President Aquino’s signing of the Cybercrime Law, with its provisions on online libel, has been perceived by the media as a sign of non-support for the Freedom of Information (FoI) bill.
In a press briefing, deputy presidential spokesman Abigail Valte admitted that the President was well aware of the provision embarking on criminal aspects of online libel.
Valte however warded off speculations that the President was behind the bill which inserted provisions concerning online libel at the last minute, and claimed that the President signed the bill into law because the bicameral Congress asked for it.
“Because it was transmitted to us by the bicam. I think three weeks before it had been signed by the President. It depends really on when the bill is transmitted to us before the President can consider it. And as to… Are you asking about the timeframe that it took? Then you should be asking that question (to) both Houses of both chambers of Congress,” she said..
The new law, she added, would in effect create cybercrime units for each of the government law enforcement agencies, which include the National Bureau of Investigation, the Philippine National Police and the Department of Justice itself.
Valte confirmed that the provision on online libel was indeed not part of the original bill and that it was only an insertion. She however averred she was not so sure whether the insertion was made when the bicameral committees convened to come up with a version mutually acceptable for both legislative chambers.
Asked to comment on the Cycbercrime Law being in conflict with the pending FoI and appears infringing the freedom of expression, the Palace mouthpiece said “ah, OK, wait. Freedom of expression as enshrined in the Constitution has legal limits, of course. It is stipulated in… the limitations as provided for under the law. Now I am not aware whether the insertion embarking on the provision on the applicability of Article 355 to publications made online, was made before or during the bicam.”        Fernan J. Angeles