Q: What provisions under Republic Act 10175 (Cybercrime Prevention Act) are declared void being

unconstitutional under the case of Disini vs Sec. of Justice:

A: VOID for being UNCONSTITUTIONAL:

1. Section 4(c)(3) of Republic Act 10175 that penalizes posting of unsolicited commercial
communications;

2. Section 12 that authorizes the collection or recording of traffic data in real-time;

3. Section 19 of the same Act that authorizes the Department of Justice to restrict or block access to
suspected Computer Data;

4. Section 4(c)(4) that penalizes online libel with respect to persons who receive a libelous post and
react to it;

5. Section 5 that penalizes aiding or abetting and attempt in the commission of cybercrimes with respect
to Sections 4(c)(2) on Child Pornography, 4(c)(3) on Unsolicited Commercial Communications, and
4(c)(4) on online Libel; and

6. Section 7 that authorizes prosecution of the offender is void as to the actual cases of Online Libel,
penalized under Art 353 of RPC, and Child Pornography committed online, penalized under RA 9775
(Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009), which constitutes double jeopardy.