Netizens better be careful with their words online, lawyer advises

Netizens had better be careful with their words when they are online, an expert on media law said Wednesday on GMA News' early evening newscast, "24 Oras".

 

University of the Philippines (UP) Office of Legal Aid director Atty. Rowena Daroy-Morales said using degrading words such as "bobo" or "stupid" as well as making hasty allegations without proof, might become bases for an online libel complaint.

 

"Huuh mahilig mambabae yan! E may asawa yung iyong tinutukoy mo, e di nag-aacuse ka na , that's an imputation...or saying 'bobo!', nakakadegrade ng katauhan yan, yes, (it's qualified for a libel complaint) because you are imputing dishonor," Morales said.

 

“The high court... declared Section 4(c)(4), which penalized online libel, is not unconstitutional with respect to the original author of the post but unconstitutional only where it penalizes those who simply receive the post or react to it," SC spokesman Theodore Te said on Tuesday in a press briefing.

Elements of libel
 

According to the Supreme Court, it would take more than mere harsh words for a statement to be considered libelous.

 

The high court said in a libel case it decided in February 2011 that "(f)or an imputation to be libelous, the following requisites must concur: a) it must be defamatory; b) it must be malicious; c) it must be given publicity and d) the victim must be identifiable.”  Absent one of these elements precludes the commission of the crime of libel."

 

"Although all the elements must concur, the defamatory nature of the subject printed phrase must be proved first because this is so vital in a prosecution for libel.  Were the words imputed not defamatory in character, a libel charge will not prosper.  Malice is necessarily rendered immaterial," the Supreme Court added.

 

The court also reminded public officials to be more tolerant of criticisms.

 

"The public officer may suffer under a hostile and an unjust accusation; the wound can be assuaged by the balm of a clear conscience.  A public [official] must not be too thin-skinned with reference to comments upon his official acts,” the SC said.

 

Black screens
 

Militant groups and netizens denounced the Supreme Court's ruling on Tuesday on the cybercrime law.

 

Non-government organization Bloggers and Netizens for Democracy  (BAND), together with militant groups, launched on Tuesday a "black protest", changing their profile pictures in Facebook and Twitter accounts into a black screen.

 

Tony Cruz, member of the BAND and one of the 15 petitioners that questioned the constitutionality of the cybercrime law said their "black protest" mourns the death of freedom of the press and freedom of speech.

 

"Nagbibigay ito (online libel) ng takot para sa mga karaniwang tao. Kung dati rati malaya at buong tapang tayong makapagpahay online ng ating pananaw tungkol sa nagaganap sa paligid, lalo na sa pagbatikos dun sa mga eskandalo sa gobyerno, ngayon pwede na tayong takutin ng mga masasama, pwede na tayong takutin ng gobyerno na 'lagot kayo pwede namin kayong i-libel'," he said in an interview aired on "24 Oras" Tuesday.

 

Another petitioner, Bayan partylist,  also slammed the high court's ruling.

 

"Yan po ay isang malaking setback, isang malaking pag-atras para sa freedom of expression , at banta hindi lang sa mga mamamahayag kundi sa lahat ng taong nagpapahayag using the internet," Bayan secretary general  Renato Reyes said.

Decriminalize libel, cyberspace law expert says
 

In an phone interview with "News To Go" Wednesday, Atty. JJ Disini, intellectual property and cyberspace law professor at the University of the Philippines (UP) College of Law, said that it would be the netizens who are most vulnerable to the online libel provision of the cybercrime law.

 

"Ang isang challenge kasi sa online libel is yung ma-identify mo yung tao. Kung halimbawa gmail account lang, hindi mo naman malaman kung sino talaga yung tao...pero with (the advent of) social media, mapapadali na gawa ng alam mo na mismo kung sino ang nagsabi ng statement, mas madali na siya (online libel case) i-prove," said Disini.

 

"May mga legitimate concerns ang ating mga netizens, kasi alam nila na sila yung posibleng magiging target niyan (online libel)," he added.

 

Disini was also one of the petitioners who questioned the constitutionality of the cybercrime law.

 

Media watchdogs likewise expressed opposition on the SC ruling and called on the decriminalization of libel.

 

"By extending the reach of the antediluvian libel law into cyberspace, the Supreme Court has suddenly made a once infinite venue for expression into an arena of fear, a hunting ground for the petty and vindictive, the criminal and autocratic," said the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP) in a statement.

 

"Criminal libel is one of the most abused means to suppress free expression and press freedom in the Philippines. The fear of possible imprisonment and the imposition of hefty fines has on many occasions silenced press criticism of government officials and even the reporting of matters  of public interest," the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility (CMFR) said. — Elizabeth Marcelo/ELR, GMA News