are secured and protected.

- sensitive personal information according to this Act refers to personal information such as the
individual’s race, ethnic origin, marital status, age, color, religious, philosophical affiliations,
individual health, education, the genetic or sexual life of a person.
- The unauthorized processing of personal information shall be penalized by imprisonment ranging
from one (1) year to three (3) years and a fine of not less than Five hundred thousand pesos
(Php500,000.00) but not more than Two million pesos (Php2,000,000.00) shall be imposed on
persons who process personal information without the consent of the data subject, or without
being authorized under this Act or any existing law.
- If we, private citizens are protected by this act and by the constitution the candidates are still
private citizens and shall also be protected.
- Activities that restrict the right to privacy, such as surveillance and censorship, can only be justified
when they are prescribed by law, necessary to achieve a legitimate aim, and proportionate to the
aim pursued
2nd Argument
Presidential candidates should be judged only on the basis of what is relevant to their job.
According to a well-known study of presidential character, some common leadership qualities that
successful U.S. presidents appear to have in common are the following:
 A strong vision for the country’s future
 An ability to put their own times in the perspective of history
 Effective communication skills
 The courage to make unpopular decisions
 Crisis management skills
 Character and integrity
 Wise appointments
 An ability to work with Congress
The people should examine the competencies and capabilities of the presidential candidate rather than
their personal and private lives.

What the presidential candidates do in their personal life is none of the public's concern as long as it will
not affect their job.

- The concept of a position or office is predicated on people's ability to self-discipline and

distinguish between their private and public lives.
- There are Laws, norms, codes of conduct, and expectations of unbiased, fair, and competent
action that bind public officials.
- For example, the Republic Act 6713, the CODE OF CONDUCT AND ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR
PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES which states the standards of personal conduct in the
discharge and execution of official duties.
3rd Argument

Personality Oriented Politics

One of the problems in the long history of elections in the Philippines is elitism and personality-oriented
politics.

The citizens and media tend to pry on the personal and private aspects rather than the ability of an
individual.

In the long history, the people tend to vote for candidates because of their personal affairs and personal
relations and connections (one of the reasons why political dynasty is such an issue in the country) We
pry on their private lives rather than what they could offer in the position.

- we don’t elect our leaders to be moral authorities, but legislative ones.

We need a presidential candidate who is competent and capable of the heavy job of running the
country, who can be the Head of the State and the Government. The commander in chief of the
armed forces, and can exercise control over all the executive departments, bureaus, and offices.

- Continuous delving into the private lives of public leaders really jeopardizes the state’s
democracy's ability to operate.
- As I’ve said it is a requisite to have the right to privacy in a democratic country, once we pry on
the unnecessary matters that would clearly not affect the capability of the person to run the
country, it is we who invoke their rights and should have a reflection on our self-righteousness.
- Matters that do not and will not affect other people shall be private and not for public interest.