Gov’t lawyers: Cyber law allows authorities to look into bank transactions



MANILA, Philippines—Government lawyers on Tuesday admitted that collection of traffic data under Republic Act 10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act would include collection of electronic banking transactions.

“Would the collection [of traffic data] also include electronic banking transactions,” Supreme Court Associate Justice Mariano Del Castillo asked Solicitor General Francis Jardeleza during Tuesday’s oral argument.

Jardeleza said “yes.”

“Won’t this be a violation of the Bank Secrecy Law,” asked Del Castillo.

The government lawyer said no because the provision is about “hot pursuit of a hacker.”

Del Castillo has been questioning the government lawyer why Congress did not define what is a traffic data that can be collected without intervention from the courts.

Jardeleza admits that he does know why it was not clearly defined.

Under Section 12, traffic data “refers only to the communication’s origin, destination, route, time, date, size, duration or type of underlying service but not content nor identities.”

The same provision allows law enforcement authorities to collect these traffic datas without need of court authorization.

“Power to collect traffic data is subject to abuse,” Del Castillo said then asked.

Get Inquirer updates while on the go, add us on these apps:

Inquirer Viber

Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.

  • chitetskoy

    Walang magbabasa ng electronic data traffic ng walang pahintulot ng korte. Ano pati yung sekreto ng negosyo, pati yung user at password namin, babasahin nila? ibasura itong p00p na batas na ito.

  • Vin

    Even the SOPA and PIPA laws in the US didn’t prevailed as it was deemed in violation to the freedom of speech and expression. Why is the Cybercrime law would be any different?

  • Handiong

    We all know that Tito Sotto was the main proponent of the Cyber law. I wonder if this law was simply plagiarized, with the sponsors not knowing what they were doing.

  • dennis

    “Under Section 12, traffic data “refers only to the communication’s origin, destination, route, time, date, size, duration or type of underlying service but not content nor identities.”
    Simple lang naman yan eh! Why don´t you have to create a bill that will NOT ALLOWED ANONYMOUS TRANSACTION? IDENTITIES AND PURPOSE OF CERTAIN TRANSACTION MUST BE IDENTIFIED! Of course! Entering into certain private transaction is hard for the people to understand specially if a country is presently functioning in democratic ways! Cyber laws regarding authorities to look into bank transactions must be legally specified and explain! But it should not cover exposing it to the public if there is something “fishy transaction” happen? Things must be deal individual,case to case basis.

  • Tonton

    Have we managed to slide from a laggard state to a dystopia in a few weeks? 

To subscribe to the Philippine Daily Inquirer newspaper in the Philippines, call +63 2 896-6000 for Metro Manila and Metro Cebu or email your subscription request here.

Factual errors? Contact the Philippine Daily Inquirer's day desk. Believe this article violates journalistic ethics? Contact the Inquirer's Reader's Advocate. Or write The Readers' Advocate:

c/o Philippine Daily Inquirer Chino Roces Avenue corner Yague and Mascardo Streets, Makati City,Metro Manila, Philippines Or fax nos. +63 2 8974793 to 94


editors' picks



latest videos