Republicof t}le P[ilippines

Supreme Court
Manila En Banc NATTONAL UNION OF JOURNALISTS OF THE PHILIPPINES (NUJP), PHILIPPINE PRESS INSTITUTE (PPI), CENTER FOR AND FREEDOM MEDIA
RESPONSIBILITY, MELINDA QUINTOSDEJESUS, ROWENA CARRANZA PARAAN, ALWYN AI-BURO, ARIEL SEBELLINO IN THE CAND THE PETITIONERS PETITION b-ttp:,1-l-v1vry.-a-uip.qtg,/-rlo-Jg:.

rat0175 /
Petitiaten,

G.R.No. 203453

- uers s* THE EXECUTTVESECRETARY,ETAL., ts. Respmde

For: Certiorari, Prohibitlon with Injunction and Application tbr Immediate RestrainingOrder nnd Od.rer Extrzordinzrn Legal and Equit'rbleRelief!

MOTION FOR PARTIAL RECONSIDERATION

of counsel,respectfullymove tbr partral reconsideration Petrtioners, througl-rundersigned 201'1, upon dre tbllorving the Decision dated i8 February2014, md copy received27 Fcbruary grounds:

A. Section a(c)(4), which penalizes online libel' is

unconstitutional,' not only in regard to those who receive or react to a postr but also in regard to the

of online libel, by 1 . In its Decision,the Honorable court upheld the constitutionality online libel, is constirutionalin regard declaringthat section4(c)(4),which penaLzes to the originalauthor of a posg though not in regardto drosewho merelyreceivedre beg a secondlook upon dle matter' post or reactto it. Petiuoners whicl'r guarantees of dre Philippines, Article III. section4 of the 1987 Constrtr-rtion freedom oF speech,of erpression,or oF the press, or the right of the people should and petitronthe govemmentfor redressof grievances, to assemble peaceably be read in conjunction with article 19 of the Intemational Covenant on Civ and

Politicalfughts, to which the Philippinesis z pany.Article 19 of the ICCPR similarly free speeclr. $rarantees or to which the Philippinesaccedes, that the Phi[ppines rattf-tes, 3. Intemationaltreaties like the ICCPR, becomepart Philippine such as intemationalhuman rights treaties, laws through transformation.lIt is a processuncler:rticlc VII, sectron21 of the '[n]o treaty or intemational:rgreement shall be Constrtution,which provides that valid and etfectiveunlessconcurredin bv at leasttwo-thirds of all the membersof the Senrte.'
n

freedomsand human rights,this Increasingly, in its Decisionsinvoh.ingfundamental .rnd the I{onorable Court has cited and reliedon intemationalhuman rights treaties, rich internatronal caselaw, and other intemationaldocuments,explarningt}rem, in interpreting counterparthuman rights provisions in the i987 Constitutron of thc Petitionersassertthat this casecalls for a similar interpretationof the Philippines.'? 1987Constitutron of the Phrlippines. in part: In this regard, article19 of the ICCPR states thisrrglrt sh,rll oiexpresston: hrre therightro tieedom 2. Everl'one shall ideasoi'; l and impart infbrmiition rrncl includefreedomto scek,receive in rvriting or in pnnq in the tbrm krnds,reg:rdless of frontiers.eitheror.:rlh'. of art, or tlrough anv other medi'roi his chorce.

6. In aplaining artide 19 of the ICCPR *re L nited Nations Human fughts wr*r the dutv to supenisethe implementationof the Committee,dre bod.r charged ICCP\ hasstated: 47. Defamation laws must be crattedwith care to ensurethat they comply to stifle freedomof with paragraph 3, and that drey do not serve,in practice, should include All such laws,in partrcular penaldefamationlarvs, expression. sucl-r defences as the defenceof trudr.and they should not be appliedrvith regardto those forms of expression diat are not, of d-reirnature,subjectto .*-ith verification. At least regard to comments about public figures, consideration should be grvento avoidingpenalizingor odrerwiserendering unlawful untrue statements that have been published in error but without malice.In any event, a public interestin the subjectmatter of d.recriticism partiesto should be recognized as a defence. Careshould be t:rkenby St2ltes relevant, penalties. Where States measures and avoid excessively puniuve to limits on dre requirementfor a defend'ant partiesshould placereasonable partlesshouldconsider reimbursethe expenses party.States of the successful 'and,in any case,the applicatronof the the decrimina.lization of def-amation in the most seriousoi cases and criminal law should only be countenanced for a State It is impermissible imprisonment is neveran appropriate penaliv. party to indict a personfor criminal defamationbut dren not to proceedto - such a practice has a chilling efl-ectthat may unduly trral expedrtrously

' Pharmacwtical NO. 173034, 9 October2007. andHealth Carc Associatiox ofthePhi/)ppitus L,Heath Secrenry,G.R. ' See,for example, Defense 7 October 2008;and Ralon Sendary ofNational u Mana/0, G.R. No. 180906, u Tagitit, G.R. No. 182:198, 3 December2009.

ot the person concernedand of freedom oi expression restrict the exercise others.' ours) (emphasis

7. The UN Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the fugllt to turther: Preedom oi Opinion and Expression has cl:rrit-red 'the Special R,rpporteur remrins conccmed thirt lcgitimrrtc onlint: 72. internationnl expression is being criminalized in contrilyention of States'. human rights obligations, rvhether it rs through tl.re irpplication -oi cxisting criminal larvs to online expression, or d-rrough dle creation oi nerv lltrvs Llesigned to crimtnrlize expressionon the Internct. Such larvsare specificallv otlen justit-iedzrsbeing necess^q' to protect indir-iduals' reputrtion, nationrll securitv or to counter terrorism. IIo*'ever, ir.r practice, thcv are ficquentll' used to censor content that the Govemment irnd othcr porveriul entities clo not like or asree rvitlr. 73. The Special Rapporteur reiterates the call to all States to decriminrrlize detamatron. Addition'all,v,he underscores thiit protection oi nirtion'rl securttv or countenng terronsrn clnnot bc used to iustifv restricting the rigl.rt to expression unless it cm lte clemonstrirtcclthlt: (ir) the expression is intended to incite imminent violence; (b) it is likclv to incite such r-iolence; ancl (c) there is a direct and immediate connection benvccn tie cxprcssionlntl the .o or occurrenc( ol'sucht tolcnct hkcl:hood (emphirsisours) Besides, in Administratire Circular No. 08-2008, this Honorable Court !69[- l.rirs 'emergent rule of preterence tbr the imposition oi fine only rather drrn declterl 21n 'All imprisonment in libel cases.' This Honorable Court h:rs thus instructed th:rt courts and juclges concerned should hencetbrd.r take note oi dle foregoing rule of preference set bv the Supreme Court on the matter of the imposrtion of penalties tbr tl.recrime of libel.'

ttee speecl1, r-rolzrtcs tbr onlinelibelundersection'l(c)J of imprisonment 9. The penaltv readin coniunction 3 oithe 1987Constinrtion, by articleIII, section asguaranteed this Flonorable goesagainst section't(c)-t r.vitharticle 19 of the ICCPR. Furtl.rermore, a in libelcrrses' oi imprisonment a penaltv for not imposing Court'sorvnpreterence of tree guarttntee perhapsinspiredbv nothing lessdran the constitutionztl pret-erence position frviceover' larvdepartsfrom this I Ionor;rbleCor.rrt's The questioned speeclr. larv,but this penaltv a penaltvof imprisonmentin the questionetl Not onl,vis tl.rere by 1009i,thtrn tl-l^t tbr libel uncler the RevisedPen',tl of imprisonment is l.rear-ier Code.
3 2011,UN Doc United Natior]sHumafl RightsCommittee,Gene[alCommentNo. 3'1,12 September A/rr8l.+t-) Doc (2013), UN of the Humzr Rightscorlrnittee [''ol. I). ccPR/c/GC/34. See2lsoRepo!.t o to F-r,eetlom of C)pinit.'n Rapporteuton the Promotion and Protectionr.rfthe Right Reportof the Special rs Rapporteur an 2011,UN Doc .\/F{RC/17/27. The Special Ftank La Rue, 16 NIa,v zurdExpression, b2rck ou his specifjc atrclrcpor-t ildepericlent erpert appoirted by the UN Human RightsCoutcil to exiur.rine to s'-hichthc Phiiippinesis a partv. his authorin*to dre UN Charter', traces hrunanrights therle. He ultir.r.utely

Thesedays, on online lournalism. chilling eFFect law hasa partrcularly 10. The questioned not only will a joumalist'swork be publishedusing traditionalmedia,but it rvill be madeavarlable on the internet.Through the internet,dre peopleare able to respond 'l'he such as facebookand twiner. using a variew of socialplatForms, and discuss, steadily importance of the internet as an interactivemedium for lournalistsha^s the peopleas can engage grown. It l.ras becomea powerful tool by which iournalists Rapporteurhasstatedin this regard: truth. The Special partnersin the searchfor tl.re
19. \rery few if zrnydevelopments in information technologies hive hrd sucl.r a revolutionary effect as the creation of dle Internet. Unlike any other medium of communication, such as radio, television 'and pnnte d publications based on one-way transmission of informanon, d1e Intemet represents ir significant leap forward as an interactive medium. Indeed, with dre advent of Web 2.0 services, or intermediary platforms that t-acilitate participatory information sharing and collaboration in the cre'ation of content, individuals are no longer passive recipients, but also active publishers of intbrmauon. Such platforms are partrcularly valuable in countries where there is no independent media, as they enable individuals to share critical views and to find objectrve infbrmalon. Furthermore, producers oi tradition'al media can also use the Intemet to greatly expand their audiencesat nominal cost' N{ore generally, by enablihg individuals to exchange intbrmation and ideas instantaneouslyand inexpensively across national bortlers, d.reIntemet allovs accessto information and knowledge that was previously unattainable. This, in turn, contributes to the discovery of the truth and progress of society as ir whole.

B. Sections 14, 15,24 a:nd 26(a) do violate separation of powers, as iudicial and legislative Powers are unduly delegated to the Secretary of Justice, PNP, NBI and

crcc.

1 . In its Decisron, this Honorable Court found no undue delegation of powers. I3ut
Congress, in enacting the Cybercrime Law, upconstitution'ally delegated powers to respondents Secretary of Justrce,Philippine Nationai Police and National Bureau ot Investigatron, that Congtess itself does not posscss. Respondents PNP and NBI, collectrvely referred to as are delegatedjudicial por.versunder section 14 to issue 'law enforcement authorities,' requiring any person

'order(s)

or service provider to disclose or submit subscriber's information, traffic data or relevant data in his/its possession or control widrin seventy two (72) hours from receipt of the order in relation to a valid complaint.' Such an order would partake of the nature of a subpoena,whicl.r is a ludicial process.

3 . Respondent Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center is given the power to

formulate and implement the natronal cybersecurityplan under section 24. 'lhere are no paraneters, nor standards, to guide respondent CICC in tbrmulatrng it. Such a delegation is unconstitutional, for it amounts to an abdicatron of the legislative

5
power to formulatepolicy in favor ot an administrauve agency, which would only be mandated to enforceanv suchpolicy.

Whetefore,it is respectfullyprayedthat the Decision be reconsidered, and online libel rn sectlon4(c)'+be declared unconstitutionalin regardto the origrnalauthor: and sections14, 15, 24 and 26(z)be similarlyinvalidatedtbr violating separation of powers,as undue clelegation of judicial and legrslatrve powers.Petitioners pray for other relief iust and equitable under the premises. QuezonCity for Manila;12 March 2014.

FREE LEGAL ASSISTANCE GROUP

(Fr.AG)
Counsel [or Petitioners

JOSEMANUEL r. DTOKNO PABLITOV, SANIDAD RICARDO A. SUNGA III BY:

O \. SUA-G.\ iII oll No. J0036 IBP No. 956517QC.2-6-l-t PTR No. 93308D, QC, 2-et+ pasig 1_0J_12 MCLE E-rernption \o. I\- fr)02,19. Unit 408 -\CL Suites 72 13- AvenueCubaoQuezon Citl.-1109 Email ncartir: -"un:1".r i{i,)} ahqr}-rac: Cellular + 63917 8542124 Copytumished: THE SOLICITOR GENERAL Counsel for allPublicRespondents 134Amorsolo Street, Legaspi Village MakatiCity ATTY. LOUIS BIRAOGO G.R.No. 203299 c/o BevedyVillageTruckingColporatlorl No. 131Banay-Banay Street Cabulao,Laguna RENTA PE CAUSING SABARRE CASTRO ANDASSOCIATES G.R.No. 203306 Unit I, 2368 Street comerI_eon GuintoStreet J.B.Roxas Malate, Mzrrila DISINI & DISINI LAW OFFICE G.R.No. 203335 320Social Science Center
Commonwealth Avenue

RIC

Diliman, QuezonCity GANA ATIENZA AVISADO LAW OFFICE G.R.No. 203359 3.dFloor,HPL Building No. 60 Sen. GilJ. Puyat Avenue Makati City ROQUE & BIJTI.'YAN I.AW OFFICE G.R.No. 203378 1904 Antel2000Corporate Center 121Valero Street, Salcedo Village MakatiCity NATIONAL UNION OF PEOPLES I.AV/YERS G.R.No. 203391 3.dFloor, ErythrinaBuilding
No. 1 Maaralin cornet Matatag Stteets CentralDistrict, QuezonCity ATTY. MELENCIO STA, MARIA ET AI,. G.R. No. 203440 Ateneo Human Rights Center G/F AteneoProfessional SchoolsBuilding 20 RockwellDrive, Rochvell Center,Makau City ATTYS. PAUL CORNELIUS CASTILLO AND RYAN ANDRES G.R. No. 203454 6d'Floor, TuscanBuilding 114V.A. Rufuro Street, i\{akati City ATTY. KRISTOPHER JA-}{ES PUR]SIMA G.R- \o. 203169 66 Floor, LTA Building 118 PereaStreet, r egaspi Vdlage,lvfakad Gtf SOLIS MEDINA LIMPINGCO & FAJARDO G.R.No. 203501 1106EastTorver,PhilippineStockExchangeCenter Exchange Road, Ortigas Commercial Center PasigCity ATTY. EDSEL TUPAZ G.R. No. 203509 41 N. Romr.raldez Street, BF Homes Subdivision 1120Quezon City ATTY. MIC}IAEL MEI-I.A G.R.No. 203515 Unit 1106,Prcstrge Tower, F. Ortiga.s Jr. Road Ortigas Center, Pasig City ATTY. RENECIO ESPIRITUJR. G.R.No. 203518 Suite 602 Richmonde PlazzHotel 21 SanMrguel Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig Crry ATTY. JAMES MARK TERRY RIDON G.R. No. 203391 89 L7 Street, Kamias, Quezon City ATTY. KELVIN LESTER LEE G.R. No. 203518 Unit 805Xar.rerville Square, XaviervilleAvenue

This Petition was served on the respondents by registered mail because of time, personnel and geographical concems and constraints; disance involved as well as lack of manpower to cause service by personal delivery constrahed counsel to causesen'ice by registeredmail. ,,a-

RICARITOA" 5I.]0{6AUI

/UXw

AFFIDA\rIT

OF SERVICE

I, PA{;b1wt thtg2 of legal age, do hereby slare under oath rhat: On 46gq3 servedcopiesof the Motion for Reconsideration in 'National Union of Journalists of the Philippines,Lr,ris V. Teodoro,RowenaCatrntzaPuaan, Ariel Sebellino, regrstercd v. The Executive Secretiuy, et a1.' by mail et al. on dre following, as shownby the rcspective rgistryreceiptdetails: THE E)GCUTIVE SECRETARY Malacanaog Palace, Manila THE SECRETARY OF JUSTICE Departnent of-lustice PadreFautaStreet, Ermita,N,tanila
REG. RECEIPT NO. POS'I'OFFICE: Date: REG. ITECEIPTNO. POST OFFICE: Date:

u-*" uq tH', ilt>l la

THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR REG. RECEIPT NO. AND I,OCAL GOVERNMENT POST OFFICE: Department of the Interior and tocal Govemment, A. Fralcisco Date: lI, EDSA comer Mapagmahal Gold Condominiurn Street. Quezor

ff"",a:f w 3l tvl t't

>lt2 | )V

ciry

THE DIRECTOR GENERAL PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE Headquarters, PhilippineNationalPolice CampCrame, QuezonCity

REC. RECEIPT NO. POST OFFICE: Date:

'#!,,, a"- m

THE DIRECTOR. NATIONAL BUREAU REG. IiECEIPT NO. OF INVESTIGATION POST OFFICE: Headquarters, National Bureau of Investigation, Taft.{r,'eoue, iUanila Datei THE CYBERCRIME INVESTIGATION AND COORDINATING CENTER
RFG. RECEIPT NO. POST OFFICE: c/o 1-he Executive Director, Iaformation and C.ommunicatroos Date: Technology Of6ce, NCC Building C.P. Garcia Ar-enue-l)iliman. Quezon Ciq' REG, RECEIPT \O. POST OFFICE: Date:

(ffi,,ru**
ffi,,u*v'* c f r,-l tt
c'4 ,H*,, a^ry^
6ltzltf

THE SOLICITORGENERAL 134 -1mo6olo Street, kgaspi \inage Itakati Gqv

Quezon City, f

T'

Nla:ch201,1.

V-o((ai
TIN # Issued on/at

L,IT^J+J

- 6 ( r ( -o o o

SUBSCRTBED AND SWORNTO before*" #112J9't

to me competentproofof identity asindicatecl above.

March2014, affianthavingpresentect

oor..No.337 Page No. fu'/.7 tsookNo.

- ^^,..c/ JEflCSOTZUL4.
\a'\.

-:-.1

..'

F#ffffi'ry;?
Adm,ir. Matter No. N!..1OS e01+2qlgl
Rotl tJ6. 36395

ATfV"