The Death of Freedom

Freedom of speech is one of the most sacred freedoms we have in the Philippines. It has toppled dictators, exposed wrongdoing, and spread a lot of good. 

On September 12, 2012, freedom of speech -- over the internet, at least -- died in the Philippines. 

The Online Cybercrime Prevention Act, Republic Act 10175, was signed into law on that day. Now, most provisions in this law I agree with. We do need to ban child pornography, among others, and stiff penalties must be given to those who patronize such things. 

However, a late insertion to this bill made online speech LIBEL. What happened to freedom of expression? It is currently being stifled by the people themselves who do not wish to go to jail. 

You say that it makes sense? It is not logical at all to impose harsh penalties on those who express themselves on social networking sites -- the same penalties meted out to professional journalists. Surely a rant cannot be called a crime, now can it? Well, apparently, now it can. 

Unless the Supreme Court steps up and declares this provision UNCONSTITUTIONAL. 

Here's Article III, Section 4 of the Philippine Constitution: 

No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.

How then can people say that the law in its entirety is constitutional? It isn't. When you threaten the masses with jail time if they say that a certain person has a certain negative quality or has the appearance of wrongdoing (even if it may be true), you are stifling freedom of expression. 

We are being told to trust the government to do its job and to protect civil liberties. REALLY. Do you really expect us to trust the government? With everything happening in the government, it simply isn't realistic. 

Without online freedom, we cannot share many articles we find online. We cannot comment on those articles without the risk of landing in jail. We cannot expose those who try to get away with a lot of wrongdoing -- simply because we citizens who want our country to be better than it is do not want to go to jail or pay stiff penalties. Our country is important, but we love our families too much to go to jail. 

If someone incited rebellion online, then that may be completely different. That's subversion. That's one step below direct armed rebellion, and in fact might lead to that. Now people who say THAT should be put in jail. 

Aside from this, though, people should not be prevented from expressing their disgust for different public officials and powerful rich people. People should be allowed to praise the positive and despise the negative. This is how change happens. 

Without freedom of speech, we are just like repressive regimes in China, Iran, and North Korea. We would be reviving something that existed when we were under martial law, when those who spoke out mysteriously disappeared, never to be seen again. 

Do we really want that distinction for our country?