If the Bangsamoron Basic Law is already on the works (which may soon create more trouble like splitting India and Pakistan into two separate states or Korea into North and South DID NOT solve the problem), one may consider that the Philippine has had its other BBL law in operation during the Nobita Presidency namely the Balat-Sibuyas Basic Law. If you remembered the passing of the anti-cybercrime law, while the name sounds good on paper, however it does provide one phrase that should be revised namely the libel clause. The libel clause as proposed would lock up anyone for a meme, libel or any act that a politician or anyone finds offensive. In short, it's a real overkill like taking down a forest just to hunt down one deer. That law was already put in action not during Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's regime but during President Nobita Aquino's regime.
For example, think of the meme above that is making fun of President Nobita Aquino. The meme compares President Nobita to the cartoon Nobita. I thought of the ridiculous reason of locking the maker of the meme up. Aside from the Philippines having slow Internet (thanks a lot data caps...), you might as well consider it is a waste of time. The Philippines has bigger problems like the MILF, NPA or the Abu Sayyaf (who have now found the ISIS as their new employers ever since the real life Cobra Commander died last May 2, 2011 causing the real life COBRA organization to fall apart).
When I think about the libel provision, I thought of the stupidity behind the idea of an unrevised libel clause. Libel itself is defined as, "a method of defamation expressed by print, writing, pictures, signs, effigies, or any communication embodied in physical form that is injurious to a person's reputation, exposes a person to public hatred, contempt or ridicule, or injures a person in his/her business or profession." When looking at it, libel has several degrees that need to be defined to which kind of libel is criminal and which one isn't. The meme showing Cartoon Nobita and Real Life Nobita is NOT enough to even to be considered as libel fit enough for a criminal charge. Although it is LIBEL but to imprison someone for that one is just plain stupid.
Sad to say but some laws in the Philippines already reflect a Balat-Sibuyas Basic Law. It just so happened I heard somebody was imprisoned simply for writing, "My brother's girlfriend is a slut." on Twitter and writer had to go to jail and pay a fine for an offense that DID NOT require police mediation. In the Philippines, a lot of petty issues happen in court which may explain why justice is hardly given to real disputes like severe libel (ex. falsely accusing someone of criminal activity), land grabbing disputes (hence a lot of wealthy people get away with land grabbing and squatters end up having privileges as a result) and other cases that REALLY need attention. Worse, some lawyers and EVEN judges are stupid to accept any cases that would be a major waste of time. I mean, it's very, VERY impractical for me to demand a HUGE FINE just because somebody called me gago. If killing somebody for calling you gago is stupid, likewise giving the person the right to sue for such a petty offense is also stupid.
Also, online trolls are not necessarily criminals. Sure they may irritate but why do you think Facebook added a BLOCK feature? Blocking a person may prevent further harassment. If the online troll is there to derail conversations in a Facebook group, that person is best insulted by either banning, kicking out of the group or a combination of both. I mean, they get angrier if they are ignored. An online troll can only be considered a criminal if they actually hack through your privacy, steal your money online or try to make you look like a criminal.
As said, it's time to really focus on the bigger offenses instead of smaller offenses. After all, there are disciplinary laws AND anti-criminal laws. It's time to be reasonable... after all punishment must be given according to the severity of offense. After all, it's one eye for eye, one tooth for one tooth and one eye for two eyes, all teeth for one tooth as a basis for lawful punishment right?
Comments
Post a Comment