Policing the Internet

By DUCKY PAREDES

‘R.A. 10175 sure is tough; not only does libel put you in jail; it even does so, under this new law, for a longer time than ever before. Libel should no longer be a crime that still imposes jail time.’

WHAT could be so wrong with R.A. 10175, “an act defining cybercrime, providing for the prevention, investigation, suppression and the imposition of penalties therefor and for other purposes” that was enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled and already signed into law by the President?

The way I see it, R.A. 10175 is a perfect fit to the maxim “duro lex sed lex” -- the law is tough but it is the law! R.A. 10175 sure is tough; not only does libel put you in jail; it even does so, under this new law, for a longer time than ever before.

Libel should no longer be a crime that still imposes jail time.

This was understandable in the days when there were limited outlets for expression so that stricter limits on what was allowed had to have jail terms attached to the use of derogatory information not falling under fair reporting. This was because there were limited avenues for making public reports. For instance, often, one only had one newspaper in a country.

Later, there were sevel competing print media, followed by radio, television and, more recently, the Internet, which, unlike all prior media, was not owned by one person nor is it even a business as before or even organized. The Internet is as intimate as a telephone and as efficient as a rumor mill. Thus, how is it fair that rules are written for its use that would even put one away for a long time in the event that one said or wrote anything and was sued for what he thought?

***

By now, when media does not necessarily mean a printed newspaper or magazine or an organized radio or television program which are at the same times businesses, is there still need for libel to be criminalized? I believe that one ought to be able to sue for sums of money in the event that one feels that his reputation has been unjustly compromised. But, to punish the act with jail time is to go back to the time when the one newspaper in town could still destroy one’s reputation.

Today, with so many cities having multiple newspapers, radio and TV stations, an unjust, unfair or even malicious report in any one of the competing media in one’s locality would hardly have any effect on one’s reputation. Thus, even for libel cases committed by major media, the more proper way to doing justice is the award of a sum of money, rather than putting the guilty behind bars.

***

What makes a cyber crime? There are two categories: First, there are those target computers directly, such as spreading computer viruses, malware and denial-of-service attacks (that target large computer networks);

Then, there are common crimes facilitated by using computer networks and devices, most common of which are cyberstalking, fraud and identity theft.

I would also criminalize the act of sending out spam in bulk. Spam is the unsolicited sending of bulk email for commercial purposes, which clogs up computer networks and have even made individual computers unusable by the sheer volume of spam that it has accepted.

***

How does one fix this situation we are in? Clearly, our Senate has done a dumb thing – pass a law that it totally unacceptable to the citizenry and one which would tend to stunt the growth of computer and Internet usage which has been identified as one of the paths towards progress and modernity. Computers and the Internet are also integral to commerce and economic growth.

Does our Senate not have anyone who looks at what the senators have approved before sending this out to the world? With the thousands employed by this government, is there no one who will do the last read to see that all of the commas and periods are in their proper places and that the nascent law makes good sense?

How did such a bill as badly crafted as this pass muster with the legal eagles who are supposed to be on the legal panel that advises our president on what he signs for approval.

Clearly, this is now law with only the official publication still needing to be done. Can this be fixed by writing the IRR (Implementing Rules and Regulations) that would have to basically say something other than what is clearly written in the new law?

Can one amend a bad law through its IRR?

To me, the best fix for R.A. 10175, is what many in the print and broadcast professions have been campaigning for -- finally decriminalize libel.

By decriminalizing libel, one also takes away the one thing that small-time politicos have to threaten local journalists (besides having them shot) which is time in jail.

Once libel is decriminalized, the only recourse is to file for damages, which in the case of small-town journalism would mean that it is the publisher and not the reporter who bears the brunt of the monetary damage.

For Internet libel, a blogger ought to be responsible for his own blog and commercial establishments ought to be aware of whatever comes out on their official webpages. And, for those using social media? They ought to be responsible enough to answer for whatever they enter for publication in facebook, twitter or where ever else on the Internet.

***

Readers who missed a column can access www.duckyparedes.com/blogs. This is updated daily. Your reactions are welcome at duckyparedes@yahoo.com