On Tuesday, the Philippines Supreme Court issued a temporary restraining order stopping the government from enforcing the controversial Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 which President Benigno Aquino III signed into law last month.
Storified by Courtney Congjuico · Wed, Oct 10 2012 03:53:37
Once upon a time, a country proposed a cyber “safety” law,
which on the very surface, seemed to be perfectly well-intentioned. However, after the country’s citizens astutely
realized that this cyber law would do more actual harm than potential good, they
rallied and petitioned against this bill by garnering media attention and utilizing
social media tools to spread the word on the World Wide Web. These efforts achieved great success and the
law was quickly repealed, proving victory for the people and an astounding defeat to a control-seeking
government.
Does this story sound familiar?
It should. But if you’re
thinking that I’m referring to the instance earlier this year when the
entire internet shut down in protest to the SOPA and PIPA bills in the U.S.,
then you’re wrong. The event that I’m
eluding to above happened just recently, more urgently, and in a tiny country
that’s not often mentioned in mainstream media. Today, the Philippines Supreme
Court unanimously issued a 120-day temporary restraining order (TRO) on the entire Cybercrime Prevention Act of
2012 or Republic Act 10175.
Much in the way that U.S. citizens reacted and retaliated quickly to the SOPA and PIPA bills, the Philippine citizens were driven by imperative necessity due to
the act having been passed a month ago and actually
reinforced last week. The act’s questionable
provisions and its implied infringements on the freedom of speech and
expression on the internet was brought to the attention of online users
everywhere in the Philippines – from activists groups, forum posters, bloggers,
social media users, and garnering major attention from mainstream media
outlets.
With everyone’s reactions feeding off of each other, it took absolutely no time for these passionate reactions to manifest itself into concrete action. Many of the activist groups such as the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility and the Philippine Press Institute declared the Cybercrime Prevention Act as unconstitutional and set up a petition for the country’s Supreme Court to rule on “a law that establishes a regime of ‘cyber authoritarianism’ and undermines all the fundamental guarantees of freedoms and liberties that many have given their lives and many still give their lives work to vindicate, restore and defend. “ Other organizations such as The Philippine Internet Freedom Alliance had taken further initiatives through active online participation that is reminiscent of the SOPA-style blackout protest, with the Filipino variation being referenced to as “Black Wednesday.” Online users also encouraged each other to raise awareness and bring about action through the social media practices of hash-tagging slogans such as #NoToCybercrimeLaw or #ReviseCyberCrimeLaw and changing Facebook profile pictures to express anti-Cyber Martial Law sentiments. Even more severe measures have been put into action in opposition of the Cybercrime Prevention Act in which hackers that claimed to be part of a group called Anonymous Philippines hacked into government websites to demonstrate a resilient stance against the cyber law.
