1.) tabacco university is a well known school in the province of laguna.

The sec
urity department thru the advice of MIS
deparment implemented a rule which will subject every students laptop to inspect
ion in order to ensure that no pornographic
materials, pirated software and other prohibited materials are stored in a stude
nt laptop.
Mr. manny is the president of the supreme student government and contends tha
t such a rule violates their privacy rights
guaranteed by the constitusion because a laptop is a personal property especiall
y their contents.
the security chief counter-argued and contends that their school bags as well
as its contents are also personal property but
the inspection of such is not being ruled to be a violation of privacy rights. t
hus inspecting laptop and their contents cannot
be said to be a violation of students privacy rights.
the dean of student's affair asked your opinion with the foregoing legal issu
e.

what will be your advice to the dean of the student affairs?

- I'm in favor with Mr. Manny because laptops is a personal property, only the o
wner itself has the right to use it and no one else,
inspecting elements of it would really violates the privacy rights of the owner.
About the bag it is an excemption because students
understand that it's a protocol for their safety, even in the malls inspections
of bag is required for detection of unwanted thing
that make cause harm to others.
2. ) Atty. JD vice president for legal and human resources department of tabacco
corp. issues a memorandom advising all employees of the tabacco
that the corporation had acquired a spyware which is capable of monitoring acti
vities done by each employee in their personal computer
including personal email messages, chats and all the sites they visited in the i
nternet.
Ms. Fei president of the employee union criticized the memorandum and opine
d that such regulation is a violation of their privacy rights
guaranteed by the constitusion.
will you support the contention of ms. fei, why or why not?
- No, because the company only wants to ensure that their employees are doing th
eir work. The company did not violate any privacy right
for they are the one who gives the employee their monthly salary, so even the pr
esident of the employee union has no rights to criticized
the memorandum given by their employer.