posted at 12:46pm. breaking news from ABS-CBN news: the TRO against the Cybercrime Prevention Act has been extended indefinitely by the Supreme Court.
” The Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled to extend the 120-day temporary restraining order on the implementation of Republic Act 10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012
“In a text message to ABS-CBN News, Supreme Court acting public information officer Gleo Guerra said the court has ordered an extension of the TRO ‘until the court orders otherwise.’ xxx” (ABS-CBN News)
Breaking News. From interaksyon.com (online news of Channel 5) as of 1pm: SC stops Cybercrime Law by TRO.
“MANILA, Philippines – (UPDATE, 1:02 p.m.) The Supreme Court on Tuesday unanimously voted for the issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO) stopping the enforcement of the controversial Cybercrime Prevention Act. All 14 justices were present. xxx
xxx
“The TRO was issued as the high tribunal deliberated en banc on 15 petitions from various groups and personalities from the media, lawyers’ and free-speech advocates’ sectors, all seeking a halt to implementation of the Cybercrime Prevention Act. xxx” ” – interaksyon.com
YES! Unanimous.
They read it. They know their constitutional law.
A TRO from the Supreme Court is indefinite in character. It is effective unless set aside, and it becomes permanent when the SC decides in favor of the petitioners.
(Updated as of 5:20 pm: The SC in its resolution limited the TRO to only 120 days, oral arguments set: Jan. 15, 2013. Merry Christmas!)
xxx (continuation of 1pm blog post)
Unconstitutional kayo, Senado, Konggreso, Malacañang !On your faces, er, este, on its face, the law is unconstitutional. “On its face” means just by a reading of the text.
Ipinilit pa ng Malacañang — violative of the right to be secure in one’s person, houses, papers, and effects, the right to privacy of communication and correspondence, the right against double jeopardy, the right to freedom from prior restraint, the free speech clause, etc. etc.
Mabuhay ang lahat ng netizens na pumalag at hindi pumayag sa Cybercrime Law!
(Salamat di na madilim ang blog ko)
See previous blog post, below, for context, posted five hours before issuance of TRO:
Media law final exams today. 1pm exam, finished, examinees have left the room and spread the word, so the 1pm questions are now public. Here’s one of the bonus questions:
For 5 points! (Drumroll…)
66-71) Blogger JLo complained during a press con on the Cybercrime Law that her daughter would not be able to “rant” anymore in Facebook and Twitter whenever she is served “undercooked” or “overcooked” hamburger in Jollibee or McDonald’s because “it would be punishable as libel” under the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012. What would you advise JLo, based on your background in media law? Explain.
xxx xxx xxx
i’ll be incommunicado until I’ve submitted the grades. Well, actually, I could still be reached but I won’t reply unless… close po ba tayo? ka-text ko po ba kayo, hindi po, salamat.
For that interregnum, will just be blogposting the amusing answers to the bonus questions starting tomorrow; maybe one a day.
xxx xxx xxx
For this particular question, since there is no particular jurisprudence with exactly the same facts, there are no right and wrong answers; but the examiner is looking for the following: 1)What are the subjects of fair comment? [We took up at least nine (many!) subjects of fair comment, with one of them being so broad as to cover any matter of public interest; and 2)what the criteria for fair comment? Those comments are not libelous. Just state the relevant category and you’ll get the full points.] 3) If the examinee includes the following discussion, he/she will get wild applause from me: When is a so-called “rant”, “joke” etc. (a “like” in FB or a “he-he-he” after a re-tweet) covered by the fair-comment-rule and therefore not libelous? (broad category too; you’ll be happy if you know your media law) Abanganthe sagot! (Watch out for the answers!)
Libel is always content-based, it is not medium-based.
(Palakpakan! applause! big smile! confetti! balloons!)
