The Cyber crime law is unconstitutional because of (A)Sec.

4(c)(4) content related offenses which makes libel possible in cyberspace just by resharing of libelous posts in facebook or twitter worse the libel penalty given is the same libel stated in the revised penal code which is punishable of prision correctional in its minimum and medium periods or a fine ranging from 200 to 6,000 pesos, or both with a bonus of one degree higher than the one provided in the revised penal. (B)Sec. 5(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." if you include this in the libel clause or sec 4 then it also means just by liking a libelous post would mean your abetting the crime since abetting means to (To approve, encourage, and support). (C) Sec 6 which raises by one degree higher the penalties provided for by the Revised Penal Code for all crimes committed through and with the use of information and communications. this would be one of the main reasons why it must be declared unconstitutional because just by doing one of the crimes like Illegal Access, Illegal Interception, Data Interference,System Interference ,Cyber Squatting, Cyber Sex, etc. It would aggravate your crime instantaeneously especially when most of the offenses should be aimed at a hacker and not mainly to the public people who are just sharing their views about the government (D)SEC. 12. Real-Time Collection of Traffic Data. Law enforcement authorities, with due cause, shall be authorized to collect or record by technical or electronic means traffic data in real-time associated with specified communications transmitted by means of a computer system. Sec 12 violates the right to privacy of communication and correspondence Sec 3 art 3 of the philippine constitution which also means as "THE RIGHT TO BE LEFT ALONE" this section allows a person to correspond and communicate with each other without the state having a RIGHT TO PRY into such correspondence and communication. The way Sec 12 was made in my opinion is that law enforcement authorities with due cause shall have a right to collect or record by technical or electronic means traffic data in real time just by this words it would simply imply that they could pry on what we are doing in our computer without us even knowing that they are doing it and would obviously violate Sec 3 art 3 of the philippine Constitution. BLOGSPOT

Referrence(http://miriam.com.ph/newsblog/?p=803) (E) The cybercrime law is also a Overbreadth doctrine or a Vagueness doctrine for the reason that it deters free expression and that it provides punishment without specifying what conduct is punishable and which makes it void because it violates due process. among the provisions of the Cybercrime Act that are too broad or too vague are: Sec. 4, para 4. It makes libel a cybercrime, if committed online; Sec. 5. It punishes any person who aids or abets the commission of any cybercrime, even if it is only through Facebook or Twitter; Sec. 6. It adopts the entire Penal Code, if the crime is committed by the use of information technology, but the penalty shall be one degree higher; Sec. 7. It makes the same crime punishable, both under the Penal Code and the Cybercrime Act; Sec. 19. It authorizes the Department of Justice to issue an order to restrict access to computer data which is found to be prima facie in violation of the new law. Sec. 19 is called the takedown clause. -(F)SEC. 19. Restricting or Blocking Access to Computer Data. When a computer data is prima facie found to be in violation of the provisions of this Act, the DOJ shall issue an order to restrict or block access to such computer data. Because it gives the DOJ so much power over the cyber space which gives the question on how they found that the computer data is prima facie in violation of the provision of the act. Which comes back to sec 12 where they collect or record by technical or electronical means traffic data in real time and would violates the Sec 3 art 3 of the philippine constitution 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 whether stored in local computer systems or online. Another is that this section most likely aims at bloggers in which they post their opinions about the government which might be in the negative. would this be considered already libelous when the person who posted this only expressed his opinion in the government or the official and that public

officials who work in the government should already know that when he was placed in the position he would be placing himself in a position where every thing he does would be judge by the people and if that official can not accept what the people is saying about him would that be already libelous if it is then that official should step down from his position since being a public official in the government he must already know the fact that he would be serving the people then he must already know that he would be subjected to the opinions of the people whether they may be good or bad. Otherwise then libel should be defined as the negative comments or opinions of people. Lastly would they immediately block or restrict access to that computer data? then if it is then this law should be considered a bill of attainder since it eliminates the due process of law. Lastly cybercrime law violates freedom of speech because of libel since by simply expressing your opinion you could be charged of libel with one degree higher of punishment and the bad thing in this is that all you need to do is post in facebook or twitter a negative opinion and by liking it might be already considered abbeting the crime. So cybercrime is simply saying that we could not express our negative opinion to our government and officials because we would be charged of libel which in the end would be a violation of our freedom of speech since freedom of speech includes the negative and positive opinions of the people.