While I do not agree with Atty. Roque, somehow, on granting PNoy emergency powers over the Power Rate Hike Issue even if it is temporary, I am interested in his point, emphasizing that Access to Electricity is a HUMAN RIGHT. Looking forward to the recognition of such in our jurisdiction . 🙂
This is Cybercrime Law in action! (kahit sa October 3 pa magti-take-effect yung law, may umaabuso na.)
This very recent incident will show us how the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 (RA 10175) is FLAWED and will indeed cause harm to everyone. These statements by a certain page claiming to be of PNP give us a clear picture of what will happen starting October 3, 2012. One, that is suggested by these statements, is the INVASION of PRIVACY of every netizen. If the government suspects us of having committed a “cybercrime” as defined in the newly-enacted law, they can immediately track us down and monitor our accounts, WITHOUT COURT ORDER.
This is a CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATION. The 1987 Philippine Constitution provides in Article III, Section 3. (1) “The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of the court, or when public safety or order requires otherwise as prescribed by law.”
Familiar, eh? Yes, it exhibits Martial Law, in cyberspace. But not just in cyberspace because threats to our lives continue in the real world — spying, tracking, filing cases against us and the possibility of being punished one degree higher (in case of “online libel”).
Clearly, this law is ANTI-PEOPLE! We CALL the Supreme Court to URGENTLY heed the petitions we filed against the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012!
If the Aquino Government is really democratic, such laws abridging our freedom to exercise our democratic rights should not be passed or approved. In case they have been approved, immediate junking/action to revise shall be done.
Fight for a GENUINELY DEMOCRATIC PHILIPPINES! No to e-Martial Law! Junk the Cybercrime Law! Sign the petition here: http://www.change.org/petitions/junk-the-cybercrime-prevention-law
PS: I hope we can use this against the Cybercrime Law
PSS: Can we file a case against the PNP if our evidences will tell us that it is indeed the PNP that is owning the page? I can feel it poses threat to the netizens who commented on that post, esp. to that person whom the PNP addressed such statements.