As I was scanning in my twitter account this morning, I was astonished by the amount of buzz about Republic Act. 10175, which is also known as the (1)Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012. There were even some who have changed their profile picture to full black-out image to represent their protest to this new law.
Out of curiosity I try to search the net and tried to obtain a copy of the law for me to at least have the grasp and to at least express my own view about this very controversial topic. Here are my views:
1. Is the law really necessary?? Is the law beneficial??
In today's environment when everything is just a click away and we can do almost everything online, my personal view is that the law is really neccessary. The Congress have done a great job on identifying the need and the initiating the passing of the law in addressing this impecable need. Moreover, with these move will enhance the ICT business in which current and prospective BPO businesses will feel a more safer with regards to safeguarding their business data and other relevant information being transmitted through internet and wireless communication. And as a matter of fact they are pushing with these law way back from the time they are still not as big as industry and having catered to this very delicate matter will boost other foreign companies to invest despite intense competition in countries such as India, Malaysia among others. Aside from the boost in some industry the law caters the need for other cybercrimes such as child pornography, cybersex and lifting patented/trademark materials without consent and permission.
2. If the law is necessary and it contribute to the betterment of some industries, why are there protest against this law?
Based on what I have read on the law and some of the protest on social media sites. Many are questioning the legality on the basis of the "freedom of expression", that will preclude them in expressing their opinion through social media such as twitter, facebook and blogs.
The definition provided in RA 10175, is very limited and vague that many observe that will limit their expression on the context of that they are being penalized especially when they try to express their feelings and dissappointments in the goverment officials and other things that they do feel that they should not be doing.
In my opinion, the RA 10175 lacks the clarity and should adressed the penalty provision and scope of the punishable acts and the gravity of the offenses for the sake of addressing the public clamour. Though I expect that the lawmakers would release an IRR with regards to the RA considering dialogues conducted with the representative of those who are seeking clarifications with the RA. A healthy dialogue would not harm anyone but clarify things that should be clarified before hand.
Well I guess that's all that I need to say for now. As of the time being no TRO was issued for the so let's all abide by the law until a clarificatory statement from the judiciary is given.
Reference:
(1) PDF copy RA. 10175 from www.gov.ph
0 comments:
Post a Comment