GR. No.

203335 February 11, 2014

JOSE JESUS M. DISINI, JR., ROWENA S. DISINI, LIANNE IVY P. MEDINA, JANETTE TORAL and
ERNESTO SONIDO, JR., Petitioners,
vs.
THE SECRETARY OF JUSTICE, THE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND
LOCAL GOVERNMENT, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE INFORMATION AND
COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY OFFICE, THE CHIEF OF THE PHILIPPINE NATIONAL
POLICE and THE DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, Respondents.

FACTS:
Petitioners Jose Jesus M. Disini, Jr., Rowena S. Disini, Lianne Ivy P. Medina, Janette Toral and Ernesto
Sonido, Jr., as taxpayers, file a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition under Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure, the petitioners seek to 1) nullify Sections 4(c)(4), 6, 7, 12 and 19 of RA 10175, otherwise known as the
“Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012” for violating the fundamental rights protected under the Constitution; and 2)
prohibit the Respondents, singly and collectively, from enforcing the afore-mentioned provisions of the Cybercrime
Act.
Named as Respondents are the Secretary of Justice, the Secretary of the Interior and Local Government, the
Executive Director of the Information Communications Technology Office, the Chief of the Philippine National
Police, and the Director of the National Bureau of Investigation.

Issues:

Whether or not Sections 6 and 7 of the Cybercrime Act more than doubles the liability for imprisonment for any
violation of existing penal laws are in violation of the petitioners’ right against Double Jeopardy;

Ruling:

Sections 6 and 7 of the Cybercrime Act violate the Double Jeopardy and Equal Protection Clauses of the
Constitution:
o • Persons who commit crimes using information and communication technologies (ICTs) face the
possibility of being imprisoned more than double the imprisonment laid down in the RPC or special
law, simply by the passage of the Cybercrime Act;
o • the cybercrimes defined and punished under Section 6 of the Act are absolutely identical to the
crimes defined in the RPC and special laws which raises the possibility that an accused will be
punished twice for the same offense in violation of the Constitution;
o • Congress created a class of offenders who commit crimes “by, through or with the use” of ICTs in
violation of the equal protection clause