The quadruplet bills on Cybercrime

Share:

Compare them yourself word-for-word 

Exclusive by Raïssa Robles

Four senators filed almost exact copies of the same bill that eventually became the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012.

Here’s the proof.

You can compare the cybercrime bills of Senator Edgardo Angara, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, Senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. and Senator Ramon “Bong” Revilla section-by-section.

To read the story behind this, please click on the link below:

Why did four senators file nearly identical cybercrime bills?

Senator Edgardo Angara filed Senate Bill 52 on July 10, 2009

EXPLANATORY NOTE

Internet use in the Philippines has grown rapidly in the past decade. It has given rise to countless opportunities to a lot of Filipinos in every field imaginable. It has served as venue for growth and development in businesses, trade, engineering, arts and sciences and has sped up the exchange of information about practically all aspects of life. It has since been an integral part of our daily lives.

However, the Internet also has its own disadvantages and one of these is cybercrime. Ordinarily, cybercrime is defined as any illegal and criminal activity committed on the internet. These include unlawful acts where information technology is used either a tool or target, or both, in the commission of such unlawful acts. Any criminal activity that employs a computer either as an instrumentality, target or a means for the commission of other illegal acts also goes within the range of cybercrime.

In recent years, we have witnessed how cybercrime has emerged as the latest and most complicated problem in the cyber world. Criminal activities in the cyberspace are on the rise. Computers today are being misused for illegal activities like e-mail espionage, credit and fraud, spams, and software piracy, which not only invade our privacy but also offend our senses. On many instances, the computer have been utilized as an instrument in the following illegal activities: financial crimes, sale of illegal or stolen articles, pornography, online gambling, crimes impinging on intellectual property rights, e-mail spoofing, forgery, cyber defamation, and even cyber stalking.

On the other hand, the computer may has also been the object of other unlawful acts such as, but not limited to, illegal access or hacking, theft of information contained in electronic form, e-mail bombing, virus attacks, internet time thefts and so forth. Examples of these types of conducts include illegal access or access to the whole or any part of a computer system without proper authorization, illegal interception or the interception without right made by technical means, of non-public transmission of computer data to, from or within a computer system, data interference or the damaging, deletion, deterioration, alteration or suppression of computer data without proper authority, system interference or the serious hindering without right of the functioning of a computer system by inputting, transmitting, damaging, deleting, deteriorating, altering or suppressing computer data, misuse of devices, forgery and fraud.

Cybercrime is an actual danger to democracy, human rights and the rule of law. It is a dangerous reality which has to be taken seriously at the highest level. Measures to fight and prevent cybercrime must be based on laws that fully respect civil liberties. Thus, it is of utmost importance that an efficient protection and prevention method be developed to combat cybercrime.

In view of the foregoing, the immediate approval of this measure is earnestly sought.

Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile filed Senate Bill 134 on July 5, 2010

Internet use in the Philippines has grown rapidly in the past decade. It has given rise to countless opportunities to a lot Filipinos in every field imaginable. It has served as venue for growth and development in business, trade, engineering, arts and sciences and has sped up the exchange of information about practically all aspects of life. It has since been an integral part of our daily lives.

However, the interest also has its own disadvantages and one of these is cybercrime. Ordinarily, cybercrime is defined as any illegal and criminal activity committed on the internet. These include unlawful acts where information technology is used either a tool or target, or both, in the commission of such unlawful acts. Any criminal activity that employs a computer either as an instrumentality, target or means for the commission of other, illegal acts also goes within the range of cybercrime.

In recent years, we have witnessed how cybercrime has emerged as the latest and most complicated problem in the cyber world. Criminal activities in the cyberspace are on the rise. Computers today are being misused for illegal activities like e-mail espionage, credit card fraud, spams, and software privacy, which not only invade our privacy but also offend our senses. On many instance, the computer have been utilized as an instrument in the following illegal activities: financial crimes, sale of illegal or stolen articles, pornography, online gambling, crimes impinging on intellectual property rights, e-mail spoofing, forgery, cyber defamation, and even cyber stalking.

On the other hand, the computer may has also been object of the other unlawful acts such as, but not limited to, illegal access or hacking, theft of information contained in electronics form, e-mail bombing, virus attacks, internet time thefts and so forth. Examples of these types of conducts include illegal access or access to the whole or any part of a computer system without proper authorization, illegal interception without right made by technical means, of non-public transmission of computer data to, from or within a computer. system, data interference or the damaging, deletion, deterioration, alteration or suppression of computer data without proper authority, system interference or the serious hindering without right of the functioning of a computer system by inputting, transmitting, damaging, deleting, deteriorating, altering or suppressing computer data, misuses of device, forgery and fraud.

Cybercrime is an actual danger to democracy, human rights and the rule of law. It is a dangerous reality which has to be taken seriously at the highest level. Measures to fight and prevent cybercrime must be based on laws that fully respect civil liberties, Thus, it is of utmost importance that an efficient protection and prevention method be developed to combat cybercrime.

In view of the foregoing, the immediate approval of this measures is earnestly sought.

 

Senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. filed Senate Bill 2534 on September 22, 2010

This bill seeks to define cybercrimes, set parameters for its prevention and investigation, and impose penalties for its violation.

High technology has proven to be a useful tool in the world today. Almost every transaction necessitates the use of computer and other related electronic devices. It makes business operations, deals in the government, commercial establishments, academic institutions and other public organization or office much easier and less complicated.

It is however unfortunate that technology is sometimes used to the detriment of the
public.

Nowadays, methods of digital attacks, identity theft, and hacking, to mention a few, beleaguer the information technology system.’ Computers nowadays are used to commit crimes where confidential information is lost or intercepted, or where one’s privacy is violated.

This legislative measure enumerates offenses against the confidentiality, integrity and availability of computer data and system, computer-related offenses, and content-related offenses. It provides penalties against individuals violating this proposed law, and enforces corporate liability.

Under this bill, the Regional Trial Court shall have jurisdiction over any violation committed by a Filipino national regardless of the place of commission. Likewise, the Government of the Philippines shall cooperate with, and render assistance to other nations for purposes of detection, investigation, and prosecution of offenses referred to in this proposed Act and in the collection of evidence in electronic form in relation thereto.

Furthermore, there is hereby created a Department of Justice Office of Cybercrime mandated to facilitate or directly carry out the provisions of technical advice, preservation of data, collection of evidence, give legal information and locate suspects and all other cybercrime matters related to investigation and reporting issues. It shall investigate and prosecute the punishable acts defined herein.

The Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center is likewise created, which is tasked, among others, to prepare and implement appropriate and effective measures to prevent and suppress cybercrime activities.

There is a pressing need to address this matter through legislation so that once and for all, cybercrime will no longer plague the society.

In view thereof, the passage of this bill is earnestly requested.

 

Senator Ramon “Bong” Revilla filed Senate Bill 2721 on February 28, 2011

The Philippines has seen the rise of information and communications industries, such as content production, telecommunications, broadcasting, electronic commerce, and data processing, over the years, The industry’s role on the nation’s overall social and economic development can never be disregarded, Thus, it must be imperative for the State to provide an environment conducive to the development, acceleration, and rational application and exploitation of information and communications technology to attain free, easy, and intelligible access to exchange and/or delivery of information, Also, there is a need to protect the integrity of computer, computer and communications systems, networks, and databases, and the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information and data stored therein, from all forms of misuse, abuse, and illegal access by making punishable such conducts under the law.

The State shall adopt sufficient powers to effectively prevent and combat cybercrime by facilitating their detection, investigation, and prosecution at both the domestic and international levels, and by providing arrangements for fast and reliable international cooperation, A cybercrime law is expected to attract foreign investors into the country, It will increase the country’s reputation as a trading partner for information and communication industries, such as the constantly-rising business process outsourcing, As the department of Justice Secretary puts it, “a cybercrime law will ensure that investments from sunrise industries such as BPO are protected and that swift action can be made against cybercriminals attacking this sector.” Institutionalization of a cybercrime law will also conform the country to international standards.

This bill defines the cybercrime, enumerates illegal acts and provides for penalties in violation thereof. It also provides for the creation of a Cybercrime Investigation and Coordination Center to formulate and implement a national cyber security plan. It also provides a scheme for international cooperation.

There is a pressing need for the establishment of a legal framework to protect business firms and individuals from illegal and unauthorized access to computer systems, Thus, early passage of this bill is earnestly sought.

 

Senator Angara

SECTION 1. Title. — This Act shall be known as the “Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2010″.

Senator Enrile

SECTION 1. Title – This Act ,shall be known as the “Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2010″.

Senator Bongbong Marcos

SECTION 1. Title. – This Act shall be known as the “Cybercrime Prevention Act of 201 0″.

Senator Bong Revilla

SECTION 1. Title. This Act shall be known as the “Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2011″.

SECTION 2

Senator Angara

SEC. 2. Declaration of Policy. — The State recognizes the vital role of information and communications industries such as content production, telecommunications, broadcasting, electronic commerce, and data processing, in the nation’s overall social and economic development. The State also recognizes the Importance of providing an environment conducive to the development, acceleration, and rational application and exploitation of information and communications technology to attain free, easy, and intelligible access to exchange and/or delivery of information; and the need to protect and safeguard the integrity of computer, computer and communications systems, networks, and databases, and the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information and data stored therein, from all forms of misuse, abuse, and illegal access by making punishable under the law such conduct or conducts. In this light, the State shall adopt sufficient powers to effectively prevent and combat such offenses by facilitating their detection, investigation, and prosecution at both the domestic and international levels, and by providing arrangements for fast and reliable international cooperation.

Senator Enrile

SEC. 2. Declaration of Policy - The State recognizes the vital role of information and content industries, such as telecommunications, broadcasting, electronic commerce, and data processing, in the nation’s overall social and economic development. The State also recognizes the importance of providing an environment conducive to the development, acceleration, and rational application and exploitation of information and communications technology to attain free, easy, and intelligible access to exchange and/or delivery of information; and the need to protect and safeguard the integrity of computer, computer and communications systems, networks, and database, and the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information and data stored therein, from all forms of misuse, abuse, and illegal access by making punishable under the law such conduct or conducts. In this light, the State shall adopt sufficient powers to effectively prevent and combat such offenses by facilitating their detection, investigation, and prosecution at both the domestic and international levels, and by providing arrangements for fast and reliable international cooperation.

Senator Bongbong Marcos

SECTION 2. Declaration of policy. – The State recognizes the vital role of information and communications industries such as content production, telecommunications, broadcasting, electronic commerce, and data processing, in the nation’s overall social and economic development The State also recognizes the importance of providing an environment conducive to the development, acceleration, and rational application and exploitation of information and communications technology to attain free, easy, and intelligible access to exchange and/or delivery of information; and the need to protect and safeguard the integrity of computer, computer and communications systems, networks, and databases, and the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information and data stored therein, from all forms of misuse, abuse, and illegal access by making punishable under the law such conduct or conducts. In this light, the State shall adopt sufficient powers to effectively prevent and combat such offenses by facilitating their detection, investigation, and prosecution at both the domestic and international levels, and by providing arrangements for fast and reliable international cooperation.

Senator Bong Revilla

SECTION 2. Declaration of policy. The State recognizes the vital role of information and communications industries such as content production, telecommunications, broadcasting, electronic commerce, and data processing, in the nation’s overall social and economic development. The State also recognizes the importance of providing an environment conducive to the development, acceleration, and rational application and exploitation of information and communications technology to attain free, easy, and intelligible access to exchange and/or delivery of information; and the need to protect and safeguard. the integrity of computer, computer and communications systems, networks, and databases, and the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information and data stored therein, from all forms of misuse, abuse, and illegal access by making punishable under the law such conduct or conducts. In this light, the State shall adopt sufficient powers to effectively prevent and combat such offenses by facilitating their detection, investigation, and prosecution at both the domestic and international levels, and by providing arrangements for fast and reliable international cooperation.

SECTION 3 – Definition of Terms

Senator Angara

SEC. 3. Definition of Terms. – For purposes of this Act, the following terms are hereby defined as follows:

a) Access – refers to the instruction, communication with, storing data in, retrieving data from, or otherwise making use of any resources of a computer system or communication network;

b) Alteration – refers to the modification or change, in form or substance, of an existing computer data or program;

c) Communication – refers to the transmission of information including voice and non-voice data;

d) Computer system – means any device or a group of interconnected or related devices, one or more of which, pursuant to a program, performs automatic processing of data. It covers any type of computer device including devices with data processing capabilities like mobile phones and also computer networks. The device consisting of hardware and software may include input, output and storage facilities which may stand alone or be connected in a network or other similar devices. It also includes computer-data storage devices or medium.

e) Computer Data – refers to any representation of facts, information, or concepts in a form suitable for processing in a computer system including a program suitable to cause a computer system to perform a function and includes electronic documents and/or electronic data messages;

f) Computer Program – refers to a set of instructions executed by the computer;

Senator Enrile

SEC. 3. Definition of Terms – For purposes of this Act, the following terms are hereby defined as follows:

a) Access – refers to the instruction, communication with, storing data in, retrieving data from, or otherwise making use of any resources of a computer system;

b) Alteration – refers to the modification or change, in form or substance, of an existing computer data or program;

c) Communication – refers to the transformation of information including voice and non-voice data;

d) Computer system – means any device or a group or interconnected or related devices, one or more of which, pursuant to a program, performs automatic processing of data. It covers any type of computer device including devices with data processing capabilities like mobile phones and also computer networks. The device consisting of hardware and software may include input, output and storage facilities which may stand alone or be connected in a network or other similar devices. It also includes computer-data storage devices or medium.

e) Computer data – refers to any representation of facts, information, or concepts in a form suitable for processing in a computer system including a program suitable to cause a computer system to perform a function and includes electronic documents electronic data messages;

f) Computer Program – refers to a set of instructions executed by the computer to achieve intended results;

Senator Bongbong Marcos

SECTION 3. Definition of terms. – For purposes of this Act, the following terms are hereby defined as follows:

a) Access – refers to the instruction, communication with, storing data in, retrieving data from, or otherwise making use of any resources of a computer system or communication network;

b) Alteration – refers to the modification or change, in form or substance, of an existing computer data or program;

c) Communication – refers to the transmission of information including voice and non-voice data;

d) Computer system – refers to any device or group of interconnected or related devices, one or more of which, pursuant to a program, performs automatic processing of data. It covers any type of computer device including devices with data processing capabilities like mobile phones and also computer networks consisting of hardware and software may include input, output and storage facilities which may stand alone or be connected in a network or other similar devices. It also includes computer-data storage devices or medium;

e) Computer data – refers to any representation of facts, information, or concepts in a form suitable for processing in a computer system including a program suitable to cause a computer system to perform a function and includes electronic documents and/or electronic data messages;

f) Computer program – refers to a set of instructions executed by the computer;

Senator Bong Revilla

SECTION 3. Definition of Terms. For purposes of this Act, the following terms are hereby defined as follows:

a. Access – refers to the instruction, communication with, storing data in, retrieving data from, or otherwise making use of any resources of a computer system or communication network;

b. Alteration – refers to the modification or change, in form or substance, of an existing computer data or program;

c. Communication – refers to the transmission of information including voice and none-voice data;

d. Computer system – means any device or a group of interconnected or related devices, one or more of which, pursuant to a program, performs automatic processing of data. It covers any type of computer device including devices with data processing capabilities like mobile phones and also computer networks. The device consisting of hardware and software may include input, output and storage facilities which may stand alone or be connected in a network or other similar devices. It also includes computer-data storage devices or medium.

e. Computer Data – refers to any representation of facts, information, or concepts in a form suitable for processing in a computer system including a program suitable to cause a computer system to perform a function and includes electronic documents and/or electronic data messages;

f. Computer Program – refers to a set of instructions executed by the computer;

Continuation of Section 3 -

Definition of Terms

Senator Angara

g) Without Right – refers to either: (i) conduct undertaken without or in excess of authority; or (ii) conduct not covered by established legal defenses, excuses, court orders, justifications, or relevant principles under the law;

h) Database – refers to a representation of information, knowledge, facts, concepts, or instructions which are being prepared, processed or stored or have been prepared, processed or stored in a formalized manner and which are intended for use in a computer system;

i) Interception – refers to listening to, recording, monitoring or surveillance of the content of communications, including procuring of the content of data, either directly, through access and use of a computer system or indirectly, through the use of electronic eavesdropping or tapping devices, at the same time that the communication is occurring;

j) Service Provider – refers to :

i. any public or private entity that provides to users of its service the ability to communicate by means of a computer system, and

ii.any other entity that processes or stores computer data on behalf of such communication service or users of such service;

k) Subscriber’s Information – refers to any information contained in the form of computer data or any other form that is held by a service provider, relating to subscribers of its services other than traffic or content data and by which can be established;

1. The type of communication service used, the technical provisions taken thereto and the period of service;
11. The subscriber’s identity, postal or geographic address, telephone and other access number, any assigned network address, billing and payment information, available on the basis of the service agreement or arrangement;
111. Any other available information on the site of the installation of communication equipment, available on the basis of the service agreement or arrangement.

l) Traffic Data or Non-Content Data – refers to any computer data other than the content of the communication, including but not limited to the communication’s origin, destination, route, time, date, size, duration, or type of underlying service.

Senator Enrile

g) Without Right – refers to either: (I) conduct undertaken without or in excess of authority; or (ii) conduct not covered by established legal defenses, excuses, court orders, justifications, or relevant principles under the law;

h) Database – refers to a representation of information, knowledge, facts, concepts, or instructions which are being prepared, processed or stored or have been prepared,processed or stored in a formalized manner and which are intended for us in a computer system;

i) Interception – refers to listening to, recording, monitoring or surveillance of the content of communications, including procuring of the content of data, either directly, through access and use of’ a computer system or indirectly, through the use of electronic eavesdropping or tapping devices, at the same time that the communication is occurring;

j) Service Provider – refers to the provider of:
I. any public or private entity that provides to users of its service the ability to communicate by means of a computer system, and ii. any other entity that processes or stores computer data on behalf of such communication service or users of such service;

k) Subscriber’s Information – refers to any information contained in the form of computer data or any other form that is held by a service provider, relating to subscribers of its services other than traffic or content data and by which can be established;

i. The type of communication service used, the technical provisions taken thereto and the period of service;
ii. The subscriber’s identity, postal or geographic address, telephone and other access number, any assigned network address, billing and payment information, available on the basis of the service agreement or arrangement;
iii. Any other available information on the site of the installation of communication equipment, available on the basis of the service agreement or arrangement.

Senator Bongbong Marcos

g) Without right – refers to either: (i) conduct undertaken without or in excess of authority; or (ii) conduct not covered by established legal defenses, excuses, court orders justifications, or relevant principles under the law.

h) Database – refers to a representation of information, knowledge, facts, concepts, or instructions which are being prepared, processed or stored or have been prepared, processed or stored in a formalized manner and which are intended for use in a computer system;

i) Interception – refers to listening to, recording, monitoring or surveillance of the content of communications, including procuring of the content data, either directly, through access and use of a computer system or indirectly, through the use of electronic eavesdropping or tapping devices, at the same time that the communication is occurring;

j) Service provider – refers to:

i. Any public or private entity that provides to users of its service the ability to communicate by means of a computer system, or

ii. Any other entity that processes or stores computer data on behalf of such communication service or users of such service;

k) Subscriber’s information – refers to any information contained in the form of computer data or any other form that is held by a service provider, relating to subscriber’s of its services other than traffic or content data and by which can be established:

i. The type of communication service used, the technical provisions taken and the period:of service;
ii. The subscriber’s identity, postal or geographic address, telephone and other access number; any assigned network address, billing and payment information, available on the basis of the service agreement or arrangement; .
iii. Any other available information on the site of the installation of communication equipment, available on the basis of the service agreement or arrangement.

l) Traffic data or non-content data – refers to any computer data other than the content of the communication including but not limited to the communication’s origin, destination, route, time, date, size, duration, or type of underlying service.

Senator Bong Revilla

g.Without Right – refers to. either: (i) conduct undertaken without or in excess of authority; or (ii) conduct not covered by established legal defenses, excuses, court orders, justifications, or relevant principles under the law;

h. Database – refers to a representation of information, knowledge, facts, concepts, or instructions which are being prepared, processed or stored or have been prepared, processed or stored in a formalized manner and which are intended for use in a computer system;

i. Interception – refers to listening to, recording, monitoring or surveillance of the content of communications, including procuring of the content of data, either directly, through access and use of a computer system or indirectly, through the use of electronic. eavesdropping or tapping devices, at the same time that the communication is occurring;

j. Service Provider – refers to:

i. any public or private entity that provides to users of its service the ability to communicate by means of a computer system, and
ii. any other entity that processes or stores computer data on behalf of such communication service or users of such service;

k. Subscriber’s Information – refers to any information contained in the form of computer data or any other form that is held by a service provider, relating to subscribers of its services other than traffic or content data and by which can be established;

1. The type of communication service used, the technical provisions taken thereto and the period of service;
ii. The subscriber’s identity, postal or geographic address, telephone and other access number, any assigned network address, billing and payment information, available on the basis of the service agreement or arrangement;
iii. Any other available information on the site of the installation of communication equipment, available on the basis of the service agreement or arrangement.

l. Traffic Data or Non-Content Data – refers to any computer data other than the content of the communication, including but not limited to the communication’s origin, destination, route, time, date, size, duration, or type of underlying service.

Continuation of comparison of 4 bills

Punishable Acts

Senator Angara

CHAPTER II – PUNISHABLE ACTS

SEC. 4. Cybercrime Offenses. — The following acts constitute the offense of cybercrime punishable under this Act: Offenses against the confidentiality, integrity and availability of computer data and systems:

I. Illegal Access – The intentional access to the whole or any part of a computer system without right.

2. Illegal Interception – The intentional interception made by technical means without right of any non-public transmission of computer data to, from, or within a computer system including electromagnetic emissions from a computer system carrying such computer data: Provided, however, That it shall not be unlawful for an officer, employee, or agent of a service provider, whose facilities are used in the transmission of communications, to intercept, disc lose, or use that communication in the normal course of his employment while engaged in any activity that is necessary to the rendition of his service or to the protection of the rights or property of the service provider, except that the latter shall not utilize service observing or random monitoring except for mechanical or service control quality checks;

3. Data interference – the intentional or reckless alteration of computer data without right.

4. System Interference – the intentional or reckless hindering without right of the functioning of a computer system by inputting, transmitting, deleting or altering computer data or program.

Senate President Enrile

CHAPTER II – PUNISHABLE ACTS

Sec. 4. Cybercrime Offenses. – The following acts constitute the offense of cybercrime punishable under this Act: a. Offenses against the confidentiality, integrity and availability of computer data and systems:

i. Illegal Access – The intentional access to the whole or any part of a computer system without right.

ii. Illegal Interception – The intentional interception made by technical means without right of any. non-public transmission of computer data to, from, or within a computer system including electromagnetic emissions from a computer system carrying such computer data: Provided, however, That it shall not be unlawful for an officer, employee, or agent or a service provider, whose facilities are used in the transmission of communications, to intercept, disclose, or use that communication in the normal course of his employment while engaged in any activity that is necessary to the rendition of his service or to the protection of the rights or property of the service provider, except that the latter shall not utilize service observing or random monitoring except for mechanical or service control quality checks;

iii. Data interference – the intentional or reckless alteration of computer data without right.

iv. System Interference – the intentional or reckless hindering without right of the functioning of a computer system by inputting, transmitting, deleting, altering or suppressing computer data or program.

Senator Bongbong Marcos

CHAPTER II – PUNISHABLE ACTS

SECTION 4. Cybercrlme offenses.- The following acts constitute the offense of cybercrime punishable under this Act: A. Offenses against the confidentiality, integrity and availability of computer data and systems:

1. Illegal access – the intentional access to the whole or any part of a computer system without right.

2. Illegal interception – the intentional interception made by technical means without right of any non-public transmission of computer data to, from, or within a computer system including electromagnetic emissions form a computer system carrying such computer data: provided, however, that it shall not be unlawful for an officer, employee, or agent of a service provider, whose facilities are used in the transmission of communications, to intercept, disclose, or use that communication in the normal course of his employment while engaged in any activity that is necessary to the rendition of his service or to the protection of the rights or property of the service provider, except that the latter shall not utilize service observing or random monitoring except for mechanical or service control quality checks; .

3. Data interference – the intentional or reckless alteration of computer data without right.

4. System interference – the intentional or reckless hindering without right of the functioning of a computer system by inputting, transmitting, deleting or altering computer data or program.

Senator Bong Revilla

CHAPTER II – PUNISHABLE ACTS

SECTION 4. Cybercrime Offenses.– The following acts constitute the offense of cybercrime punishable under this Act: A. Offenses against the confidentiality, integrity and availability of computer data and systems:

1. Illegal Access – The intentional access to the whole or any part of a computer system without right.

2. lllegal Interception – The intentional interception made by technical means without right of any non-public transmission of computer data to, from, or within a computer system including electromagnetic emissions from a computer system carrying such computer data: Provided, however, That it shall not be unlawful for an officer, employee, or agent of a service provider, whose facilities are used in the transmission of communications, to intercept, disclose, or use (hat communication in the normal course of his employment while engaged in any activity that is necessary to the rendition of his service or to the protection of the rights or property of the service provider, except that the latter shall not utilize service observing or random monitoring except for mechanical or service control quality checks;

3. Data interference – the intentional or reckless alteration of computer data without right.

4. System Interference – the intentional or reckless hindering without right of the functioning of a computer system by inputting, transmitting, deleting or altering computer data or program.

Continuation of Punishable Acts

Senator Angara

5. Misuse of Devices-

a. The use, production, sale, procurement, importation, distribution, or otherwise making available, without right, of:

i. .a device, including a computer program, designed or adapted primarily for the purpose of committing any of the offenses under this Act; or

ii. a computer password, access code, or similar data by which the whole or any part of a computer system is capable of being accessed with intent that it be used for the purpose of committing any of the offenses under this Act;

b. The possession of an item referred to in paragraphs 5(a)(i) or (ii) above with intent to use said devices for the purpose of committing any of the offenses under this Section.

Provided, That no criminal liability shall attach when the use, production, sale, procurement, importation, distribution, or otherwise making available, or possession of computer devices/data referred to is for the authorized testing of a computer system.

Senate President Enrile

v. Misuse of Devices-

a) The use, production, sale, procurement, importation, distribution, or otherwise making available, without right, of:

i. a device, including a computer program, designed or adapted primarily for the purpose of committing any of the offenses under this Act; or

ii. a computer password, access code, or similar data by which the whole or any part of a computer system is capable of being accessed with intent that it be used for the purpose of committing any of the offenses under this Act;

b) The possession of an item referred to in paragraphs 5(a) (i) or (ii) above with intent to use said devices for the purpose of committing any of the offense under this Section.

Provided, That no criminal liability shall attach when the use, production, sale, procurement, importation, distribution, or otherwise making available, or possession of computer ‘devices/data referred to is for the authorized testing of a computer system.

Senator Bongbong Marcos

5. Misuse of devices-

a. The use, production, sale,. procurement, importation, distribution, or otherwise making available, without right, of:

i. device, including a computer program, designed or adapted primarily for the purpose of committing any of the offenses under this Act; or

ii. a computer password, access code, or similar data by which the whole’ or any part of a computer system is capable of being accessed with intent that it be used for the purpose of committing any of the offenses under this Act;

b. The possession of an item referred to in paragraphs 5 (a)(i) or (ii) above with intent to use said devices for the purpose of committing any of the offenses under this Section; provided, that no criminal liability shall attach when the use, production, sale, procurement, importation, distribution, or otherwise making available, or possession of computer devices/data referred to is for the testing of a computer system.

Senator Bong Revilla

5. Misuse of Devices- a. The use, production, sale, procurement, importation, distribution, or otherwise making available, without right, of:

i. device, including a computer program, designed or adapted primarily for the purpose of committing any of the offenses under this Act; or

ii. a computer password, access code, or similar data by which the whole or any part of a computer system is capable of being accessed with intent that it be used for the purpose of cOimnitting any of the offenses under this Act;

b. a computer password, access code, or similar data by which the whole or any part of a computer system is capable of being accessed with intent that it be used for the purpose of cOimnitting any of the offenses under this Act;. Provided, That no criminal liability shall attach when the use, production, sale, procurement, importation, distribution, or otherwise making available, or possession of computer devices/data referred to is for the authorized testing of a computer system.

B. Computer Related Offenses

Senator Angara

B. Computer-related Offenses:

1. Computer-related Forgery – (a) the intentional input, alteration, or deletion of any computer data without right resulting in inauthentic data with the intent that it be considered or acted upon for legal purposes as if it were authentic, regardless whether or not the data is directly readable and intelligible; (b) the act of knowingly using computer data which is the product of computer-related forgery as defined herein, for the purpose of perpetuating a fraudulent or dishonest design.

2. Computer-related Fraud – the intentional and unauthorized input, alteration, or deletion of computer data or program or interference in the functioning of a computer system, causing damage thereby, with the intent of procuring an economic benefit for oneself or for another person or for the perpetuation of a fraudulent or dishonest activity; Provided, that if no damage has yet been caused, the penalty imposable shall be one degree lower.

Senate President Enrile

b. Computer-related Offenses:

i. Computer-related Forgery – (a) the intentional input, alteration, or deletion of any computer data without right resulting in inauthentic data with the intent that it be considered or acted upon for legal purposes as if it were authentic, regardless whether or not the data is directly readable and intelligible; (b) the act of knowingly using computer data which is the product of computer-related forgery as defined herein, for the purpose of perpetuating a fraudulent or dishonest design.

ii. Computer-related Fraud – the intentional and unauthorized input, alteration, or deletion of computer data or program or interference in the functioning of a computer system, causing damage thereby, with the intent of procuring an economic benefit for oneself or for another person or for the perpetuation of a fraudulent or dishonest activity; Provided, that if no damage has yet been caused, the penalty imposable shall be one degree lower.

Senator Bongbong Marcos

B. Computer-related offenses:

1. Computer-related forgery – (a) the international input, alteration, or deletion of any computer data without right resulting in inauthentic data with the intent that it be considered or acted upon for legal purposes as if it were authentic, regardless whether or not the data is directly readable and intelligible; (b) the act of knowingly using computer data which is the product of computer-related forgery as defined, for the purpose of perpetuating a fraudulent or dishonest design.

2. Computer-related fraud - the intentional and unauthorized input, alteration, or deletion of computer data or program or interference in the functioning of a computer system, causing damage thereby, with the intent of  procuring an economic benefit for oneself  or for another person or for the perpetuation of a fraudulent or dishonest activity; provided, that if no damage has yet been caused, the penalty imposable shall be one degree lower.

Senator Bong Revilla

B. Computer-related Offenses:

1. Computer-related Forgery – (a) the intentional input, alteration, or deletion of all computer data without right resulting in inauthentic data with the intent that it be considered or acted upon for legal purposes as if it were authentic, regardless whether or not the data is directly readable and intelligible; (b) the act of knowingly using computer data which is the product of computer-related forgery as defined herein, for the purpose of perpetuating a fraudulent or dishonest design.

2. Computer-related Fraud – the intentional and unauthorized input, alteration, or deletion of computer data or program or interference in the functioning of a computer system, causing damage thereby, with the intent of procuring an economic benefit for oneself or for another person or for the perpetuation of a fraudulent or dishonest activity; Provided, that if no damage has yet been caused, the penalty imposable shall be one degree lower.

 

C. Content-related Offenses

Senator Angara

C. Content-related Offenses:

1. Cybersex – any person who establishes, maintains or controls, directly or indirectly, any operation for sexual activity or arousal with the aid of or through the use of a computer system, for a favor or consideration.

2. Child Pornography- any person who willfully engages in the following acts;

a. Producing child pornography through a computer system; b. Offering or making available child pornography through a computer system; c. Distributing or transmitting child pornography through a computer system; d. Procuring child pornography through a computer system for oneself or for another person; or e. Possessing child pornography materials in the computer system or on a computer data storage medium.

For purposes of this Section, the term, “child pornography” shall include pornographic material that visually depicts: (a) a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct; (b) a person appearing to be a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct; (c) realistic images representing a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct.

3. Unsolicited Commercial Communications. — The transmission of commercial electronic communication with the use of computer system which seek to advertise, sell, or offer for sale products and services are prohibited unless:

a. There is a prior affirmative consent from the recipient; or b. The following conditions are present:

i. The commercial electronic communication contains a simple, valid, and reliable way for the recipient to reject receipt of further commercial electronic messages (‘opt-out’) from the same source; ii. The commercial electronic communication does not purposely disguise the source of the electronic message; and iii. The commercial electronic communication does not purposely include misleading information in any part of the message in order to induce the recipients to read the message.

Senate President Enrile

c. Content-related Offenses:

i. Cybersex – any person who establishes, maintains or controls, directly or indirectly, any operation for sexual activity or arousal with the aid of or through the use of a computer system, for a favor or consideration.

ii. Child Pornography – any person who engages in the following acts:

a) Producing child pornography for the purpose of distribution through a computer system’ b) Offering or making available child pornography through a computer system; c) Distribution or transmitting child pornography through a computer system; d) Procuring child pornography through a computer system for oneself or for another person; or e) Possessing child pornography materials in the computer system or on a computer data storage medium.

For purposes of this Section, the term “child pornography” shall include pornographic material that visually depicts: (a) a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct; (b) a person appearing to be a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct; (c) realistic images representing a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct.

iii. Unsolicited Commercial Communications. – The transmission of commercial electronic communication with the use of computer system which seek to advertise, sell, or offer for sale products and services are prohibited unless:

a) There is a prior affirmative consent from the recipient; or

b) The following conditions are present:

i.)The commercial electronic communication contains a simple, valid, and reliable way for the recipient to reject receipt of further commercial electronic messages (‘opt-out) from the same source;

ii.)The commercial electronic communication does not purposely disguise the source of the electronic message; and

iii.)The commercial electronic communication does not purposely include misleading information in any part of the message in order to induce the recipients to read the message.

Senator Bongbong Marcos

C. Content-related offenses: 1. Cybersex – any person who establishes, maintains or controls, directly or indirectly, any operation for sexual activity or arousal with the aid of or through the use of computer system, for a favor or consideration. 2. Child pornography- any person who willfully engages in the following acts:

a. Producing child pornography through computer system; b. Offering or making available child pornography through a computer system; c. Distributing or transmitting child pornography through a computer system; d. Procuring child pornography through a computer system for oneself or for another person; or e. Possessing child pornography materials in the computer system or on a computer data storage medium.

For purposes of this Section, the term “child pornography” shall include pornographic material that visually depicts: (a) a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct; (b) a person appearing to be a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct; © realistic images representing a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. 3. Unsolicited Commercial Communications. – The transmission of commercial electronic communication with the use of computer system which seeks to advertise, sell, or offer for sale products and services are prohibited unless:

a. There is a prior affirmative consent from the recipient; or b. The following conditions are present:

i. The commercial electronic communication contains a simple, valid, and reliable way’ for the recipient to reject receipt of further commercial electronic messages (‘opt-out’) from the same source; ii. The commercial electronic communication does not purposely disguise the source of the electronic message; and iii. The commercial electronic communication does not purposely include misleading information in any part of the message in order to induce the recipients to read the message.

Senator Bong Revilla

C. Content-related Offenses:

1. Cybersex – any person who establishes, maintains or controls, directly or indirectly any operation for sexual activity or arousal with the aid of or through the use of a computer system, for a favor or consideration.

2. Child Pornography – any person who willfully engages in the following acts:

a. Producing child pornography through a computer system; b. Offering or making, available child pornography through a computer system; c. Distributing or transmitting child pornography through a computer system; d. Procuring child pornography through a computer system for oneself or for another person; or e. Possessing child pornography materials in the computer system or on a computer data storage medium.

For purposes of this Section, the term “child pornography” shall include pornographic material .that visually depicts: (a) a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct; (b) a person appearing to be a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct; (c) realistic images representing a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. 3. Unsolicited Commercial Communications. The transmission o[ commercial electronic communication with the use of computer system which seek to advertise, sell, or offer for sale products and services are prohibited unless:

a. There is a prior affirmative consent from the recipient; or b. The following conditions are present:

i. The commercial electronic communication contains a simple, valid, and reliable way for the recipient to reject receipt of further commercial electronic messages (‘opt-out’) from the same source; ii. The commercial electronic communication does not purposely disguise the source of the electronic message; and iii. The commercial electronic communication does not purposely include misleading information in any part of the message in order to induce the recipients to read the message.

Section 5: Other Offenses

Senator Angara

SEC. 5. Other Offenses. — The following acts shall also constitute an offense:

1. Aiding or Abetting in the Commission of Cybercrime. — Any person who willfully abets or aids in the commission of any of the offenses enumerated in this Act shall be held liable.

2. Attempt in the Commission of Cybercrime – Any person who willfully attempts to commit any of offenses enumerated in this Act shall be held liable.

Senate President Enrile

SEC. 5. Other Offenses.- The following acts shall also constitute an offense:

a. Aiding or Abetting in the Commission of Cybercrime. – Any person who willfully abets or aids in the commission of any of the offenses enumerated in this Act shall be held liable.

b. Attempt in the Commission of Cybercrime – Any person who willfully attempts to commit any of offenses enumerated in this Act shall be held liable.

Senator Bongbong Marcos

SECTION 5. Other offenses.- The following acts shall also constitute an offense:

1. Aiding or Abetting in the Commission of Cybercrime. – Any person who willfully abets or aids in the commission of any of the offenses enumerated in this Act shall be held liable.

2. Attempt in the Commission of Cybercrime – Any person who willfully attempts to commit any of the offenses enumerated in this Act shall be liable.

Senator Bong Revilla

SECTION 5. Other Offenses. The following acts shall also constitute an offense:

1. Aiding or Abetting in the Commission of Cybercrime. – Any person who willfully abets or aids in the commission of any of the offenses enumerated in this Act shall be held liable,

2. Attempt in the Commission of Cybercrime – Any person who willfully attempts to commit any of offenses enumerated in this Act shall be held liable.

 

Section 6: Liability under the Law

Senator Angara

SEC. 6. Liability under Other Laws. — A prosecution under this Act shall be without prejudice to any liability for violation of any provision of the Revised Penal Code, as amended or special laws.

Senate President Enrile

SEC. 6 Liability under Other Laws. – A prosecution under this Act shall be without prejudice to any liability for violation of any provision of the Revised Penal Code, as amended or special laws.

Senator Bongbong Marcos

SECTION 6. Liability under other laws. – A prosecution under this Act shall be without prejudice to any liability for violation of any provision of the Revised Penal Code, as amended or special laws.

Senator Bong Revilla

SECTION 6. Liability under other Laws. A prosecution under this Act shall be without prejudice to any liability for violation of any provision of the Revised Penal Code, as amended or special laws.

CHAPTER III – Penalties

Senator Angara

CHAPTER III – PENALTIES

SEC. 7. Penalties. — Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Sections 4A and 4B of this Act shall be punished with imprisonment of prision mayor or a fine of at least Two Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP200,OOO,OO) up to a maximum amount commensurate to the damage incurred or both. Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Section 4C( I) of this Act shall be punished with imprisonment of prision mayor or a fine of at least Two Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP200,000.00) but not exceeding One Million Pesos (PhPl,OOO,OOO.OO) or both. Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Section 4C(2) of this Act shall be punished with imprisonment of prision correctional or a fine of at least One Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP I 00,000.00) but not exceeding Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP500,000.00) or both. Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Section 4C(3) shall be punished with imprisonment of arresto mayor or a fine of at least Fifty Thousand Pesos (PhP50,000.00) but not exceeding Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos (PhP250,000.00) or both. Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Section 5 shall be punished with imprisonment one degree lower than that of the prescribed penalty for the offense or a fine of at least One Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP100,000.00) but not exceeding Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP500,000.00) or both.

SEC. 8. Corporate Liability. — When any of the punishable acts herein defined are knowingly committed on behalf of or for the benefit of a juridical person, by a natural person acting either individually or as part of an organ of the juridical person, who has a leading position within in, based on (a) a power of representation of the juridical person, (b) an authority to take decisions on behalf of the juridical person, or (c) an authority to exercise control within the juridical person, the juridical person shall be held liable for a fine equivalent to at least double the fines imposable in Section 7 up to a maximum of  Ten Million Pesos (PhP10,000,000.00). If the commission of any of the punishable acts herein defined was made possible due (t0 the lack of supervision or control by a natural person referred to and described in the preceding paragraph, for the benefit of that juridical person by a natural person acting under its authority, the juridical person shall be held liable for a fine equivalent to at least double the fines imposable in Section 7 up to a maximum of Five Million Pesos (PhP5,000,000.00). The liability imposed on the juridical person shall be without prejudice to the criminal liability of the natural person who has committed the offense.

Senate President Enrile

CHAPTER III – PENAL TIES

SEC. 7. Penalties. – Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Sections 4(a) and 4(b) of this Act shall be punished with imprisonment of prision mayor or a fine of at least Two Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP200,000.00) up to a maximum amount commensurate to the damage incurred or both. Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Section 4(c)(i) of this Act shall be punished with imprisonment of prision mayor or a fine of at least Two Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP200,OOO.OO) but not exceeding One Million Pesos (PhP1000,000,000.00) or both. Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Section 4(c) (ii) of this Act shall be punished with imprisonment of prision correcional or a fine of at least One Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP100,000.00) but not exceeding Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP500,000.00) or both. Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Section 4(c) (iii) shall be punished with imprisonment of arresto mayor or a fine of at least Fifty Thousand Pesos (PhP50,000.00) but not exceeding Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos (PhP250,000.00) or both. Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Section 5 shall be punished with imprisonment one degree lower than that of the prescribed penalty for the offense or a fine of at least One Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP100,000.00) but not exceeding Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP500,000.00) or both.

SEC 8. Corporate Liability – When any of the punishable acts herein defined is knowingly committed on behalf of or for the benefit of a juridical person, by a natural person acting either individually or as part of an organ of the juridical person, who has a leading position within in, based on (a) a power of representation of the juridical person, (b) an authority to take decisions on behalf of the juridical person, or ( c) an authority to exercise control within the juridical person, the juridical person shall be held liable for a fine equivalent to at least double the fines imposable in Section 7 up to a maximum of Ten Million Pesos (PhP10,000,000.00). When the commission of any of the punishable acts herein defined was made possible due to lack of supervision or control by a natural. person referred to and described in the preceding paragraph, for the benefit of that juridical person by a natural person acting under its authority, the juridical person shall be held liable for a fine equivalent to at least double the fines imposable in Section 7 up to a maximum of Five Million Pesos (PhP5,000,000.00). The liability imposed on the juridical person shall be without prejudice to the criminal liability of the natural person who has committed the offense.

Senator Bongbong Marcos

CHAPTER III – PENALTIES

SEC. 7. Penalties. – Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Sections 4A and 4B of this Act shall be punished with imprisonment of prision mayor or a fine of at least Two Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP200,000.00) up to a maximum amount commensurate to the damage incurred or both. Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Section 4C(1) of this Act shall be punished with imprisonment of prision mayor or a fine of at least Two Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP200,000.00) but not exceeding One Million Pesos (PhP1,000,000.00) or both. Any person found guilty of any ?f the punishable acts enumerated in Section 4C(2) of this Act shall be punished with imprisonment of prision correcional or a fine of at least One Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP100,000.00) but not exceeding Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP500,000.00) or both. Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Section 4C(3) of this Act shall be punished with imprisonment of arresto mayor or a fine of at least Fifty Thousand Pesos (PhP50,000.00) but not exceeding Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos (PhP250,000.00) or both. Any person found guilty of any of punishable acts enumerated in Section 5 shall be punished with imprisonment one degree lower than that of the prescribed penalty for the offense or a fine of at least One Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP1 00,000.00) but not exceeding Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP500,000.00) or both.

SECTION 8. Corporate liability. – When any of the punishable acts herein defined are knowingly committed on behalf of or for the benefit of a juridical person, by a natural person acting either individually or as part of an organ of the juridical person, who has a leading position within in, based on (a) a power of representation of the juridical person, (b) an authority to take decisions on behalf of the juridical person, or (c ) an authority to exercise control within the juridical person, the juridical person shall be held liable for a fine equivalent to at least double the fines imposable in Section 7 up to a maximum of Ten Million Pesos (PhP10,000,000.00). If the commission of any of the punishable acts herein defined was made possible due to the lack of supervision or control by a natural person referred to and described in the preceding paragraph, for the benefit of that juridical person by a natural person acting under its authority, the’ juridical person shall be held liable for a fine equivalent to at least double the fines imposable in Section 7 up to a maximum of Five Million Pesos (PhP5,000,000.00). The liability imposed on the juridical person shall be without prejudice to the criminal liability of the natural person who has committed the offense.

Senator Bong Revilla

CHAPTER III – PENALTIES

SECTION 7. Penalties. Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Sections 4A and 4B of this Act shall be punished with imprisonment of prision mayor or a fine of at least Two Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP200, 000,00) up to a maximum amount commensurate to the damage incurred or both, Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Section 4C( I) of (his Act shall be punished with imprisonment of prision mayor or a fine of at least Two Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP200,000,00) but not exceeding One Million Pesos (PhP1,000,000,00) or both. Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Section 4C(2) of this Act shall be punished with imprisonment of prision correcional or a fine of at least One Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP1000,000) but not exceeding Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP500,000,00) or both. Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Section 4C (3) shall be punished with imprisonment of arresto mayor or a fine of at least Fifty Thousand Pesos (PhP50,000,00) but not exceeding Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos (PhP250,000,00) or both. Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Section 5 shall be punished with imprisonment one degree lower than that of the prescribed penalty for the offense or a fine of at least One Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhPl,OOO,OOO,OO) but not exceeding Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP500,000,00) or both.

SECTION 8. Corporate Liability. When any of the punishable acts herein defined are knowingly committed on behalf of or for the benefit of a juridical person, by a natural person acting either individually or as part of an organ of the juridical person, who has a leading position within in, based on (a) a power of representation of the juridical person, (b) an authority to take decisions on behalf of the juridical person, or (c) an authority to exercise control within the juridical person, the juridical person shall be held liable for a fine equivalent to at least double the fines imposable in Section 7 up to a maximum of Ten Million Pesos (PhP 10,000,000). If the commission of any of the punishable acts herein defined was made possible due (to the lack of supervision or control by a natural person referred to and described in the preceding paragraph, for the benefit of that juridical person by a natural person acting under its authority, the juridical person shall be held liable for a fine equivalent to at least double the fines imposable in Section 7 up to a maximum of Five Million Pesos (Php5, 000,000,00). The liability imposed on the juridical person shall be without prejudice to the criminal liability of the natural person who has committed the offense.

CHAPTER IV – ENFORCEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION

Senator Angara

SEC. 9. Real-time Collection of Computer Data. — Law enforcement authorities, with due cause, and upon securing a court warrant, shall be authorized to collect or record by technical or electronic means, and service providers are required to collect or record by technical or electronic means, and/or to cooperate and assist law enforcement authorities in the collection or recording of, traffic data, in real-time, associated with specified communications transmitted by means of a computer system.

SEC. 10. Preservation of Computer Data. — The integrity of traffic data and subscriber infom1ation relating to communication services provided by a service provider shall be preserved for a minimum period of six (6) months from the date of the transaction. Content data shall be similarly preserved for six (6) months from the data of receipt of the order from law enforcement authorities requiring its preservation. Law enforcement authorities may order a one-time extension for another six (6) months provided that once computer data preserved, transmitted or stored by a service provider is used as evidence in a case, the mere furnishing to such service provider of the transmittal document to the Office of the Prosecutor shall be deemed a notification to preserve the computer data until the termination of the case. The service provider ordered to preserve computer data shall keep confidential the order and its compliance.

SEC. 11. Disclosure of Computer Data. — Law enforcement authorities, upon securing a court warrant, shall issue an order requiring any person or service provider to disclose or submit subscriber’s information, traffic data or relevant data in his/its possession or control within seventy two (72) hours from receipt of the order in relation to a valid complaint officially docketed and assigned for investigation and the disclosure is necessary and relevant for the purpose of investigation.

SEC. 14. Duties of Law Enforcement Authorities. — To ensure that the technical nature of cybercrime and its prevention is given focus and considering the procedures involved for international cooperation, law enforcement authorities specifically the computer or technology crime divisions or units responsible for the investigation of cybercrimes are required to submit timely and regular reports including pre-operation, post-operation and investigation results and such other documents as may be required to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for review and monitoring.

Senate President Enrile

CHAPTER IV – ENFORCEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION

SEC. 9. Expedited Preservation of Stored Computer Data. – Law enforcement authorities may issue a preservation order to a service provider to preserve specified computer data that has been stored by means of a computer system in relation to a valid complaint and/or pending investigation.

SEC. 10. Preservation of Computer Data. – The integrity of traffic data and subscriber information relating to communication services provided by a service provider shall be preserved for a minimum period of six (6) months from the date of the transaction. Content data shall be similarly preserved for six (6) months from the date of receipt of the order from law enforcement authorities requiring its preservation. Law enforcement authorities may order a one-time extension for another six (6) months provided that once computer data preserved, transmitted or stored by a service provider is used as evidence in a case, the mere furnishing to such service provider of the transmittal document to the Office of the Prosecutor shall be deemed a notification to preserve the computer data until termination of the case. The service provider ordered to preserve computer data shall keep confidential the order and its compliance.

SEC. 11. Real-time Collection of Traffic Data. – Law enforcement authorities shall be authorized to collect or record by technical or electronic means, and/or to require cooperation from a service provider in the collection or recording of, traffic data, in real-time, associated with specified communications transmitted by means of a computer system by issuing a collection order.

SEC. 12. Interception of Content Data. – Law enforcement authorities shall be authorized to collect or record content data upon securing a court order.

SEC. 13. Disclosure of Computer Data. – Law enforcement authorities shall issue an order requiring any person or service provider to disclose or submit subscriber’s information, traffic data or relevant data in his/its possession or control within seventy two (72) hours from receipt of the order in relation to a valid complaint officially docketed and assigned for investigation and the disclosure is necessary and relevant for the purpose of investigation. Law enforcement authorities shall submit regular reports to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for monitoring.

Senator Bongbong Marcos

CHAPTER IV – PROCEDURE

SECTION 9. Expedited preservation of stored computer data. – Law enforcement authorities may issue a preservation order to a service provider to preserve specified computer data that has been stored by means of a computer system in relation to a valid complaint and/or pending investigation.

SEC. 10. Preservation of computer data. – The integrity of traffic data and subscriber information relating to communication services provided by a service provider shall be preserved for a minimum period of six (6) months from the date of the transaction. Content data shall be similarly preserved for six (6) months from the date of receipt of the order from law enforcement authorities requiring its preservation. Law enforcement authorities may order a one-time extension for another six (6) months provided that once computer data preserved, transmitted or stored by a service provider is used as evidence in a case, the mere furnishing to such service provider of the transmittal document to the Department of Justice shall be deemed a notification to preserve the computer data until the termination of the case. The service provider ordered to preserve computer data shall keep confidential the order and its compliance.

SECTION 11. Real-time collection of traffic data. – Law enforcement authorities shall be authorized to collect or record by technical or electronic means, and/or to require cooperation from a service provider in the collection or recording of, traffic data, in real-time, associated’ with specified communications transmitted by means of a computer system by issuing a collection order.

SECTION 12 Interception of content data. – Law enforcement authorities shall be authorized to collect or record content data upon securing a court order.

SECTION 13. Disclosure of subscriber’s information, traffic data or relevant data. – Law enforcement authorities may issue a disclosure order requiring a service provider to disclose or submit subscriber’s information, traffic data or relevant data in its possession or control within seventy two (72) hours from receipt of the order in relation to a valid complaint and/or pending investigation.

Senator Bong Revilla

CHAPTER IV – ENFORCEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION

SECTION 9. Real-time Collection of Computer Data. Law enforcement authorities, with due cause, and upon securing a court warrant, shall be authorized to collect or record by technical or electronic means, and service providers are required to collect or record by technical or electronic means, and/or to cooperate and assist law enforcement authorities in the collection or recording of, traffic data, in real-time, associated with specified communications transmitted by means of a computer system.

SECTION 10. Preservation of Computer Data. — The integrity of traffic data and subscriber information relating to communication services provided by a service provider shall be preserved for a minimum period of six (6) months from the date of the transaction; Content data shall be similarly preserved for six (6) months from the data of receipt of the order from law enforcement authorities requiring its preservation. Law enforcement authorities may order a onetime extension for another six (6) months provided that once computer data preserved, transmitted or stored by a service provider:’ is used as evidence in a case, the mere furnishing to such service provider of the transmittal document to the Office of the Prosecutor shall be deemed a notification to preserve the computer data until the termination of the case. The service provider ordered to preserve computer data shall keep confidential the order and its compliance.

SECTION 11. Disclosure of Computer Data. Law enforcement authorities, upon securing a court warrant, shall issue an order requiring any person or service provider to disclose or submit subscriber’s information, traffic data or relevant data in his/its possession or control within seventy two (72) hours from receipt of the order in relation to a valid complaint officially docketed and assigned for investigation and the disclosure is necessary and relevant for the purpose of investigation.

Cont. – CHAPTER IV – ENFORCEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION

Senator Angara

SEC. 12. Search, Seizure, and Examination of Computer Data.- Where a search and seizure warrant is properly issued, the law enforcement authorities shall likewise have the following powers and duties: Within the time period specified in the warrant, to conduct interception, as defined in this Act, content 0f  communications, procure the content of data either directly, through access and use of computer system, or indirectly, through the use of electronic eavesdropping or tapping devices, in real time or at the same time that the communication is occurring and to:

a. To secure a computer system or a computer data storage medium; b. To make and retain a copy of those computer data secured; c. To maintain the integrity of the relevant stored computer data; d. To conduct examination of the computer data storage medium; and e. To render inaccessible or remove those computer data in the accessed computer or computer and communications network.

Pursuant thereof, the law enforcement authorities may order any person who has knowledge about the functioning of the computer system and the measures to protect and preserve the computer data therein to provide, as is reasonable, the necessary information, to enable the undertaking of the search, seizure and examination. Law enforcement authorities may request for an extension of time to complete the examination of the computer data storage medium and to make a return thereon but in no case for a period longer than thirty (30) days from date of approval by the court.

SEC. 13. Non-compliance. – Failure to comply with the provisions of Chapter IV hereof specifically the orders from law enforcement authorities shall be punished as a violation of P.D. No. 1829 with imprisonment of prision correctional in its maximum period or a fine of One Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php100,000.00) or both, for each and every non-compliance with an order issued by law enforcement authorities.

Senate President Enrile

SEC. 14. Search, Seizure, and Examination of Computer Data.- Where a search and seizure warrant is properly issued, the law enforcement authorities shall likewise have the following powers and duties: Within the time period specified in the warrant, to conduct interception, as defined in this Act, content of communications, procure the content of data either directly, through access and use of computer system, or indirectly, through the use of electronic eavesdropping or tapping devices, in real time or at the same time that the communication is occurring and to:

a. To secure a computer system or a computer data storage medium; b. To make and retain a copy of those computer data secured; c. To maintain the integrity of the relevant stored computer data; d. To conduct examination of the computer data storage medium; and e. To render inaccessible or remove those computer data in the accessed computer or computer and communication network.

Pursuant thereof, the law enforcement authorities may order any person who has knowledge of the functioning of the computer system and the measures to protect and preserve the computer data therein to provide, as is reasonable, the necessary information, to enable the undertaking of the search, seizure and examination. Law enforcement authorities may request for an extension of time to complete the examination of the computer data storage medium and to make a return thereon but in no case for a period longer than thirty (30) days from the date of approval by the court.

SEC. 15. Non-compliance. – Failure to comply with the provisions of Chapter IV hereof specifically the orders from law enforcement authorities shall be punished as a violation of P.D. No. 1829 with imprisonment of prision correcional in its maximum period or a fine of One Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP100,000.00) or both, for each and every non-compliance with an order issued by law enforcement authorities.

Senator Bongbong Marcos

SECTION 14. Search, seizure, and examination of computer data.-Where a search and seizure warrant is properly issued, the law enforcement authorities shall likewise have the following powers and duties: Within the time period specified in the warrant, to conduct interception, as defined in this Act, content of communications, procure the content data either directly, through access and use of computer system, or indirectly, through the use of electronic eavesdropping or tapping devices, in real time or at the same time that the communication is occurring and to:

a. secure a computer system or a computer data storage medium; b. make and retain a copy of those computer data secured; c. maintain the integrity of the relevant stored computer data; d. conduct examination of the computer data storage medium; and e. render inaccessible or remove those computer data in the accessed computer or computer and communications network.

Accordingly, the law enforcement authorities may order any person who has knowledge about the functioning of the computer system and the measures to protect and preserve the computer data therein to provide, as is reasonable, the necessary information, to enable the undertaking of the search, seizure and examination. Law enforcement authorities may request for an extension of time to complete the examination of the computer data storage medium and to make a return thereon but in no case for a period longer than thirty (30) days from date of approval by the court.

SECTION 15. Non-compliance. – Failure to comply with the provisions of Chapter IV hereof specifically the orders from law enforcement authorities shall be punished as a violation of P. D. No. 1829 with imprisonment of prision correcional in its maximum period or a fine of One Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP100,000.00) or both, for each and every non-compliance with an order issued by law enforcement authorities.

Senator Bong Revilla

SECTION 12. Search, Seizure, and, Examination of Computer Data.Where a search and seizure warrant is properly issued, the law enforcement authorities shall likewise have the following powers and duties: Within the time period specified in the warrant, to conduct interception, as defined in this Act, content of communications, procure the content of data either directly, through access and use of computer system, or indirectly, through the use of electronic eavesdropping or tapping devices, in real time or at the same time that the communication is occurring and to

a. To secure a computer system or a computer data storage medium; b. To make and retain a copy of those computer data secured; c. To maintain the integrity of the relevant stored computer data; d. To conduct examination of the computer data storage medium; and e. To render inaccessible or remove those computer data in the accessed computer or computer and communications network.

Pursuant thereof, the law enforcement authorities may order any person who has knowledge about the functioning of the computer system and the measures to protect and preserve the computer data therein to provide, as is reasonable, the necessary information, to enable the undertaking of the search, seizure and examination. Law enforcement authorities may request for an extension of time to complete the examination of the computer data storage medium and to make a return thereon but in no case for a period longer than thirty (30) days from date of approval by the court.

SECTION 13. Non-compliance. Failure to comply with the provisions of Chapter IV hereof specifically the orders from law enforcement authorities shall be punished as a violation of P.D.No. 1829 with imprisonment of prision correctional in its maximum period or a fine of One Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php1,000,000.00) or both, for each and every non-compliance with an order issued by law enforcement authorities.

SECTION 14. Duties of Law Enforcement Authorities. — To ensure that the technical nature of cybercrime and its prevention is given focus and considering the procedures involved for international cooperation, law enforcement authorities specifically the computer or technology crime divisions or units responsible for the investigation of cybercrimes are required to submit timely and regular reports including pre-operation, post- operation and investigation results and such other documents as may be required to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for review and monitoring.

CHAPTER V – Jurisdiction

Senator Angara

CHAPTER V – JURISDICTION

SEC.15. Jurisdiction. — The Regional Trial Court shall have jurisdiction over any violation of the provisions of this Act including any violation committed by a Filipino national regardless of the place of commission. Jurisdiction shall lie if any of the elements was committed within the Philippines or committed with the use of any computer system wholly or partly situated in the country, or when by such commission any damage is caused to a natural or juridical person who, at the time the offense was committed, was in the Philippines.

Senate President Enrile

CHAPTER V -JURISDICTION

SEC. 16. Jurisdiction – The ,Regional Trial Court shall have jurisdiction over any violation of the provisions of this Act including any violation committed by a Filipino national regardless of the place of commission. Jurisdiction shall lie if any of the elements was committed within the Philippines or committed with the use of any computer system wholly or partly situated in the country, or when by such commission any damage is caused to a natural or juridical person who, at the time the offense was committed, was in the Philippines.

Senator Bongbong Marcos

CHAPTER V – JURISDICTION

SECTION 16. Jurisdiction.- The Regional Trial Court shall have jurisdiction over any violation committed by a Filipino national regardless of the place of commission. Jurisdiction shall lie if any of the elements was committed within the Philippines or committed with the use of any computer system wholly or partly situated in the country, or when by such commission any damage is caused to a natural or juridical person who, at the time the offense was committed, was in the Philippines.

Senator Bong Revilla

CHAPTER V – JURISDICTION

SECTION 15. Jurisdiction. The Regional Trial Court shall have jurisdiction over any violation of the provisions of this Act including any violation committed by a Filipino national regardless of the place of commission. Jurisdiction shall lie if any of the elements was committed within the Philippines or committed with the use of any computer system wholly or partly situated in the country, or when by such commission any damage is caused to a natural or juridical person who, at the time the offense was committed, was in the Philippines.

CHAPTER VI – International Cooperation

Senator Angara

CHAPTER VI – INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION

SEC. 16. General principles relating to international cooperation. — All relevant international instruments on international cooperation in criminal matters, arrangements agreed on the basis of uniform or reciprocal legislation, and domestic laws, to the widest extent possible for the purposes of investigations or proceedings concerning criminal offenses related to computer systems and data, or for the collection of evidence in electronic form of a criminal offense shall be given full force and effect.

SEC. 17. Applicability of the Convention on Cybercrime. — The provisions of Chapter III of the Convention on Cybercrime shall be directly applicable in the implementation of this Act as it relates to international cooperation taking into account the procedural laws obtaining in the jurisdiction.

Senate President Enrile

CHAPTER VI – INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION

SEC. 17. General principle relating to international cooperation. – All relevant international instruments on international cooperation in criminal matters, arrangement agreed on the basis of uniform or reciprocal legislation, and domestic laws, to the widest extent possible for the purpose of investigations or proceedings concerning criminal offenses related to computer systems and data, or for the collection of evidence in electronic form of a criminal offense shall be given full force and effect.

SEC. 18. Applicability of the Convention on Cybercrime. – The provisions of Chapter III of the Convention on Cybercrime shall be directly applicable in the implementation of this Act as it relates to international cooperation taking into account the procedural laws obtaining in the jurisdiction.

SEC. 19. Mutual Assistance and Cooperation.- The Government of the Philippines shall cooperate with, and render assistance to other nations for purposes of detection, investigation, and prosecution of offenses referred to in this Act and in the collection of evidence in electronic form in relation thereto. The principles contained in Presidential Decree No. 1069, otherwise known as the Philippine Extradition Law and other pertinent laws shall apply. In this regard, the Government of the Philippines shall:

a) Provide assistance to a requesting nation in the real-time collection of traffic data associated with specified communications in the Philippine territory transmitted by means of a computer system, with respect to criminal offenses defined in this law for which real-time collection of traffic data would be available;

b) Provide assistance to a requesting nation in the real-time collection, recording or interception of content data of specified communications transmitted by means of a computer system;

c) Allow another state, without its authorization to:

i. access publicly available stored computer data, located in the territory, or elsewhere; or

ii. access or receive, through a computer system located in the territory, stored computer data located in another country, if the nation obtains the lawful and voluntary consent of the person who has the lawful authority to disclose the data to the nation through that computer system;

d) Entertain a request of another nation for it to order or obtain the expeditious preservation of data stored by means of a computer system, located within the territory, relative to which the requesting nation intends to submit a request for mutual assistance for the search or similar access, seizure or similar securing, or disclosure of the stored computer data.

i. A request for preservation of data under this Section shall specify:

a. the authority seeking the preservation; b. the offense that is the subject of a criminal investigation or proceedings and a brief summary of the related facts; c. the stored computer data to be preserved and its relationship to the offense; d. the necessity of the preservation; and e. that the requesting nation intends to submit a request for mutual assistance for the search or similar access, seizure or similar securing, or disclosure of the stored computer data.

ii. Upon receiving the request from another nation, the Government of the Philippines shall take all appropriate measures to preserve expeditiously the specified data in accordance with this law and other pertinent laws. For the purposes of responding to a request, dual criminality shall not be required as a condition to providing such preservation.

iii. A request for preservation may only be refused if:

a. the request concerns an offense which the Government of the Philippines considers as a political offense or an offense connected with a political offense; or b. the Government of the Philippines considers the execution of the request will prejudice its sovereignty, security, public order or other national interest.

iv. Where the Government of the Philippines believes that preservation will not ensure the future availability of the data, or will threaten the confidentiality of, or otherwise prejudice the requesting nation’s investigation, it shall promptly so inform the requesting nation. The requesting nation will determine whether its request should be executed

v. Any preservation effected in response to the request referred to in Section 19, paragraph (a) shall be for a period not less than sixty days, in order to enable the requesting nation to submit a request for the search or similar access, seizure or similar securing, or disclosure of the data. Following the receipt of such a request the data shall continue to be preserved pending a decision on that request.

e) Accommodate request from another nation to search, access, seize, secure, or disclose data stored by means of a computer system located within Philippine territory, including data that has been preserved under the previous subsection. The Government of the Philippines shall respond to the request through the proper application of  international instruments, arrangements and laws. a. The request shall be responded to on an expedited basis where:

i. there are grounds to believe that relevant data is particularly vulnerable to loss or modification; or ii. the instruments, arrangements and laws referred to in number 2 of this Section otherwise provide for expedited co-operation.

b. The requesting nation must maintain the confidentiality of the fact or the subject of request for assistance and cooperation. It may only use the request information subject to the conditions specified in the grant. SEC. 20. Cooperation Based on Reciprocity. – In the absence of a treaty or agreement, mutual assistance and cooperation under Chapter VI, Section 19 of this Act shall be based on the principle of reciprocity.

SEC. 21. Spontaneous Information. – Information obtained within the framework of investigation and enforcement may be forwarded to another nation without prior request when the disclosure of such information might assist in initiating or carrying out investigations or proceedings concerning criminal offenses punishable in the Convention on Cybercrime or might lead to a request for cooperation.

Senator Bongbong Marcos

CHAPTER VI-INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION

SECTION 17. Mutual Assistance and Cooperation.- The Government of the Philippines shall cooperate with, and render assistance to other nations for purposes of detection, investigation, and prosecution of offenses referred to in this Act and in the collection of evidence in electronic form in relation thereto. The principles contained in Presidential Decree No. 1069, otherwise known as the Philippine Extradition Law and other pertinent laws shall apply. In this regard, the Government of the Philippines shall: 1. Provide assistance to a requesting nation in the real-time collection of traffic data associated with specified communications in the Philippine territory transmitted by means of a computer system, with respect to criminal offenses defined in this law for which real-time collection of traffic data would be available; 2. Provide assistance to a requesting nation in the real-time collection, recording or interception of content data of specified communications transmitted by means of a computer system; 3. Allow another state, without its authorization to:

a. access publicly available stored computer data, located in the territory, or elsewhere; or b. access or receive, through a computer system located in the territory, stored computer data located in another country, if the nation obtains the lawful and voluntary consent of the person who has the lawful authority to disclose the data to the nation through that computer system;

4. Entertain a request of another nation for it to order or obtain the expeditious preservation of data stored by means of a computer system, located within the territory, relative to which the requesting nation intends to submit a request for mutual assistance for the search or similar access, seizure or similar securing, or disclosure of the stored computer data.

a. A request for preservation of data under this Section shall specify:

i. the authority seeking the preservation; ii. the offense that is the subject of a criminal investigation or proceedings and a brief summary of the related facts; iii. the stored computer data to be preserved and its relationship to the offense; iv. the necessity of the preservation; and v. that the requesting nation intends to submit a request for mutual assistance for the search or similar access, seizure or similar securing, or disclosure of the stored computer data.

b. Upon receiving the request from another nation, the Government of the Philippines shall take all appropriate measures to preserve expeditiously the specified data in accordance with this law and other pertinent laws. For the purposes of responding to a request, dual criminality shall not be required as a condition to providing such preservation.

c. A request for preservation may only be refused if:

i. the request concerns an offense which the Government of the Philippines considers as a political offense or an offense connected with a political offense; or

ii. the Government of the Philippines considers the execution of the request will prejudice its sovereignty, security, public order or other national interest.

d. Where the Government of the Philippines believes that preservation will not ensure the future availability of the data, or will threaten the confidentiality of, or otherwise prejudice the requesting nation’s investigation, it shall promptly so inform the requesting nation. The requesting nation will determine whether its request should be executed.

e. Any preservation effected in response to the request referred to in paragraph 1 shall be for a period not less than sixty days, in order to enable the requesting nation to submit a request for the search or similar access, seizure or similar securing, or disclosure of the data. Following the receipt bf such a request the data shall continue to be preserved pending a decision on that request.

5. Accommodate request from another nation to search, access, seize, secure, or disclose data stored by means of a computer system located within Philippine territory, including data that has been preserved under the previous subsection. The Government of the Philippines shall respond to the request through the proper application of international instruments, arrangements and laws.

a. The request shall be responded to on an expedited basis where:

i. there are grounds to believe that relevant data is particularly vulnerable to loss or modification; or ii. the instruments, arrangements and laws referred to in number 2 of this Section otherwise provide for expedited co-operation,

b. The requesting nation must maintain the confidentiality of the fact or the subject of request for assistance and cooperation. It may only use the request information subject to the conditions specified in the grant

SECTION 18. General principles relating to international cooperation. – All relevant international instruments on international cooperation in criminal matters, arrangements agreed on the basis of uniform or reciprocal legislation, and domestic laws, to the widest extent possible for the purposes of investigations or proceedings concerning criminal offenses related to computer systems and data, or for the collection of evidence in electronic form of a criminal offense shall be given full force and effect.

SECTION 19. Applicability of the Convention on Cybercrime. – The provisions of Chapter III of the Convention on Cybercrime shall be directly applicable in the implementation of this Act as it relates to international cooperation taking into account the procedural laws obtaining in the jurisdiction.

SECTION 20. Cooperation based on reciprocity. – In the absence of a treaty or agreement, mutual assistance and cooperation under the preceding sections in this Chapter shall be based on the principle of reciprocity.

SECTION 21. Spontaneous information. – Information obtained within the framework of investigation and enforcement may be forwarded to another nation without prior request when the disclosure of such information might assist in initiating or carrying out investigations or proceedings concerning criminal offenses punishable in the Convention or might lead to a request for cooperation.

Senator Bong Revilla

CHAPTER VI – INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION

SECTION 16. General principles relating to international cooperation. – All relevant international instruments on international cooperation in criminal matters, arrangements agreed on the basis of uniform or reciprocal legislation, and domestic laws, to the widest extent possible for the purpose of investigations or proceedings concerning criminal offenses related to computer systems and data, or for the collection of evidence in electronic form of a criminal offense shall be given full force and effect.

SECTION 17. Applicability of the Convention on Cybercrime. – The provisions of Chapter III of the Convention on Cybercrime shall be directly applicable in the implementation of this Act as it relates to international cooperation taking into account the procedural laws obtaining in the jurisdiction.

CHAPTER VII – Competent Authorities

Senator Angara

SEC. 18. Department of Justice. – The Department of Justice (DOJ) shall be responsible for extending immediate assistance for the purpose of investigations or proceedings concerning criminal offenses related to computer systems and data, or for the collection of electronic evidence of a criminal offense and to otherwise ensure that the provisions of this law are complied. In this regard, there is hereby created a DOJ Office of Cybercrime for facilitating or directly carrying out the provisions of technical advice, preservation of data, collection of evidence, giving legal information and locating suspects and all other cybercrime matters related to investigation and reporting issues.

SEC. 19. Commission on Information and Communications Technology. – The Commission on Information and Communications Technology (CICT) shall be responsible for formulating and implementing a national cyber security plan and extending immediate assistance for the suppression of real-time commission of cybercrime offenses through a computer emergency response team (CERT). In this regard, there is hereby created a CICT National Cyber Security Office to carry out the above responsibilities and all other matters related to cybercrime prevention and suppression, including capacity building.

Senate President Enrile

CHAPTER VII – COMPETENT AUTHORITIES

SEC. 22. Department of Justice. – The Department of Justice (DOJ) shall be responsible for extending immediate assistance for the purpose of investigations or proceedings concerning criminal offenses related to computer systems and data, or for the collection of electronic evidence of a criminal offense and to otherwise ensure that the provisions of this law are complied. In this regard, there is hereby created a DOJ Office of Cybercrime for facilitating or directly carrying out the provisions of technical advice, preservation of data, collection of evidence, giving legal information and locating suspects and all other cybercrime matters related to investigation and reporting issues. It shall investigate and prosecute the punishable acts defined in this Act. Law enforcement authorities specifically the computer or technology crime divisions or units responsible for the investigation pf cybercrimes are deputized under the Department of Justice Office of Cybercrime created in this Act to ensure the proper and effective implementation of this Act.

SEC. 23. Commission on Information and Communications Technology. – The Commission on Information and Communications Technology (CICT) shall be responsible for formulating and implementing a national cyber security plan and extending immediate assistance for the suppression of real-time commission of cybercrime offenses through a computer emergency response team (CERT).

Senator Bongbong Marcos

CHAPTER VII – COMPETENT AUTHORITIES

SECTION 22. Department of Justice. – The Department of Justice (DOJ) shall be responsible for extending immediate assistance for the purpose of investigations or proceedings concerning criminal offenses related to computer systems and data, or for the collection of electronic evidence of a criminal offense and to otherwise ensure that the provisions of this law are complied. In this regard, there is hereby created a DOJ Office of Cybercrime for facilitating or directly carrying out the provisions of technical advice, preservation of data, collection of evidence, giving legal information and locating suspects and all other cybercrime matters related to investigation and reporting issues. It shall investigate and prosecute the punishable acts defined in this Act. Law enforcement authorities specifically the computer or technology crime divisions or units responsible for the investigation of cybercrimes are deputized under the Department of Justice Office of Cybercrime created in this Act to ensure the proper and effective implementation of this Act.

SECTION 23. Commission on Information and Communications Technology. – The Commission. on Information and Communications Technology (CICT) shall be responsible for formulating and implementing a national cyber security plan and extending immediate assistance for the suppression of real-time commission of cybercrime offenses through a computer emergency response team (CERT).

Senator Bong Revilla

CHAPTER VII- COMPETENT AUTHORITIES

SECTION 18. Department of Justice. – The Department of Justice (DOJ) shall be responsible [or extending immediate assistance for the purpose of investigations or proceedings concerning criminal offenses related to computer systems and data, or for the collection of electronic evidence of a criminal offense and to otherwise ensure that the provisions of this law are complied. In this regard, there is hereby created a DOJ Office of Cybercrime for facilitating or directly carrying out the provisions of technical advice, preservation of data, collection of evidence, giving legal information and locating suspects and all other cybercrime matters related to investigation and reporting issues.

SECTION 19. Commission on Information and Communications Technology. – The Commission on Information and Communications Technology (CICT) shall be responsible for formulating and implementing a national cyber security plan and extending immediate assistance for the suppression of real-time commission of cybercrime offenses through a computer emergency response team (CERT). In this regard, there is hereby created a CICT National Cyber Security Office to carry out the above responsibilities and all other matters related to cybercrime prevention and suppression, including capacity building.

CHAPTER VIII – Cybercrime Investigation and Coordination Center

Senator Angara

CHAPTER VIII – CYBERCRlME INVESTIGATION AND COORDINATION CENTER

SEC. 20. Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center. — There is hereby created, within thirty (30) days from the effectivity of this Act, a Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center, hereinafter referred to as CICC, under the control and supervision of the Office of the President, to formulate and implement the national cyber security plan.

SEC. 21. Composition. — The CICC shall be headed by the Chairman of the Commission on Information and Communications Technology as Chairman; with the Director of the NBI as Vice-Chairman; Chief of the PNP; Chief of the National Prosecution Service (NPS); and the Head of the National Computer Center (NCC) as members. The CICC shall be manned by a secretariat of selected personnel and representatives from the different participating agencies.

SEC. 22. Powers and Functions.– The CICC shall have the following powers and functions:

a. To prepare and implement appropriate and effective measures to prevent and suppress cybercrime activities as provided in this Act; b. To monitor cybercrime cases being handled by participating law enforcement and prosecution agencies; c. To facilitate international cooperation on intelligence, investigations, training and capacity building related to cybercrime prevention, suppression and prosecution; d. To coordinate the support and participation of the business sector, local government units, and non-government organizations III cybercrime prevention programs and other related projects; e. To recommend the enactment of appropriate laws, issuances, measures and policies; f. To call upon any government agency to render assistance in the accomplishment of the CICC’s mandated tasks and functions; g. To perform such other functions and duties necessary for the proper implementation of this Act.

Senate President Enrile

CHAPTER VIII- CYBERCRIME INVESTIGATION AND COORDINATING CENTER

SEC. 24. Creation of the Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center.- There is hereby created, within thirty (30) days from the effectivity of this Act, a Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center, hereinafter referred to as CICC, which shall have the following powers and functions:

a. Prepare and implement appropriate and effective measures to prevent and suppress cybercrime activities as provided in this Act; b. Monitor cybercrime cases being handled by law enforcement authorities and prosecution agencies and require the submission of timely reports; c. Facilitate international cooperation on intelligence, investigations, training and capacity building related to cybercrime prevention, suppression and prosecution; d. Designate a point of contact available on a twenty-four hour, seven-day-a-week basis; Coordinate the support and participation of the business sector, local government units, and non-government organizations in cybercrime prevention programs and other related projects; f. Recommend the enactment of appropriate laws, issuances, measures and policies; g. Call upon any government agency to render assistance in the accomplishment of the CICC’s mandated tasks and functions; h. Perform such other functions and duties necessary for the proper implementation of this Act.

SEC. 25. Composition Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center.- The CICC shall be chaired by the Secretary of Justice or his representative with the following agencies as members:

a. Chairperson of the Commission on Information and Communications Technology (CICT); b. Director of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI); c. Chief of the Philippine National Police (PNP); and d. Head of the National Computer Center (NCC), or their representatives as members.

The CICC shall be manned by a secretariat of selected personnel and representatives from the different participating agencies.

Senator Bongbong Marcos

CHAPTER VIII- CYBERCRIME INVESTIGATION AND COORDINATING CENTER

SECTION 24. Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center; Powers and Functions.- There is hereby created, within thirty (30) days from the effectivity of this Act, a Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center, hereinafter referred to as CICC, which shall have the following powers and functions:

a. To prepare and implement appropriate and effective measures to prevent and suppress cybercrime activities as provided in this Act; b. To monitor cybercrime cases being handled by law enforcement authorities and prosecution agencies and require the submission of timely reports; c. To facilitate international,’cooperation on intelligence, investigations, training and capacity building related to cybercrime prevention, suppression and prosecution; d. To designated a point of ‘contact available on a twenty-four hour, seven-day-a-week basis; e. To coordinate the support and participation of the business sector, local government units, and non-government organizations in cybercrime prevention programs and other related projects; f. To recommend the enactment of appropriate laws, issuances, measures and policies; g. To call upon any government agency to render assistance in the accomplishment of the CICC’s mandated tasks and functions; h. To perform such other functions and duties necessary for the proper implementation of this Act

SECTION 25. Composition. – The CICC shall be chaired by the Secretary of Justice or his representative with the following agencies as members: Chairperson of the Commission on Information and Communications Technology (CICT); the Director of the NBI; Chief of the PNP; Head ,of the National Computer Center (NCC), or their representatives as members. The CICC shall be manned by a secretariat of selected personnel and representatives from the different participating agencies.

Senator Bong Revilla

CHAPTER VIII- CYBERCRIME INVESTIGATION AND COORDINATION CENTER

SECTION 20. Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center. There is hereby created, within thirty (30) days from the effectivity of this Act, a Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center, hereinafter referred to as CICC, under the control and supervision of the Office of the President, to formulate and implement the national cyber security plan.

SECTION 21. Composition. — The CICC shall be headed by the chairman of the Commission on Information and Communications Technology as Chairman; with the Director of the NBI as Vice-Chairman; Chief of the PNP; Chief of the National Prosecution Service (NPS), and the Head of the National Computer Center (NCC) as members. The CICC shall be manned, by a secretariat of selected personnel and representatives from the different participating agencies.

SECTION 22. Powers and Functions.The CICC shall have the following powers and functions:

a. To prepare and implement appropriate and effective measures to prevent and suppress cybercrime activities as provided in this Act; b. To monitor cybercrime cases being handled by participating law enforcement and prosecution agencies; C. To facilitate international cooperation on intelligence, investigations, training and capacity building related to cybercrime prevention, suppression and prosecution; d. To coordinate the support and participation of the business sector, local government units, and non-government organizations in cybercrime prevention programs and other related projects; e. To recommend the enactment of appropriate laws, issuances, measures and policies; f. To call upon any government agency to render assistance in the accomplishment of the CICC’s mandated tasks and functions; g. To perform such other functions and duties necessary for the proper implementation of this Act.

CHAPTER IX – FINAL PROVISIONS

Senator Angara

CHAPTER IX – FINAL PROVISIONS

SEC. 23. Appropriations. — The amount of ten million pesos (PhP 10,000,000.00) shall be appropriated annually for the implementation of this Act.

SEC. 24. Implementing Rules and Regulations. – The Department of Justice in consultation with the Commission on Information and Communication Technology shall formulate the necessary rules and regulations for the effective implementation of this Act including the creation and establishment of a national cyber security office with the relevant computer emergency response councilor team.

SEC. 25. Separability Clause. — If any provision of this Act is held invalid, the other provisions not affected shall remain in full force and effect.

SEC. 26. Repealing Clause. –. All laws, decrees, or rules inconsistent with this Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly. Section 33 of Republic Act No, 8792 or the Electronic Commerce Act is hereby modified accordingly.

SEC. 27. Effectivity. — This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after the completion of its publication in the Official Gazette or ;in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation. Approved.

Senate President Enrile

CHAPTER IX – FINAL PROVISIONS

SEC. 26. Appropriations. – The amount of Ten Million Pesos (PhP,OOO,OOO.OO) shall be appropriated annually for the implementation of this Act.

SEC. 27. Implementing Rules and Regulations. – The Department of Justice (DOJ), in consultation with the agencies mentioned in the creation of the Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center, shall formulate :the necessary rules and regulations for the effective implementation of this Act including the establishment of a national cyber security plan and the relevant computer emergency response team.

SEC. 28. Separability Clause. – If any provision of this Act is held invalid, the other provisions not affected shall remain in full force and effect.

SEC. 29. Repealing Clause. – All laws, decrees, or rules inconsistent with this Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly. The provisions of Presidential Decree No. 1829, Republic Act Nos. 4200, 8792 and 9372 are hereby modified accordingly.

SEC. 30. Effectivity. – This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after the completion of its publication in the Official Gazette or in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation.

Senator Bongbong Marcos

CHAPTER IX – FINAL PROVISIONS

SECTION 26. Appropriations. – The amount of Ten Million Pesos (PhP10,000,000) shall be appropriated annually for the implementation of this Act.

SECTION 27. Implementing Rules and Regulations. – The Department of Justice (DOJ) in consultation with the agencies mentioned in the creation of the Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center shall formulate the necessary rules and regulations for the effective implementation of this Act to include the establishment of the relevant computer emergency response team and/or 24/7 network. SECTION 28. Separability Clause. – If any provision of this Act is held invalid, the other provisions not affected shall remain in full force and effect.

SECTION 29. Repealing Clause. – All laws, decrees, or rules inconsistent with this Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly. The provisions of Presidential Decree No. 1829, Republic Act Nos, 4200, 8792 and 9372 are modified accordingly,

SECTION 30. Effectivity. – This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after the completion of its publication in the Official Gazette or in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation. Approved.

Senator Bong Revilla

CHAPTER IX – FINAL PROVISIONS

SECTION 23. Appropriations. The amount of ten million pesos (PhP10,000,000) shall be appropriated annually for the implementation of this Act.

SECTION 24. Implementing Rules and Regulations. The Department of Justice in consultation with the Commission on Information and Communication Technology shall formulate the necessary rules and regulations for the effective implementation of this Act including the creation and establishment of a national cyber security office with the relevant computer emergency response council or team.

SECTION 25. Separability Clause. If any provision of this Act is held invalid, the other provisions not .affected shall remain in full force and effect.

SECTION 26. Repealing Clause. All laws, decrees, or rules inconsistent with this Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly. Section 33 of Republic Act No. 8792 or the Electronic Commerce Act is hereby modified accordingly.

SECTION 27. Effectivity. — This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after the completion of its publication in the Official Gazette or in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation Approved,

70 Responses to “The quadruplet bills on Cybercrime”

Read below or add a comment...

  1. 30
    ginebra says:

    they should fire all their staff responsible for this copycat bill filing. sayang lang taxes ko sa mga inutil sa senado!

  2. 29
    Jan says:

    Enrile was the first to file a bill so the rest must have copied from him. Didn’t he accuse Trillanes of copying his draft for the Philippine Archipelagic Baselines Law? But maybe Trillanes explains the practice of copying old bills in congress best: “(I)n public policy making, there is no such thing as copying since best practices are supposed to be emulated.” http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/284780/enrile-vows-to-bare-truth-about-trillanes-during-2013-poll-campaign

    • 29.1
      raissa says:

      Unless the originator complains.

      But wait.

      enrile’s bill had more text than Angara. Enrile’s bill seems to be an updated version of Angara’s bill.

  3. 28
    leona says:

    Are the quadruplet now smiling or pouting an expression? About time.

  4. 27
    Martial Law Baby says:

    Could it be possible that this bill was passed into law to prevent politicians from “Mudslinging” and spreading “Black Propaganda” against each other? Then it would be scrapped right after election. Just a thought.

  5. 26
    Mafe says:

    Is there nothing in the Senate rules of procedure that manages duplicated filing of duplicated bills (especially so that the proposals are starkly similar in form and substance)? Does this quintuplet filing mean that the senators do not “talk” to each other? I was a local legislative officer before and I know that duplicated filing was not a practice. When the local legislators want to file/support a bill or resolution, they indicate whether they wish to co-author, sponsor or co-sponsor the same. And in the senate where the legislative staff and records management are supposed to be more competent and rational, this should have not happened. Because it shows how incredibly incompetent and run-of-the-mill they are.

  6. 25
    legendharry says:

    Let me put my 2-cent: when a bill is proposed it goes to the following steps: filing, first reading (the Senate President or Presiding Officer refers the bill to the appropriate committee), committee hearing… In Steps 2 & 3, those 4 bills should have been consolidated and maybe the most senior of the authors or the first to file will be considered as the principal author and the rest will be co-authors.

    Question: anong committee at sino kaya ang chairperson nito at bakit nakalusot na ganyan ganyan na lang?

  7. 24
    maya pula says:

    Politicians are afraid of the power of the internet. They will do anything to curtail the voice of a blogger, and end up with a paranoid bill. That is what we, and the Supreme Court, who will have to uphold rule of law will resolve..hopefully before elections( 2013)

  8. 23
    pinay710 says:

    aaaaaaaaaaaaaahhh kaya pala noong inaakusahan ng netizen si sotto na copier eh puro sila tahimik kasi 4 pala sa kanila ay kasing balat ni sotto. at baka hindi lang yung 4 kaya tahimik lahat. eh baka magkamali sila ng salita eh madamay eh talaga palang may gawa din silang mangongopya. wala silang orginality. original lang sila kung paano nila gagamitin ang mga nakukurakot nila sa kaban ng bayan.dyan sa bagay na yan kanya kanya silang style WALANG KOPYAHAN NG PAGKAMAL NG PERA. may TRO na ang libel hindi ako maakusahan ng libel.

    • 23.1
      vander anievas says:

      hahaha, retroactive iyan. gagawin nila ang lahat para tayong taga cyberspace ay mabusalan pag hindi nila gusto ang timplada ng ating isinulat…see you kosa…:)

      • 23.1.1
        pinay710 says:

        @vanader tinawag mo akong KOSA may mga hospital na akkong nakiipagappointment sakaling malibel ako. magpaadmit agad ako na dimented na. hehehehehehh ikaw siguro hindi pa puede maakusahan na dimented. hehehhehehe meron philhealth ang mga anak ko. hehehheheeh beneficiary ako. see you sa hospitla not in the rehas.

    • 23.2
      Vibora says:

      dapat siguro ang ipasweldo sa kanila, perang kinopya na rin. doon naman sila mahilig sa kopya.

  9. 22
    jeth says:

    This is normal right? Kung ang karamihan nga ng batas natin ay itinulad sa batas ng America, anong nakakapag taka dito? Joke nga ng prof ko dati pinalitan lang daw ang “U.S” ng “Philippines”, tapos! Pero sa pagkakaalam ko, ito talaga ang normal na proseso sa pagbubuo ng batas.

    Siguro ang dapat natin isipin ay kung saan itinulad o nagmula ang batas na ito. Sino ang nagmungkahi na magkaroon ng ganitong batas, sino ang nanghikayat kongreso upang isulong ito.

    • 22.1
    • 22.2

      high school pa ako nadinig ko na yan; mga batas na kinopya lang natin sa amerika, di naman
      tayo ganyan kabobo; panahon na seguro, gawing tulad ng ginawa ni Ms Raissa: ilabas na
      word for word ang mga batas na kinopya sa amerika, para hindi naman lumabas na
      binobola natin ang ating kabataan.

  10. 21
    JiroArturo says:

    Apat na senators pare-parehas ang sinasabi. Ano ba ito-kopyahan? Kakahiya. Ito bang klaseng senators ang dapat gumawa ng batas?

    • 21.1
      netty says:

      Just some INPUT on my limited knowledge of how bills are passed… that several people can have the same ideas but proper procedural rules should be followed for one bill to be passed into law. The great concern in the CCL passage is the sneaky way it was passed. It is not clear whether it has undergone this condition…”The committee reviews the bill, holds public hearings and work sessions. If the bill is amended in the Senate by even one word, it must be sent back to the House for concurrence. If the House does not concur with the amendments, the presiding officers of each body appoint a conference committee to resolve the differences between the two versions of the bill.”

      Below, some C/P measures on How an Idea Becomes a Law—— (where it is applicable)
      Como Una Idea Se Hace Ley
      *An idea for a law can come from anyone; an individual or group of citizens, a legislator or legislative committee, the executive or judicial branch, or a lobbyist. By statute state agencies must presession file bills. Legislators or legislative committees may file an unlimited number of measures within established timelines set by rule. The committee reviews the bill, holds public hearings and work sessions.
      If the bill is amended in the Senate by even one word, it must be sent back to the House for concurrence. If the House does not concur with the amendments, the presiding officers of each body appoint a conference committee to resolve the differences between the two versions of the bill.
      In order for the bill to go to the House floor for a final vote, or be reported out of committee, a committee report is signed by the committee chair and delivered back to the Chief Clerk.
      Any amendments to the bill are printed and the bill may be reprinted to include the amendments (engrossed bill).
      The bill, now back in the house of origin (House), has its second reading.
      The measure then has its third reading, which is its final recitation before the vote. This is the time the body debates the measure. To pass, the bill must receive aye votes of a majority of members (31 in the House, 16 in the Senate). *

      • 21.1.1

        isang bill, ginawang apat isinulong ng apat na “siga” ng senado. OVERKILL yan;
        walang-walang procedure, procedure o systemang nilabag diyan. PALUSOT
        par excellence yan. tignan ninyo ang bwelta ng tao at ng korte suprema. GARAPAL
        yan.

    • 21.2
      curveball says:

      Walang masama kung pare-pareho ang bill na ipapasa para maging batas. Lalo na kung iisa ang hangarin. Ang hindi maganda ay yun nga parehong-pareho. Sa mga salitang ginamit, sa mga pagkakasunod-sunod din. Ibig sabihin nito may mga ESP silang lahat para maisip na ang bawat isa (sa 4 na tao) ay iisa ang nasa isip? Ang nasa isip ko bilang ordinaryo mamamayan, parang alang ginawa o ginagawa naman para magisip.
      Aba eh kopyahan to the max na ito. Kung sa elem at h.s. ay ibig sabihin lumabas ang teacher kaya libre ang lahat para magkopyahan.Kasi walang nag-aral at nag review.

    • 21.3
      AngLagay says:

      No wonder… kasi puro sila SOTTOcopy. Anyway, hindi din nakapagtataka, kasi marami diyan mga SOTTOnas din at hindi karapat dapat na maging senator or congressman. Nangyayari ito, kasi majority ng mga botante sa Philippines ay sikat at artista ang tanging qualification na tinitingnan sa mga pulitiko.

      On the other hand, kasalan din ni Mr. President and his legal team. He signed and approved without thoroughly studying the cyber law. Siyempre, kapag tamad ang boss, tamad din ang mga tangasunod.

  11. 20
    duquemarino says:

    “Copy pasting” legislation????

  12. 19
    curveball says:

    Isa pa naisip ko di kaya playing safe sila? Pag yung isa bill di nakapasa, dahil may nakakita, meron pang tatlo, pag nakita yung isa at di nakapasa, ,meron pang dalawa, kapag di pa rin nakapasa, meron pa isa. Finally pag di nakapasa (pero baka makapasa na kasi pagod na sila sa kababasa at debate), Isingit naman bago pirmahan ni Pnoy. Parang misplaced ang virtue na persistent-iba ang ipinipilit kahit pangit.
    O di ba ang galing nila magpasa ng bills? Magpasa na 4 na kambal bills tapos ay magsingit pa.
    Kung nasa elem at h.s, itong mga tao na ito lagot sa teacher ko.
    Nakatayo sa likod ng row 4 malapit sa basurahan maghapon.
    O kaya susulat ng “Hindi na ako mangongopya” sa blackboard 50 times.
    Only in the Philippines.

    • 19.1

      Ang nakapagtataka, para silang hindi mga batikang senador.
      Kailangan pa ba nilang gawin yan alam naman nila ang
      kalakaran sa senado. Ano nga ba yan? baka meron
      malevolent na motibo sa likod niyan. wala pang nakakaalam.

  13. 18
    Edwin says:

    Really, a more appropriate term to describe the bills would be quintuplet.

    There was the plagiarism issue from the other senator that became the brainchild of it all, so all in all consisting of five parts, so to speak. It reminded me of the symbolic octopus (i.e., google=octopus illuminati) stretching its greedy tentacles throughout the world, to put the latter under its control, i.e., slavery, as part of a bigger scheme, perhaps, called new world order, whether or not they were aware of them.

    This is a conspiracy to steal the people’s right to privacy and destroy their freedom.

    It is time for everyone concerned to speak up and be heard through social media such as blogs, and make your votes count in the election, i.e., pick those who are not influenced by globalism and would not be swayed by socialism, collectivism, and communism.

  14. 17
    vander anievas says:

    ito kaya ay kakaiba? ito kaya ay may intensyon na higit pa sa pagsasabatas nito? bakit apat na pareparehong bill pa ang ipa-file? ano ang nasa likod nito?
    kailan pa kaya nangyayari sa senado ang bagay na ito?
    ang tanong, sa senado lang ba may ganitong mga gawain?
    hindi ko malirip ang lalim ng bagay na ito. apat ang senador para magpasa ng iisang klaseng batas.
    hindi ba pag-aaksaya ng pera iyan? hindi ba pwedeng sila ay magsama-sama at maging co-authors or co-endorsers ng isang consolidated na bill?
    sana ay masagot ng ating mga senador ang mga nagdaratingang katanungan mula sa mga mamamayang umaasa sa matapat at matino nilang serbisyo.

    • 17.1
      pelang says:

      noong kapanahunan ko, nag-rally na ang mga tao sa Luneta pa. sama-sama ako noon kasi, doon ko lang talaga nalalaman ang tunay na nangyayari sa bansa natin. ngayon, dito sa ating Cyber Plaza Miranda at iba pang Cyber Network, nalalaman na rin natin ang tunay at hindi lang haka-haka na pangyayari sa lahat ng Mundo. Kaya lang paano natin ipapaalam sa mga ordinaryong pinoy lamang ang mga ito lalung-lalo na doon sa mga hindi nga alam kung anong ibig sabihin ng surfing at mga walang computer. Si JPE nga, hindi niya naiintindihan kung ano ang blogging?

    • 17.2
      jeth says:

      co-authors nga po sila

      • 17.2.1
        vander anievas says:

        there was a funny account during one senate interpellation when jpe asked what is blog? it’s a strange word to him. let’s be kind to aged ones, like me, i’m not one of the cyber generations. slide rule pa ang gamit namin noon…:)

        see this link: http://beta.abs-cbnnews.com/-depth/08/29/12/enrile-eyes-new-law-protect-bloggers

        reason why he can’t relate to the avalanche of protests file one after another…

        in the lighter side he proposed to come up with safety measures to protect bloggers…

  15. 16
    David says:

    Thanks Raissa,

    Incredible piece. Gives new meaning to “monkey see, monkey do”, how pathetic.

  16. 15
    erwin says:

    Diyan ako bilib ngayon kay Sen Lito Lapid. HINDI siya marunong magcopy ng BILLS para lang may masabing may naifile siyang bills sa senado.

    hehehehehehe

    • 15.1
      vander anievas says:

      hahaha. kung ang lahat ng senadores natin ay katulad niya, tahimik ang pilipinas. walang gulong magmumula sa magugulong batas na ginawa ng mga magugulong mambabatas.
      kaya lang, baka hindi na rin natin kailangan ang senado. ayaw ko niyan. hindi masaya!! :)
      sa darating na halalan 2013, ihalal natin ang katulad ni lapid.
      sa darating na halalan 2013, ihalal natin ang mga pulitikong : see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil, and himself an evil…
      at aalis na ako sa pinas…:)

  17. 14
    rigo says:

    Akala ko Tatlong Haring Gago, may pang apat pa pala…

  18. 13
    Rey Adones says:

    Raissa,

    With your Blog, it exposes the doings of our politicians. “IT’s a SHAME” and Only in the Philippines. Do they really deserve to be there? However, the people voted for them. So what shall we do next? I call on all the Voters to please think twice before casting your precious “VOTE”. To Sen. Angara, Sen. Enrile, Sen. Bong-bong Marcos and Sen.Bong Revilla avoid any further copying please.

    Once again thank you Raissa

  19. 12
    trigz says:

    No wonder nobody raised a howl on Sotto’s shameless plagiarizing. It’s a common practice in the Senate, even when crafting bills. Thank you Raissa for doing what you are doing, exposing these buffoons for what they really are. At least, now that they know people are looking over their shoulders, they would think twice before making fools of themselves.

  20. 11
    wyl5326 says:

    Someone with personal interest is probably the mastermind who initiated this stupid law who have transcended beyond a President’s term. This mastermind must be exposed and removed for megalomaniacal ambition who can’t think of unintended consequences ! Considering the multi-year efforts this bill have undergone metamorphosis, I suspect the mastermind could be related to IT Technology Security who must have met some technical challenged before like how the frustrated Rigoberto Tiglao tried to pinned down his detractors like me ! Unfortunately for Bobit, he is no IT technician, but might have known somebody else who knows more and became his deep penetrating pawn planted for long term activation into the future ! While this is only my haunch, I can only point to the confluence of 4 different Senators filing similar bills ! Someone has to be the secret beneficiary for this and I don’t know who !

  21. 10
    leona says:

    Do the quadroplets have the same fingerprints too? Footprints? Baka sa isang kwarto lang ginawa lahat ito? Parang klone! Isang horno isang plate! Apat na kambal-moskiteros!

    hahaha…what a JOKE! only in ‘PINAS!

  22. 9
    medy says:

    ma’am raissa what could be the worst implication of this ‘quadruplets’???

  23. 8
    CBC says:

    Ano ba ‘yan, sayang lang ang pinapa-sweldo ng taung-bayan sa kanila. (Buti pa si Raissa, hindi pa-sweldo ng mga Pilipino pero ang sipag mag-research at magsulat ng mga bagay na may saysay!)

    Nakakasawa na ‘tong mga pollute-icians na ‘to, hilig magkalat. Ang gusto ko naman, mga Fil-iticians, ‘yung may tunay na malasakit sa Pilipinas at sa Pilipino.

    *sigh*

    • 8.1
      Johnny Lin says:

      Wala yata sa category mo si Tito “kilitician”, kill joy na nagpapatawa.

      • 8.1.1
        CBC says:

        Naku, Sir, selective amnesia siguro kaya hindi ko siya naisali — self-preservation baga! Kasi pag nagpapatawa siya, naiiyak ako; pero pag nagda-drama siya, natatawa ‘ko (sa inis). Nakakasira ng bait! LOL.

  24. 7
    Johnny Lin says:

    This proves that Sotto Revilla, Lapid and Estrada are genius and very qualified as senators comparative to Drilon, Angara, Pangilinan and Escudero.

    Government provides free ghost a writers, anyway.

    Who needs a LAw Degree in crafting bills?

    He he he

  25. 6
    netty says:

    There is an infectious virus spreading in the Senate, called Copycitis that if not treated early would result to an entire epidemic from the floor to the nation. What the infected suggested for treatment is the complete isolation of the people from the internet where they perceived the killer virus is coming from. So, if a person contacted the virus, the victim will be put under quarantine, arrested without question and rot in jail for fifteen years which is plausible for a common man than being fined, for the person is utterly found to be ill, broke and infected.
    In view of the above findings by the citizenry who are healthy yet, the main originator of the virus must be found together with the four other highly contagious Senators that sat side by side with each other, drink and eat in close proximity, and work closely with each other. In the meantime, the people are nervously awaiting the results of the investigation on the who, what ,why, how and where of the ongoing malady.
    IMO, the health authorities should get a tissue sample from the brains of the four suspicious individuals for
    biopsy. As for the insertion gut and stuffed Senator, he can provide the entertainment for the crowd while the
    investigation is ongoing. More fun , but dead serious. I had fun, thanks , Raissa. Keep well yourself. ;)

  26. 5
    netty says:

    There is an infectious virus spreading in the Senate, called Copycitis that if not treated early would result to an entire epidemic to spread from the floor to the nation. What the suspicious individuals suggested for treatment is the complete isolation of the people from the internet where they perceived the killer virus is coming from. So, if a person contacted the virus, the victim will be put under quarantine, arrested without question and rot in jail for fifteen years which is plausible for a common man than being fined, for the person is utterly found to be ill, broke and infected.

    In view of the above findings by the citizenry who are healthy yet, the main originator of the virus must be found together with the four other highly contagious Senators that sat side by side with each other, drink and eat in close proximity, and work closely with each other. In the meantime, the people are nervously awaiting the results of the investigation on the who, what ,why, how and where of the ongoing malady.

    IMO, the health authorities should get a tissue sample from the brains of the four suspicious individuals for biopsy. As for the insertion gut and stuffed Senator, he can provide the entertainment for the crowd while the serious stuff is ongoing, more fun but dead serious. I had fun, thanks Raissa. Keep well ;)

  27. 4
    jam says:

    Huh!!!sayang ang pera ng taong bayan. Plagiarism s loob ng senado,eh ang mga senador puro yes n lng ba at d nagbabas pero updated sa twitter. Thank you maam raissa.

  28. 3
    curveball says:

    Nakakainis naman mga taong ito.
    Nuon nasa elem at h.s. ako bawal ang magkopyahan. Pag nahuli ng teacher lalagyan ng 0 ang test paper o kaya patayuin sa likod.
    Saan kaya nila natutunan ito?
    Ngayon at nalaman natin na ganito pala sila, tandaan ko pangalan nila at di ko “kopyahin” sa balota

  29. 2

    Reading this post made me think of Groundhog Day. Based on the dates, the first of these practically exact bill copies was made by Enrile? Unless he also got it from someone else, also?

    Sumakit ulo ko kasi parang deja four.

    • 2.1
      leona says:

      @Guy….apat din na “identikal amendments” pag nag amienda sila? hahaha…

      this JOKE is on meeeeeee! alin ang kaonterpit bill dyan?

  30. 1
    pelang says:

    wow! akala ko pa naman si Tito Sotto lang ang xerox copy maschine sa senado. kung kay bong-bong marcos at Bong Revilla, hindi ako nagtataka na mangopya na lang sila. pero si Angara (dating Presidente ng U.P., ) at JPE. I wonder kung sino ang original doon sa kanilang dalawa na pinagkopyahan nila Bong-bong at Bong Revilla. well, what do we know? pasalamat tayo sa Internet na gusto nilang ipatigil para hindi sila mabuking sa ginagawa nila sa senado. Salamat Raissa sa investigative report mong ito, kung hindi sa iyo, hindi namin malalaman kung ano ang pinag gagagawa sa senado at congresso. bago nito, wala tayong kamalay- malay na gano’n lang pala ang ginagawa ng mga senador at congressmen, KOPYAHAN: At nang dahil dito, (para hindi mabuking) gumawa sila ng cybercrime law. buti na lang di natin tinigilan. NAKAKAHIYA KAYO!

  31. 1.1
    gayyem says:

    Naalaala ko tuloy ang sinabi ng isang Head ng isang staff ng isang senador.Sa congreso raw, talamak ang copiahan! Bakit ka nga naman magpapakahirap mag-isip, eh napakadali ang “copy and paste”. Siguro, tuwang-tuwa sila sa technology na ito. Para saan nga ba ang technology kung hindi sa ikagiginhawa ng tao.

  32. Jan says:

    Enrile was the first to file a bill so the rest must have copied from him. Didn’t he accuse Trillanes of copying his draft for the Philippine Archipelagic Baselines Law? But maybe Trillanes explains the practice of copying old bills in congress best: “(I)n public policy making, there is no such thing as copying since best practices are supposed to be emulated.” http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/284780/enrile-vows-to-bare-truth-about-trillanes-during-2013-poll-campaign

    • raissa says:

      Unless the originator complains.

      But wait.

      enrile’s bill had more text than Angara. Enrile’s bill seems to be an updated version of Angara’s bill.

  33. leona says:

    Are the quadruplet now smiling or pouting an expression? About time.

  34. Martial Law Baby says:

    Could it be possible that this bill was passed into law to prevent politicians from “Mudslinging” and spreading “Black Propaganda” against each other? Then it would be scrapped right after election. Just a thought.

  35. Mafe says:

    Is there nothing in the Senate rules of procedure that manages duplicated filing of duplicated bills (especially so that the proposals are starkly similar in form and substance)? Does this quintuplet filing mean that the senators do not “talk” to each other? I was a local legislative officer before and I know that duplicated filing was not a practice. When the local legislators want to file/support a bill or resolution, they indicate whether they wish to co-author, sponsor or co-sponsor the same. And in the senate where the legislative staff and records management are supposed to be more competent and rational, this should have not happened. Because it shows how incredibly incompetent and run-of-the-mill they are.

  36. legendharry says:

    Let me put my 2-cent: when a bill is proposed it goes to the following steps: filing, first reading (the Senate President or Presiding Officer refers the bill to the appropriate committee), committee hearing… In Steps 2 & 3, those 4 bills should have been consolidated and maybe the most senior of the authors or the first to file will be considered as the principal author and the rest will be co-authors.

    Question: anong committee at sino kaya ang chairperson nito at bakit nakalusot na ganyan ganyan na lang?

  37. maya pula says:

    Politicians are afraid of the power of the internet. They will do anything to curtail the voice of a blogger, and end up with a paranoid bill. That is what we, and the Supreme Court, who will have to uphold rule of law will resolve..hopefully before elections( 2013)

  38. pinay710 says:

    aaaaaaaaaaaaaahhh kaya pala noong inaakusahan ng netizen si sotto na copier eh puro sila tahimik kasi 4 pala sa kanila ay kasing balat ni sotto. at baka hindi lang yung 4 kaya tahimik lahat. eh baka magkamali sila ng salita eh madamay eh talaga palang may gawa din silang mangongopya. wala silang orginality. original lang sila kung paano nila gagamitin ang mga nakukurakot nila sa kaban ng bayan.dyan sa bagay na yan kanya kanya silang style WALANG KOPYAHAN NG PAGKAMAL NG PERA. may TRO na ang libel hindi ako maakusahan ng libel.

    • vander anievas says:

      hahaha, retroactive iyan. gagawin nila ang lahat para tayong taga cyberspace ay mabusalan pag hindi nila gusto ang timplada ng ating isinulat…see you kosa…:)

      • pinay710 says:

        @vanader tinawag mo akong KOSA may mga hospital na akkong nakiipagappointment sakaling malibel ako. magpaadmit agad ako na dimented na. hehehehehehh ikaw siguro hindi pa puede maakusahan na dimented. hehehhehehe meron philhealth ang mga anak ko. hehehheheeh beneficiary ako. see you sa hospitla not in the rehas.

    • Vibora says:

      dapat siguro ang ipasweldo sa kanila, perang kinopya na rin. doon naman sila mahilig sa kopya.

  39. jeth says:

    This is normal right? Kung ang karamihan nga ng batas natin ay itinulad sa batas ng America, anong nakakapag taka dito? Joke nga ng prof ko dati pinalitan lang daw ang “U.S” ng “Philippines”, tapos! Pero sa pagkakaalam ko, ito talaga ang normal na proseso sa pagbubuo ng batas.

    Siguro ang dapat natin isipin ay kung saan itinulad o nagmula ang batas na ito. Sino ang nagmungkahi na magkaroon ng ganitong batas, sino ang nanghikayat kongreso upang isulong ito.

    • high school pa ako nadinig ko na yan; mga batas na kinopya lang natin sa amerika, di naman
      tayo ganyan kabobo; panahon na seguro, gawing tulad ng ginawa ni Ms Raissa: ilabas na
      word for word ang mga batas na kinopya sa amerika, para hindi naman lumabas na
      binobola natin ang ating kabataan.

  40. JiroArturo says:

    Apat na senators pare-parehas ang sinasabi. Ano ba ito-kopyahan? Kakahiya. Ito bang klaseng senators ang dapat gumawa ng batas?

    • netty says:

      Just some INPUT on my limited knowledge of how bills are passed… that several people can have the same ideas but proper procedural rules should be followed for one bill to be passed into law. The great concern in the CCL passage is the sneaky way it was passed. It is not clear whether it has undergone this condition…”The committee reviews the bill, holds public hearings and work sessions. If the bill is amended in the Senate by even one word, it must be sent back to the House for concurrence. If the House does not concur with the amendments, the presiding officers of each body appoint a conference committee to resolve the differences between the two versions of the bill.”

      Below, some C/P measures on How an Idea Becomes a Law—— (where it is applicable)
      Como Una Idea Se Hace Ley
      *An idea for a law can come from anyone; an individual or group of citizens, a legislator or legislative committee, the executive or judicial branch, or a lobbyist. By statute state agencies must presession file bills. Legislators or legislative committees may file an unlimited number of measures within established timelines set by rule. The committee reviews the bill, holds public hearings and work sessions.
      If the bill is amended in the Senate by even one word, it must be sent back to the House for concurrence. If the House does not concur with the amendments, the presiding officers of each body appoint a conference committee to resolve the differences between the two versions of the bill.
      In order for the bill to go to the House floor for a final vote, or be reported out of committee, a committee report is signed by the committee chair and delivered back to the Chief Clerk.
      Any amendments to the bill are printed and the bill may be reprinted to include the amendments (engrossed bill).
      The bill, now back in the house of origin (House), has its second reading.
      The measure then has its third reading, which is its final recitation before the vote. This is the time the body debates the measure. To pass, the bill must receive aye votes of a majority of members (31 in the House, 16 in the Senate). *

      • isang bill, ginawang apat isinulong ng apat na “siga” ng senado. OVERKILL yan;
        walang-walang procedure, procedure o systemang nilabag diyan. PALUSOT
        par excellence yan. tignan ninyo ang bwelta ng tao at ng korte suprema. GARAPAL
        yan.

    • curveball says:

      Walang masama kung pare-pareho ang bill na ipapasa para maging batas. Lalo na kung iisa ang hangarin. Ang hindi maganda ay yun nga parehong-pareho. Sa mga salitang ginamit, sa mga pagkakasunod-sunod din. Ibig sabihin nito may mga ESP silang lahat para maisip na ang bawat isa (sa 4 na tao) ay iisa ang nasa isip? Ang nasa isip ko bilang ordinaryo mamamayan, parang alang ginawa o ginagawa naman para magisip.
      Aba eh kopyahan to the max na ito. Kung sa elem at h.s. ay ibig sabihin lumabas ang teacher kaya libre ang lahat para magkopyahan.Kasi walang nag-aral at nag review.

    • AngLagay says:

      No wonder… kasi puro sila SOTTOcopy. Anyway, hindi din nakapagtataka, kasi marami diyan mga SOTTOnas din at hindi karapat dapat na maging senator or congressman. Nangyayari ito, kasi majority ng mga botante sa Philippines ay sikat at artista ang tanging qualification na tinitingnan sa mga pulitiko.

      On the other hand, kasalan din ni Mr. President and his legal team. He signed and approved without thoroughly studying the cyber law. Siyempre, kapag tamad ang boss, tamad din ang mga tangasunod.

  41. duquemarino says:

    “Copy pasting” legislation????

  42. curveball says:

    Isa pa naisip ko di kaya playing safe sila? Pag yung isa bill di nakapasa, dahil may nakakita, meron pang tatlo, pag nakita yung isa at di nakapasa, ,meron pang dalawa, kapag di pa rin nakapasa, meron pa isa. Finally pag di nakapasa (pero baka makapasa na kasi pagod na sila sa kababasa at debate), Isingit naman bago pirmahan ni Pnoy. Parang misplaced ang virtue na persistent-iba ang ipinipilit kahit pangit.
    O di ba ang galing nila magpasa ng bills? Magpasa na 4 na kambal bills tapos ay magsingit pa.
    Kung nasa elem at h.s, itong mga tao na ito lagot sa teacher ko.
    Nakatayo sa likod ng row 4 malapit sa basurahan maghapon.
    O kaya susulat ng “Hindi na ako mangongopya” sa blackboard 50 times.
    Only in the Philippines.

    • Ang nakapagtataka, para silang hindi mga batikang senador.
      Kailangan pa ba nilang gawin yan alam naman nila ang
      kalakaran sa senado. Ano nga ba yan? baka meron
      malevolent na motibo sa likod niyan. wala pang nakakaalam.

  43. Edwin says:

    Really, a more appropriate term to describe the bills would be quintuplet.

    There was the plagiarism issue from the other senator that became the brainchild of it all, so all in all consisting of five parts, so to speak. It reminded me of the symbolic octopus (i.e., google=octopus illuminati) stretching its greedy tentacles throughout the world, to put the latter under its control, i.e., slavery, as part of a bigger scheme, perhaps, called new world order, whether or not they were aware of them.

    This is a conspiracy to steal the people’s right to privacy and destroy their freedom.

    It is time for everyone concerned to speak up and be heard through social media such as blogs, and make your votes count in the election, i.e., pick those who are not influenced by globalism and would not be swayed by socialism, collectivism, and communism.

  44. vander anievas says:

    ito kaya ay kakaiba? ito kaya ay may intensyon na higit pa sa pagsasabatas nito? bakit apat na pareparehong bill pa ang ipa-file? ano ang nasa likod nito?
    kailan pa kaya nangyayari sa senado ang bagay na ito?
    ang tanong, sa senado lang ba may ganitong mga gawain?
    hindi ko malirip ang lalim ng bagay na ito. apat ang senador para magpasa ng iisang klaseng batas.
    hindi ba pag-aaksaya ng pera iyan? hindi ba pwedeng sila ay magsama-sama at maging co-authors or co-endorsers ng isang consolidated na bill?
    sana ay masagot ng ating mga senador ang mga nagdaratingang katanungan mula sa mga mamamayang umaasa sa matapat at matino nilang serbisyo.

    • pelang says:

      noong kapanahunan ko, nag-rally na ang mga tao sa Luneta pa. sama-sama ako noon kasi, doon ko lang talaga nalalaman ang tunay na nangyayari sa bansa natin. ngayon, dito sa ating Cyber Plaza Miranda at iba pang Cyber Network, nalalaman na rin natin ang tunay at hindi lang haka-haka na pangyayari sa lahat ng Mundo. Kaya lang paano natin ipapaalam sa mga ordinaryong pinoy lamang ang mga ito lalung-lalo na doon sa mga hindi nga alam kung anong ibig sabihin ng surfing at mga walang computer. Si JPE nga, hindi niya naiintindihan kung ano ang blogging?

    • jeth says:

      co-authors nga po sila

      • vander anievas says:

        there was a funny account during one senate interpellation when jpe asked what is blog? it’s a strange word to him. let’s be kind to aged ones, like me, i’m not one of the cyber generations. slide rule pa ang gamit namin noon…:)

        see this link: http://beta.abs-cbnnews.com/-depth/08/29/12/enrile-eyes-new-law-protect-bloggers

        reason why he can’t relate to the avalanche of protests file one after another…

        in the lighter side he proposed to come up with safety measures to protect bloggers…

  45. David says:

    Thanks Raissa,

    Incredible piece. Gives new meaning to “monkey see, monkey do”, how pathetic.

  46. erwin says:

    Diyan ako bilib ngayon kay Sen Lito Lapid. HINDI siya marunong magcopy ng BILLS para lang may masabing may naifile siyang bills sa senado.

    hehehehehehe

    • vander anievas says:

      hahaha. kung ang lahat ng senadores natin ay katulad niya, tahimik ang pilipinas. walang gulong magmumula sa magugulong batas na ginawa ng mga magugulong mambabatas.
      kaya lang, baka hindi na rin natin kailangan ang senado. ayaw ko niyan. hindi masaya!! :)
      sa darating na halalan 2013, ihalal natin ang katulad ni lapid.
      sa darating na halalan 2013, ihalal natin ang mga pulitikong : see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil, and himself an evil…
      at aalis na ako sa pinas…:)

  47. rigo says:

    Akala ko Tatlong Haring Gago, may pang apat pa pala…

  48. Rey Adones says:

    Raissa,

    With your Blog, it exposes the doings of our politicians. “IT’s a SHAME” and Only in the Philippines. Do they really deserve to be there? However, the people voted for them. So what shall we do next? I call on all the Voters to please think twice before casting your precious “VOTE”. To Sen. Angara, Sen. Enrile, Sen. Bong-bong Marcos and Sen.Bong Revilla avoid any further copying please.

    Once again thank you Raissa

  49. trigz says:

    No wonder nobody raised a howl on Sotto’s shameless plagiarizing. It’s a common practice in the Senate, even when crafting bills. Thank you Raissa for doing what you are doing, exposing these buffoons for what they really are. At least, now that they know people are looking over their shoulders, they would think twice before making fools of themselves.

  50. wyl5326 says:

    Someone with personal interest is probably the mastermind who initiated this stupid law who have transcended beyond a President’s term. This mastermind must be exposed and removed for megalomaniacal ambition who can’t think of unintended consequences ! Considering the multi-year efforts this bill have undergone metamorphosis, I suspect the mastermind could be related to IT Technology Security who must have met some technical challenged before like how the frustrated Rigoberto Tiglao tried to pinned down his detractors like me ! Unfortunately for Bobit, he is no IT technician, but might have known somebody else who knows more and became his deep penetrating pawn planted for long term activation into the future ! While this is only my haunch, I can only point to the confluence of 4 different Senators filing similar bills ! Someone has to be the secret beneficiary for this and I don’t know who !

  51. leona says:

    Do the quadroplets have the same fingerprints too? Footprints? Baka sa isang kwarto lang ginawa lahat ito? Parang klone! Isang horno isang plate! Apat na kambal-moskiteros!

    hahaha…what a JOKE! only in ‘PINAS!

  52. medy says:

    ma’am raissa what could be the worst implication of this ‘quadruplets’???

  53. CBC says:

    Ano ba ‘yan, sayang lang ang pinapa-sweldo ng taung-bayan sa kanila. (Buti pa si Raissa, hindi pa-sweldo ng mga Pilipino pero ang sipag mag-research at magsulat ng mga bagay na may saysay!)

    Nakakasawa na ‘tong mga pollute-icians na ‘to, hilig magkalat. Ang gusto ko naman, mga Fil-iticians, ‘yung may tunay na malasakit sa Pilipinas at sa Pilipino.

    *sigh*

    • Johnny Lin says:

      Wala yata sa category mo si Tito “kilitician”, kill joy na nagpapatawa.

      • CBC says:

        Naku, Sir, selective amnesia siguro kaya hindi ko siya naisali — self-preservation baga! Kasi pag nagpapatawa siya, naiiyak ako; pero pag nagda-drama siya, natatawa ‘ko (sa inis). Nakakasira ng bait! LOL.

  54. Johnny Lin says:

    This proves that Sotto Revilla, Lapid and Estrada are genius and very qualified as senators comparative to Drilon, Angara, Pangilinan and Escudero.

    Government provides free ghost a writers, anyway.

    Who needs a LAw Degree in crafting bills?

    He he he

  55. netty says:

    There is an infectious virus spreading in the Senate, called Copycitis that if not treated early would result to an entire epidemic from the floor to the nation. What the infected suggested for treatment is the complete isolation of the people from the internet where they perceived the killer virus is coming from. So, if a person contacted the virus, the victim will be put under quarantine, arrested without question and rot in jail for fifteen years which is plausible for a common man than being fined, for the person is utterly found to be ill, broke and infected.
    In view of the above findings by the citizenry who are healthy yet, the main originator of the virus must be found together with the four other highly contagious Senators that sat side by side with each other, drink and eat in close proximity, and work closely with each other. In the meantime, the people are nervously awaiting the results of the investigation on the who, what ,why, how and where of the ongoing malady.
    IMO, the health authorities should get a tissue sample from the brains of the four suspicious individuals for
    biopsy. As for the insertion gut and stuffed Senator, he can provide the entertainment for the crowd while the
    investigation is ongoing. More fun , but dead serious. I had fun, thanks , Raissa. Keep well yourself. ;)

  56. netty says:

    There is an infectious virus spreading in the Senate, called Copycitis that if not treated early would result to an entire epidemic to spread from the floor to the nation. What the suspicious individuals suggested for treatment is the complete isolation of the people from the internet where they perceived the killer virus is coming from. So, if a person contacted the virus, the victim will be put under quarantine, arrested without question and rot in jail for fifteen years which is plausible for a common man than being fined, for the person is utterly found to be ill, broke and infected.

    In view of the above findings by the citizenry who are healthy yet, the main originator of the virus must be found together with the four other highly contagious Senators that sat side by side with each other, drink and eat in close proximity, and work closely with each other. In the meantime, the people are nervously awaiting the results of the investigation on the who, what ,why, how and where of the ongoing malady.

    IMO, the health authorities should get a tissue sample from the brains of the four suspicious individuals for biopsy. As for the insertion gut and stuffed Senator, he can provide the entertainment for the crowd while the serious stuff is ongoing, more fun but dead serious. I had fun, thanks Raissa. Keep well ;)

  57. jam says:

    Huh!!!sayang ang pera ng taong bayan. Plagiarism s loob ng senado,eh ang mga senador puro yes n lng ba at d nagbabas pero updated sa twitter. Thank you maam raissa.

  58. curveball says:

    Nakakainis naman mga taong ito.
    Nuon nasa elem at h.s. ako bawal ang magkopyahan. Pag nahuli ng teacher lalagyan ng 0 ang test paper o kaya patayuin sa likod.
    Saan kaya nila natutunan ito?
    Ngayon at nalaman natin na ganito pala sila, tandaan ko pangalan nila at di ko “kopyahin” sa balota

  59. Reading this post made me think of Groundhog Day. Based on the dates, the first of these practically exact bill copies was made by Enrile? Unless he also got it from someone else, also?

    Sumakit ulo ko kasi parang deja four.

    • leona says:

      @Guy….apat din na “identikal amendments” pag nag amienda sila? hahaha…

      this JOKE is on meeeeeee! alin ang kaonterpit bill dyan?

  60. pelang says:

    wow! akala ko pa naman si Tito Sotto lang ang xerox copy maschine sa senado. kung kay bong-bong marcos at Bong Revilla, hindi ako nagtataka na mangopya na lang sila. pero si Angara (dating Presidente ng U.P., ) at JPE. I wonder kung sino ang original doon sa kanilang dalawa na pinagkopyahan nila Bong-bong at Bong Revilla. well, what do we know? pasalamat tayo sa Internet na gusto nilang ipatigil para hindi sila mabuking sa ginagawa nila sa senado. Salamat Raissa sa investigative report mong ito, kung hindi sa iyo, hindi namin malalaman kung ano ang pinag gagagawa sa senado at congresso. bago nito, wala tayong kamalay- malay na gano’n lang pala ang ginagawa ng mga senador at congressmen, KOPYAHAN: At nang dahil dito, (para hindi mabuking) gumawa sila ng cybercrime law. buti na lang di natin tinigilan. NAKAKAHIYA KAYO!

  61. gayyem says:

    Naalaala ko tuloy ang sinabi ng isang Head ng isang staff ng isang senador.Sa congreso raw, talamak ang copiahan! Bakit ka nga naman magpapakahirap mag-isip, eh napakadali ang “copy and paste”. Siguro, tuwang-tuwa sila sa technology na ito. Para saan nga ba ang technology kung hindi sa ikagiginhawa ng tao.

  62. -->

Do share your thoughts:

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>