DOJ wants online libel junked


MANILA, Philippines—The Department of Justice (DOJ) will present to the next Congress “enhancements” to the controversial Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, which would include junking the provision that makes online libel a crime.

Justice Secretary Leila de Lima announced on Thursday at a workshop on protecting children against sexual violence in Southeast Asia that her department has drafted “the latest version” of the Cybercrime Act, or Republic Act No. 10175.

She said the new version “[enhances] the current version” and the DOJ will endorse it to the new Congress.

The justice department is proposing amendments to the controversial law even as the Supreme Court has yet to rule on pending petitions questioning its constitutionality.

De Lima said that regardless of how the high court rules on the 15 petitions questioning the cybercrime law’s constitutionality, the DOJ is determined to propose these amendments.

She did not specify which provisions the DOJ is proposing to remove, but Justice Assistant Secretary Geronimo Sy told reporters that the libel provision in the law was “definitely… out” in the DOJ’s “enhanced” version.

“The provision on libel will not be there for sure which the DOJ in the first place never supported,” Sy said.

Online libel was not part of the original bill proposed by the DOJ but was one of the amendments inserted by the Senate as proposed by Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto II.

Under the Cybercrime Act, online libel, defined as an offense committed “through a computer system or any other similar means which may be devised in the future,” is a crime whose penalty is one degree higher than ordinary libel.

Ordinary libel is punishable with imprisonment of six months to four years.

Sy said the DOJ was taking out the Senate amendments in its proposed version. These include provisions on child pornography and cybersquatting which Sy said was not needed in the Cybercrime Act because “these are punishable under other laws already.”

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.

  • frankstupid

    well still need fix this kind of law for the sake of our rights and freedom!

  • disqusted0fu

    This one is rather unusual. De Lima usually shares the same opinion with the Palace. That’s all she does. When Pnoy tells her to sit she sits, stay she stays, and talk she talks. That’s why both the Palace and the DOJ rarely accomplishes anything.

  • mabyrik

    What must be included in the cybercrime law or the Plagiarism law, is a severe punishment for offenders for copying the works of bloggers and other authors without attribution If the offending party is a government officials, like a SC justice (del castillo) or a senator (sotto, the plagiarist), the penalty must be perpetual disqualification to hold government position, whether elective or non-elective. If the offender translated the works of others from English to Tagalog and treats as his like what Sotto did, he must be decapitated, especially if he will insult the English author by saying, “Aba, Marunong na palang mag-Tagalog si Kennedy”.

  • COOKified Vigilant Citizen

    Dear SC, you perhaps had been blind and deaf enough. A LOT OF FILIPINOS HAD SPOKEN ALREADY THAT THEY DON’T WANT THIS STUPID LAW! What would you need to be convinced, another 15 petitions written in gold plates?
    Well, prepare you websites’ a$$es for any future attacks prepared by the local hacktivists….. -_-

  • Kilabot ng mga Balahibo


    • marionics

      para makpanyurak ka ng puri ng tao online ulit??? he he

      o iba ang gusto mong yurakan ng puri???

      he he

      • Kilabot ng mga Balahibo

        basta totoo. hehehe.

        “o iba ang gusto mong yurakan ng puri???”

        eh di ang magagaling nating nasa gobyerno na nagsasabing hindi sila kapareho ng mas nakaraan administrasyon… pero ganun din naman. ahahahaha!

        how have you been?

      • Kilabot ng mga Balahibo

        basta totoo. hehehe.

        “o iba ang gusto mong yurakan ng puri???”

        eh di ang magagaling nating nasa gobyerno na nagsasabing hindi sila kapareho ng mas nakaraan administrasyon… pero ganun din naman. ahahahaha!

        how have you been?

      • marionics

        hay naku. tagal na akong di nakakayurak ng puri. puro walang puro lately nayuyurakan ko hahaha

      • Kilabot ng mga Balahibo

        bakit pag ang mga katagang ‘puri’ or ‘paninirang puri’ naririnig ko, si atty jimeno ang pumapasok sa isip ko?

        ^^ pun ba iyon sinulat ko?!!

      • marionics

        dahil manyak kaaaa!!!


      • Kilabot ng mga Balahibo

        I say it loud say it proud. manyak ako.

        seriously, this is why i dont understand gays. ekups are so delicious.

      • marionics

        aaaah e siyempre iba naman yan. ika nga dun sa spartacus (1960)-

        Marcus Licinius Crassus: Do you eat oysters?

        Antoninus: When I have them, master.

        Marcus Licinius Crassus: Do you eat snails?

        Antoninus: No, master.

        Marcus Licinius Crassus: Do you consider the eating of oysters to be moral and the eating of snails to be immoral?

        Antoninus: No, master.

        Marcus Licinius Crassus: Of course not. It is all a matter of taste, isn’t it?

        Antoninus: Yes, master.

        Marcus Licinius Crassus: And taste is not the same as appetite, and therefore not a question of morals.

        Antoninus: It could be argued so, master.

        Marcus Licinius Crassus: My robe, Antoninus. My taste includes both snails and oysters.

      • Kilabot ng mga Balahibo

        ahahaa, i assure you when i implied that i dont get gays, there wasn’t any moral reference to that question.

        perhaps the more exact question is that why can they not appreciate taste for oysters or tahong, double entendre implied.

      • marionics

        e kasi nga yan ang taste nila e. it’s a matter of taste nga sabi ng romanong amo ni antoninus. kumbaga sa pagkain e hindi lahat e type kumain ng durian o papaitan o simpalukang ulo ng kambing (o aso), pero ako type ko LAHAT yun he he

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