The Philippine Bar Association (PBA) is the latest in a long
list of groups opposed to the Cybercrime Prevention Act, describing it as
vague, potentially dangerous and discriminatory.
A petition to the Supreme Court was filed yesterday by the PBA
questioning the constitutionality of the controversial law.
The lawyers’ association said it had reviewed the law and found
some of its provisions raised “serious constitutional issues.”
“The rule of law is as essential in our physical world as it is
in cyberspace,” noted PBA president Ma. Charito Cruz.
The petition urged the Supreme Court to place Republic Act 10175
under strict scrutiny.
It cautioned against the law being used to suppress free speech,
particularly during times of change or crisis.
Access to online media outlets could possibly be restricted or
blocked by the government on the pretext that it has libelous content, the PBA
petition said.
As it stands, some of the new law’s provisions were too vague,
which would “keep the people guessing” and give law enforcers “unbridled
discretion.”
The PBA also flagged provisions allowing searches and seizures
without a court warrant, with what it called “awesome powers” given to “agents
of a political branch of government.”
It said it was possible that even the online communications of
High Court members could be placed under surveillance, if those in power
determined there was “due cause” to do so. – Paolo Romero, Jess Diaz, Marvin
Sy, Edu Punay, Alexis Romero, Sandy Araneta.
