Category Archives: Philippines/Filipino
My grade 3 nephew asked me to explain the meaning of the symbols used in the official seal of the province of Bataan. I tried googling for the answers using “official seal of Bataan meaning” as search word but in vain. The official website of Bataan doesn’t also give a hint.
Until I’ve come upon this website: archive.org which features a book entitled “SYMBOLS OF THE STATE: Republic of The Philippines” published in 1975 by the Bureau of Local Government under the Department of Local Government and Community Development.
Meaning of the Official Seal of Bataan
According to the ‘Symbols of the State,’ the meaning of the Official Seal of Bataan is as follow:
- Flaming Sword – the Flaming Sword of Bataan, symbol of the bravery of our soldiers during World War II and the guerrilla movement that followed later.
- The three golden stars – represent the three geographical regions that contributed their sons in the bloody resistance of World War II.
- Red Panel – depicts the battles fought in Bataan and in the country.
- Blue Panel – depicts the peace of the night that followed.
Now, my nephew has an answer to his assignment and all Bataenos know what their provincial seal signify.
Bureau of Local Government. (1975). Symbols of The State: Republic of The Philippines, p. 188-189. Retrieved from us.archive.org
by HARK HERALD C. SARMIENTO
Tablets, according to its proponents, are supported by most teachers, parents, and students as they are proven to be more efficient tools in the learning process than textbooks. The media has elated the public with the fact that tablets can hold hundreds of digital textbooks while remaining much lighter and cheaper than print textbooks (“Tablets vs. Textbooks,” 2013). However, there is much more to tablets than a mere light and nifty electronic book (e-book) reader (“Better reasons,” 2011). Tablets pave the way to a wider and unlimited source of learning which improve students’ cognitive capacity and increase their interactivity and creativity. As the use of tablets has been proven effective in facilitating and improving students’ learning, schools must take advantage of this advanced learning tool. Thus, the Philippine K-12 classrooms should switch from using print textbooks to utilizing interactive, digital textbooks and other educational applications on tablets.
The most obvious benefit of using tablets in schools is that it solves the problem of backpack-related injuries. Backpacks, which are bags loaded with varied books for school use carried by a strap on the back or shoulder, has developed spine problems to school children at such a young age (“Avoid bad back,” 2012). Thus, the use of tablets in the K-12 classroom solves the dilemma, as a tablet filled with 3,500 e-books weighs only around 1-2 pounds. The same number of physical books would weigh about two tons – four thousand (4000) times heavier than the weight of a tablet. But this is only the tip of the ice berg. There is more to tablets which makes it worth procuring.
In the continuous effort of the government to address the problems the education sector faces, it is aiming to eventually use tablet-based reading materials in place of traditional textbooks (Aquino III, 2012). Apparently, the government recognizes the efficiency of tablets in making learning in the classroom more engaging. Tablets can also solve the patent lack of books and resources in the Philippine education system.
This innovation in education gained support from publishing houses, organizations, and other firms around the country. Vibal Publishing House, Inc. for example, has partnered with Microsoft Corporation to run open source applications for secure, fast and flexible delivery of digital learning tools (“Vibal Publishing chooses Microsoft”, 2013). Vibal also introduced two low-cost tablet models which will be loaded with interactive Math and Science application modules as part of the initiatives of the Department of Science and Technology (DOST) to improve public education in those areas (Villavicencio, 2012). Lifeware Technology, another digital service provider, launched an Android-powered tablet for children aged 3 – 8 called as the Enlight KiddieTAB. The KiddieTAB is preloaded with 100 educational applications like language and literacy, math, art and music, and Filipino which children can learn with fun. (Magdirila 2013; Bernabe 2013).
The effective impact of learning from interactive applications and digital textbooks loaded on tablets is discussed in an article written by Janet Maragioglio (2012) entitled “IPads Boost Math Scores, Benefit Education.” The article explains the claim of publisher Houghton Mifflin Harcourt that students who used iPad (one of the many tablet brands) in learning Algebra 1 scored extremely higher on all math class and standardized tests than those who used print textbooks. Thus, it is a proof that the use of tablets enhances education by engaging, motivating, and making students eager to learn.
However beneficial tablets may appear, there are others who are not convinced with its effectiveness. Pessimists claim that using tablets is more expensive than using print textbooks. Others even argue that tablets have too many distractions for classroom use. Finally, they claim that it is an additional task for the teacher to learn using these devices which is most of the times difficult for them to master (especially the old ones).
The opposition argues that “implementing tablets in K-12 schools requires purchasing hardware (the tablet) and software (the textbooks), setting up new wi-fi facility, and training teachers and administrators how to use the technology. Implementation costs for e-textbooks on iPad tablets are 552% higher than new print textbooks in an average high school (“Tablets vs. Textbooks,” 2013). This concern was raised with optimism by President Aquino (2012) when he said at the launching of K-12 educational program that the government is just waiting for the prices to go down; and as it is, they’re already close to target. It appears that tablets’ price is inversely proportional with the demand for it, thus increasing its favorability for classroom use.
The opposition argues that tablets have too many distractions for classroom use. Students may pay attention to applications (more commonly known as “apps”), e-mail, games, and websites instead of their teachers and the lessons being discussed in the class. (“Tablets vs. Textbooks,” 2013). Fortunately, in Buffalo, New York, it was found that the best solution was to implement device management software… (Sheridan 2013) By the use of software management, educators (teachers) can manage the programs that students use and access through the tablets – the educational applications installed at tablets provided by Vibal and Lifeware as it has been discussed earlier (Villavicencio 2012; Magdirila 2013; Bernabe 2013). Thus, proper management of the devices will ensure that the aim and purpose of providing them in schools will be maintained. In addition, in case errors are found in the materials, information can be easily corrected through internet servers (Aquino III, 2012).
PNoy (2012), as we call the Philippine president, is well aware of the situation teachers will face in this era we live in which we call the digital or information age. Teachers must be in possession of a wider range of knowledge to cope with the innovations the modern technology provides. As the government aims at providing today’s youth with better opportunities to acquire information and to learn, educators must be adept with these technologies and continuously update themselves with the latest trends. In response, the government will provide teachers the proper training aside from the personal studies they must undertake to fully grasp this leap on our education system. Thus, the success of the program relies on everybody’s hands and concern. Teachers must attract the interest and sustain attention of the students by carefully facilitating or utilizing interactive and engaging learning materials in the classroom – learning tools that are provided by the government and other institutions.
Looking at the current situation of education in the Philippines, one might argue that the Philippines is not yet ready for replacing textbooks with tablets due to the cost it may incur for the government. The readiness of teachers in using the innovative device is also in question. However, our stand is that it is the proper time now to start the changes in the Philippine classrooms. We have already taken the first step of changing the educational curriculum by introducing K-12. Soon, books should be provided for the students of K-12. Therefore it is the proper time to introduce the use of tablets in the classrooms which can foster and contain the new book editions for the K-12 classes which are more interactive and best facilitate learning.
The replacement of textbooks with tablets addresses not only the financial capability of the Philippines to purchase these digital devices for learning but also the readiness of the teachers in utilizing them. However, whether you’re a technologically adept teacher with all the latest devices or a stereotype who barely manages to keep up with a vintage mobile phone unit, technology has proven itself to be a force for change. Therefore teachers of this milieu must learn to adapt and be adept with the use of these innovations brought by the advanced technologies. As today’s classrooms undergo a technological makeover and computer programs become fundamental to the learning process, we foresee students of the Philippine K-12 program spend less time turning printed book pages and more time tapping tablet screens.
ProCon.org. (2013, September 20). Tablets vs. Textbooks ProCon.org. Retrieved from http://tablets-textbooks.procon.org/
Aquino III, B. S. (2012, April 24). Speech of President Aquino at the launch of the K to 12 Basic Education Program (English translation).
The Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines. Retrieved from http://www.gov.ph/2012/04/24/speech-of-president-aquino-at-the-launch-of-the-k-to-12-basic-education-program-april-24-2012-english-translation/
Maragioglio, J. (2012, January 31) IPads Boost Math Scores, Benefit Education. Retrieved from http://www.mobiledia.com/news/126150.html
Better reasons for using tablets in Philippine schools. (2011, June 14). Once an Educator. Retrieved from http://teacherhoney.blogspot.com/2011/06/better-reasons-for-using-tablets-in.html
Avoid bad back, check backpack. (2012, May 29). The Philippine Star. Retrieved from http://www.philstar.com/health-and-family/811380/avoid-bad-back-check-backpack
Vibal Publishing chooses Microsoft’s Windows Azure for more efficient delivery of digital learning tools. (2013). Microsoft Philippines. Retrieved from http://www.microsoft.com/philippines/pressroom/Vibal-chooses-Microsofts-Windows-Azure.aspx
Villavicencio, P. (2012, May 9). Vibal outs low-cost education tablet, cloud servers for digital classrooms. InterAksyon. Retrieved from http://www.interaksyon.com/infotech/vibal-outs-low-cost-education-tablet-cloud-servers-for-digital-classrooms
Magdirila, P. (2013, August 29). KiddieTAB, the 8-inch tablet tailor-made for children’s education. TECH IN ASIA. Retrieved from http://www.techinasia.com/kiddietab-8inch-tablet-tailormade-childrens-education/
Bernabe, Kirstin. (2013, August 19). A tablet designed for kids and step-ladder learning. Philippine Daily Inquirer. Retrieved from http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/469319/a-tablet-designed-for-kids-and-step-ladder-learning
Sheridan, K. (2013, July 11). Textbooks To Tablets: The Progression Of Classroom Technology. Information Week Education. Retrieved from http://www.informationweek.com/education/mobility/textbooks-to-tablets-the-progression-of/2401579111
S. No. 2796
H. No. 5808
Republic of the Philippines
Congress of the Philippines
Second Regular Session
Begun and held in Metro Manila, on Monday the Twenty-fifth day of July two thousand eleven.
[ Republic Act No. 10175 ]
AN ACT DEFINING CYBERCRIME, PROVIDING FOR THE PREVENTION, INVESTIGATION, SUPPRESSION AND THE IMPOSITION OF PENALTIES THEREFOR AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled:
SECTION 1. Title. — This Act shall be known as the “Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012″.
SEC. 2. Declaration of Policy. — The State recognizes the vital role of information and communications industries such as content production, telecommunications, broadcasting electronic commerce, and data processing, in the nation’s overall social and economic development. The State also recognizes the importance of providing an environment conducive to the development, acceleration, and rational application and exploitation of information and communications technology (ICT) to attain free, easy, and intelligible access to exchange and/or delivery of information; and the need to protect and safeguard the integrity of computer, computer and communications systems, networks, and databases, and the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information and data stored therein, from all forms of misuse, abuse, and illegal access by making punishable under the law such conduct or conducts. In this light, the State shall adopt sufficient powers to effectively prevent and combat such offenses by facilitating their detection, investigation, and prosecution at both the domestic and international levels, and by providing arrangements for fast and reliable international cooperation.
SEC. 3. Definition of Terms. — For purposes of this Act, the following terms are hereby defined as follows:
(a) Access refers to the instruction, communication with, storing data in, retrieving data from, or otherwise making use of any resources of a computer system or communication network.
(b) Alteration refers to the modification or change, in form or substance, of an existing computer data or program.
(c) Communication refers to the transmission of information through ICT media, including voice, video and other forms of data.
(d) Computer refers to an electronic, magnetic, optical, electrochemical, or other data processing or communications device, or grouping of such devices, capable of performing logical, arithmetic, routing, or storage functions and which includes any storage facility or equipment or communications facility or equipment directly related to or operating in conjunction with such device. It covers any type of computer device including devices with data processing capabilities like mobile phones, smart phones, computer networks and other devices connected to the internet.
(e) Computer data refers to any representation of facts, information, or concepts in a form suitable for processing in a computer system including a program suitable to cause a computer system to perform a function and includes electronic documents and/or electronic data messages whether stored in local computer systems or online.
(f) Computer program refers to a set of instructions executed by the computer to achieve intended results.
(g) Computer system refers to any device or group of interconnected or related devices, one or more of which, pursuant to a program, performs automated processing of data. It covers any type of device with data processing capabilities including, but not limited to, computers and mobile phones. The device consisting of hardware and software may include input, output and storage components which may stand alone or be connected in a network or other similar devices. It also includes computer data storage devices or media.
(h) Without right refers to either: (i) conduct undertaken without or in excess of authority; or (ii) conduct not covered by established legal defenses, excuses, court orders, justifications, or relevant principles under the law.
(i) Cyber refers to a computer or a computer network, the electronic medium in which online communication takes place.
(j) Critical infrastructure refers to the computer systems, and/or networks, whether physical or virtual, and/or the computer programs, computer data and/or traffic data so vital to this country that the incapacity or destruction of or interference with such system and assets would have a debilitating impact on security, national or economic security, national public health and safety, or any combination of those matters.
(k) Cybersecurity refers to the collection of tools, policies, risk management approaches, actions, training, best practices, assurance and technologies that can be used to protect the cyber environment and organization and user’s assets.
(l) Database refers to a representation of information, knowledge, facts, concepts, or instructions which are being prepared, processed or stored or have been prepared, processed or stored in a formalized manner and which are intended for use in a computer system.
(m) Interception refers to listening to, recording, monitoring or surveillance of the content of communications, including procuring of the content of data, either directly, through access and use of a computer system or indirectly, through the use of electronic eavesdropping or tapping devices, at the same time that the communication is occurring.
(n) Service provider refers to:
(1) Any public or private entity that provides to users of its service the ability to communicate by means of a computer system; and
(2) Any other entity that processes or stores computer data on behalf of such communication service or users of such service.
(o) Subscriber’s information refers to any information contained in the form of computer data or any other form that is held by a service provider, relating to subscribers of its services other than traffic or content data and by which identity can be established:
(1) The type of communication service used, the technical provisions taken thereto and the period of service;
(2) The subscriber’s identity, postal or geographic address, telephone and other access numbers, any assigned network address, billing and payment information, available on the basis of the service agreement or arrangement; and
(3) Any other available information on the site of the installation of communication equipment, available on the basis of the service agreement or arrangement.
(p) Traffic data or non-content data refers to any computer data other than the content of the communication including, but not limited to, the communication’s origin, destination, route, time, date, size, duration, or type of underlying service.
SEC. 4. Cybercrime Offenses. — The following acts constitute the offense of cybercrime punishable under this Act:
(a) Offenses against the confidentiality, integrity and availability of computer data and systems:
(1) Illegal Access. – The access to the whole or any part of a computer system without right.
(2) Illegal Interception. – The interception made by technical means without right of any non-public transmission of computer data to, from, or within a computer system including electromagnetic emissions from a computer system carrying such computer data.
(3) Data Interference. — The intentional or reckless alteration, damaging, deletion or deterioration of computer data, electronic document, or electronic data message, without right, including the introduction or transmission of viruses.
(4) System Interference. — The intentional alteration or reckless hindering or interference with the functioning of a computer or computer network by inputting, transmitting, damaging, deleting, deteriorating, altering or suppressing computer data or program, electronic document, or electronic data message, without right or authority, including the introduction or transmission of viruses.
(5) Misuse of Devices.
(i) The use, production, sale, procurement, importation, distribution, or otherwise making available, without right, of:
(aa) A device, including a computer program, designed or adapted primarily for the purpose of committing any of the offenses under this Act; or
(bb) A computer password, access code, or similar data by which the whole or any part of a computer system is capable of being accessed with intent that it be used for the purpose of committing any of the offenses under this Act.
(ii) The possession of an item referred to in paragraphs 5(i)(aa) or (bb) above with intent to use said devices for the purpose of committing any of the offenses under this section.
(6) Cyber-squatting. – The acquisition of a domain name over the internet in bad faith to profit, mislead, destroy reputation, and deprive others from registering the same, if such a domain name is:
(i) Similar, identical, or confusingly similar to an existing trademark registered with the appropriate government agency at the time of the domain name registration:
(ii) Identical or in any way similar with the name of a person other than the registrant, in case of a personal name; and
(iii) Acquired without right or with intellectual property interests in it.
(b) Computer-related Offenses:
(1) Computer-related Forgery. —
(i) The input, alteration, or deletion of any computer data without right resulting in inauthentic data with the intent that it be considered or acted upon for legal purposes as if it were authentic, regardless whether or not the data is directly readable and intelligible; or
(ii) The act of knowingly using computer data which is the product of computer-related forgery as defined herein, for the purpose of perpetuating a fraudulent or dishonest design.
(2) Computer-related Fraud. — The unauthorized input, alteration, or deletion of computer data or program or interference in the functioning of a computer system, causing damage thereby with fraudulent intent: Provided, That if no
damage has yet been caused, the penalty imposable shall be one (1) degree lower.
(3) Computer-related Identity Theft. – The intentional acquisition, use, misuse, transfer, possession, alteration or deletion of identifying information belonging to another, whether natural or juridical, without right: Provided, That if no damage has yet been caused, the penalty imposable shall be one (1) degree lower.
(c) Content-related Offenses:
(1) Cybersex. — The willful engagement, maintenance, control, or operation, directly or indirectly, of any lascivious exhibition of sexual organs or sexual activity, with the aid of a computer system, for favor or consideration.
(2) Child Pornography. — The unlawful or prohibited acts defined and punishable by Republic Act No. 9775 or the Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009, committed through a computer system: Provided, That the penalty to be imposed shall be (1) one degree higher than that provided for in Republic Act No. 9775.
(3) Unsolicited Commercial Communications. — The transmission of commercial electronic communication with the use of computer system which seek to advertise, sell, or offer for sale products and services are prohibited unless:
(i) There is prior affirmative consent from the recipient; or
(ii) The primary intent of the communication is for service and/or administrative announcements from the sender to its existing users, subscribers or customers; or
(iii) The following conditions are present:
(aa) The commercial electronic communication contains a simple, valid, and reliable way for the recipient to reject. receipt of further commercial electronic messages (opt-out) from the same source;
(bb) The commercial electronic communication does not purposely disguise the source of the electronic message; and
(cc) The commercial electronic communication does not purposely include misleading information in any part of the message in order to induce the recipients to read the message.
(4) Libel. — The unlawful or prohibited acts of libel as defined in Article 355 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, committed through a computer system or any other similar means which may be devised in the future.
SEC. 5. Other Offenses. — The following acts shall also constitute an offense:
(a) Aiding or Abetting in the Commission of Cybercrime. – Any person who willfully abets or aids in the commission of any of the offenses enumerated in this Act shall be held liable.
(b) Attempt in the Commission of Cybercrime. — Any person who willfully attempts to commit any of the offenses enumerated in this Act shall be held liable.
SEC. 6. All crimes defined and penalized by the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and special laws, if committed by, through and with the use of information and communications technologies shall be covered by the relevant provisions of this Act: Provided, That the penalty to be imposed shall be one (1) degree higher than that provided for by the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and special laws, as the case may be.
SEC. 7. Liability under Other Laws. — A prosecution under this Act shall be without prejudice to any liability for violation of any provision of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, or special laws.
SEC. 8. Penalties. — Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Sections 4(a) and 4(b) of this Act shall be punished with imprisonment of prision mayor or a fine of at least Two hundred thousand pesos (PhP200,000.00) up to a maximum amount commensurate to the damage incurred or both.
Any person found guilty of the punishable act under Section 4(a)(5) shall be punished with imprisonment of prision mayor or a fine of not more than Five hundred thousand pesos (PhP500,000.00) or both.
If punishable acts in Section 4(a) are committed against critical infrastructure, the penalty of reclusion temporal or a fine of at least Five hundred thousand pesos (PhP500,000.00) up to maximum amount commensurate to the damage incurred or both, shall be imposed.
Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Section 4(c)(1) of this Act shall be punished with imprisonment of prision mayor or a fine of at least Two hundred thousand pesos (PhP200,000.00) but not exceeding One million pesos (PhPl,000,000.00) or both.
Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Section 4(c)(2) of this Act shall be punished with the penalties as enumerated in Republic Act No. 9775 or the “Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009″: Provided, That the penalty to be imposed shall be one (1) degree higher than that provided for in Republic Act No. 9775, if committed through a computer system.
Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Section 4(c)(3) shall be punished with imprisonment of arresto mayor or a fine of at least Fifty thousand pesos (PhP50,000.00) but not exceeding Two hundred fifty thousand pesos (PhP250,000.00) or both.
Any person found guilty of any of the punishable acts enumerated in Section 5 shall be punished with imprisonment one (1) degree lower than that of the prescribed penalty for the offense or a fine of at least One hundred thousand pesos (PhPl00,000.00) but not exceeding Five hundred thousand pesos (PhP500,000.00) or both.
SEC. 9. Corporate Liability. — When any of the punishable acts herein defined are knowingly committed on behalf of or for the benefit of a juridical person, by a natural person acting either individually or as part of an organ of the juridical person, who has a leading position within, based on: (a) a power of representation of the juridical person provided the act committed falls within the scope of such authority; (b) an authority to take decisions on behalf of the juridical person: Provided, That the act committed falls within the scope of such authority; or (c) an authority to exercise control within the juridical person, the juridical person shall be held liable for a fine equivalent to at least double the fines imposable in Section 7 up to a maximum of Ten million pesos (PhP10,000,000.00).
If the commission of any of the punishable acts herein defined was made possible due to the lack of supervision or control by a natural person referred to and described in the preceding paragraph, for the benefit of that juridical person by a natural person acting under its authority, the juridical person shall be held liable for a fine equivalent to at least double the fines imposable in Section 7 up to a maximum of Five million pesos (PhP5,000,000.00).
The liability imposed on the juridical person shall be without prejudice to the criminal liability of the natural person who has committed the offense.
ENFORCEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION
SEC. 10. Law Enforcement Authorities. — The National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) and the Philippine National Police (PNP) shall be responsible for the efficient and effective law enforcement of the provisions of this Act. The NBI and the PNP shall organize a cybercrime unit or center manned by special investigators to exclusively handle cases involving violations of this Act.
SEC. 11. Duties of Law Enforcement Authorities. — To ensure that the technical nature of cybercrime and its prevention is given focus and considering the procedures involved for international cooperation, law enforcement authorities specifically the computer or technology crime divisions or units responsible for the investigation of cybercrimes are required to submit timely and regular reports including pre-operation, post-operation and investigation results and such other documents as may be required to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for review and monitoring.
SEC. 12. Real-Time Collection of Traffic Data. — Law enforcement authorities, with due cause, shall be authorized to collect or record by technical or electronic means traffic data in real-time associated with specified communications transmitted by means of a computer system.
Traffic data refer only to the communication’s origin, destination, route, time, date, size, duration, or type of underlying service, but not content, nor identities.
All other data to be collected or seized or disclosed will require a court warrant.
Service providers are required to cooperate and assist law enforcement authorities in the collection or recording of the above-stated information.
The court warrant required under this section shall only be issued or granted upon written application and the examination under oath or affirmation of the applicant and the witnesses he may produce and the showing: (1) that there are reasonable grounds to believe that any of the crimes enumerated hereinabove has been committed, or is being committed, or is about to be committed: (2) that there are reasonable grounds to believe that evidence that will be obtained is essential to the conviction of any person for, or to the solution of, or to the prevention of, any such crimes; and (3) that there are no other means readily available for obtaining such evidence.
SEC. 13. Preservation of Computer Data. — The integrity of traffic data and subscriber information relating to communication services provided by a service provider shall be preserved for a minimum period of six (6) months from the date of the transaction. Content data shall be similarly preserved for six (6) months from the date of receipt of the order from law enforcement authorities requiring its preservation.
Law enforcement authorities may order a one-time extension for another six (6) months: Provided, That once computer data preserved, transmitted or stored by a service provider is used as evidence in a case, the mere furnishing to such service provider of the transmittal document to the Office of the Prosecutor shall be deemed a notification to preserve the computer data until the termination of the case.
The service provider ordered to preserve computer data shall keep confidential the order and its compliance.
SEC. 14. Disclosure of Computer Data. — Law enforcement authorities, upon securing a court warrant, shall issue an order requiring any person or service provider to disclose or submit subscriber’s information, traffic data or relevant data in his/its possession or control within seventy-two (72) hours from receipt of the order in relation to a valid complaint officially docketed and assigned for investigation and the disclosure is necessary and relevant for the purpose of investigation.
SEC. 15. Search, Seizure and Examination of Computer Data. — Where a search and seizure warrant is properly issued, the law enforcement authorities shall likewise have the following powers and duties.
Within the time period specified in the warrant, to conduct interception, as defined in this Act, and:
(a) To secure a computer system or a computer data storage medium;
(b) To make and retain a copy of those computer data secured;
(c) To maintain the integrity of the relevant stored computer data;
(d) To conduct forensic analysis or examination of the computer data storage medium; and
(e) To render inaccessible or remove those computer data in the accessed computer or computer and communications network.
Pursuant thereof, the law enforcement authorities may order any person who has knowledge about the functioning of the computer system and the measures to protect and preserve the computer data therein to provide, as is reasonable, the necessary information, to enable the undertaking of the search, seizure and examination.
Law enforcement authorities may request for an extension of time to complete the examination of the computer data storage medium and to make a return thereon but in no case for a period longer than thirty (30) days from date of approval by the court.
SEC. 16. Custody of Computer Data. — All computer data, including content and traffic data, examined under a proper warrant shall, within forty-eight (48) hours after the expiration of the period fixed therein, be deposited with the court in a sealed package, and shall be accompanied by an affidavit of the law enforcement authority executing it stating the dates and times covered by the examination, and the law enforcement authority who may access the deposit, among other relevant data. The law enforcement authority shall also certify that no duplicates or copies of the whole or any part thereof have been made, or if made, that all such duplicates or copies are included in the package deposited with the court. The package so deposited shall not be opened, or the recordings replayed, or used in evidence, or then contents revealed, except upon order of the court, which shall not be granted except upon motion, with due notice and opportunity to be heard to the person or persons whose conversation or communications have been recorded.
SEC. 17. Destruction of Computer Data. — Upon expiration of the periods as provided in Sections 13 and 15, service providers and law enforcement authorities, as the case may be, shall immediately and completely destroy the computer data subject of a preservation and examination.
SEC. 18. Exclusionary Rule. — Any evidence procured without a valid warrant or beyond the authority of the same shall be inadmissible for any proceeding before any court or tribunal.
SEC. 19. Restricting or Blocking Access to Computer Data. — When a computer data is prima facie found to be in violation of the provisions of this Act, the DOJ shall issue an order to restrict or block access to such computer data.
SEC. 20. Noncompliance. — Failure to comply with the provisions of Chapter IV hereof specifically the orders from law enforcement authorities shall be punished as a violation of Presidential Decree No. 1829 with imprisonment of prision correctional in its maximum period or a fine of One hundred thousand pesos (Php100,000.00) or both, for each and every noncompliance with an order issued by law enforcement authorities.
SEC. 21. Jurisdiction. — The Regional Trial Court shall have jurisdiction over any violation of the provisions of this Act. including any violation committed by a Filipino national regardless of the place of commission. Jurisdiction shall lie if any of the elements was committed within the Philippines or committed with the use of any computer system wholly or partly situated in the country, or when by such commission any damage is caused to a natural or juridical person who, at the time the offense was committed, was in the Philippines.
There shall be designated special cybercrime courts manned by specially trained judges to handle cybercrime cases.
Sec. 22. General Principles Relating to International Cooperation — All relevant international instruments on international cooperation in criminal matters, arrangements agreed on the basis of uniform or reciprocal legislation, and domestic laws, to the widest extent possible for the purposes of investigations or proceedings concerning criminal offenses related to computer systems and data, or for the collection of evidence in electronic form of a criminal, offense shall be given full force and effect.
SEC 23. Department of Justice (DOJ). — There is hereby created an Office of Cybercrime within the DOJ designated as the central authority in all matters related to international mutual assistance and extradition.
SEC. 24. Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center. — There is hereby created, within thirty (30) days from the effectivity of this Act, an inter-agency body to be known as the Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center (CICC), under the administrative supervision of the Office of the President, for policy coordination among concerned agencies and for the formulation and enforcement of the national cybersecurity plan.
SEC. 25. Composition. — The CICC shall be headed by the Executive Director of the Information and Communications Technology Office under the Department of Science and Technology (ICTO-DOST) as Chairperson with the Director of the NBI as Vice Chairperson; the Chief of the PNP; Head of the DOJ Office of Cybercrime; and one (1) representative from the private sector and academe, as members. The CICC shall be manned by a secretariat of selected existing personnel and representatives from the different participating agencies.
SEC. 26. Powers and Functions. — The CICC shall have the following powers and functions:
(a) To formulate a national cybersecurity plan and extend immediate assistance for the suppression of real-time commission of cybercrime offenses through a computer emergency response team (CERT);
(b) To coordinate the preparation of appropriate and effective measures to prevent and suppress cybercrime activities as provided for in this Act;
(c) To monitor cybercrime cases being bandied by participating law enforcement and prosecution agencies;
(d) To facilitate international cooperation on intelligence, investigations, training and capacity building related to cybercrime prevention, suppression and prosecution;
(e) To coordinate the support and participation of the business sector, local government units and nongovernment organizations in cybercrime prevention programs and other
(f) To recommend the enactment of appropriate laws, issuances, measures and policies;
(g) To call upon any government agency to render assistance in the accomplishment of the CICC’s mandated tasks and functions; and
(h) To perform all other matters related to cybercrime prevention and suppression, including capacity building and such other functions and duties as may be necessary for the proper implementation of this Act.
SEC. 27. Appropriations. — The amount of Fifty million pesos (PhP50,000,000_00) shall be appropriated annually for the implementation of this Act.
SEC. 28. Implementing Rules and Regulations. — The ICTO-DOST, the DOJ and the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) shall jointly formulate the necessary rules and regulations within ninety (90) days from approval of this Act, for its effective implementation.
SEC. 29. Separability Clause — If any provision of this Act is held invalid, the other provisions not affected shall remain in full force and effect.
SEC. 30. Repealing Clause. — All laws, decrees or rules inconsistent with this Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly. Section 33(a) of Republic Act No. 8792 or the “Electronic Commerce Act” is hereby modified accordingly.
SEC. 31. Effectivity. — This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after the completion of its publication in the Official Gazette or in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation.
(Sgd.) FELICIANO BELMONTE JR.
(Sgd.) JUAN PONCE ENRILE
This Act which is a consolidation of Senate Bill No. 2796 and House Bill No. 5808 was finally passed by the Senate and the House of Representatives on June 5, 2012 and June 4, 2012, respectively.
(Sgd.) MARILYN B BARUA-YAP
(Sgd.) EMMA LIRIO-REYES
Approved: SEP 12 2012
(Sgd.) BENIGNO S. AQUINO III
President of the Philippines
The Freelance Writers’ Guild of the Philippines (FWGP) will hold its Second General Assembly from 1 p.m. to 6 p.m. at the University Hotel in UP Diliman on Sunday, Sept. 16.
The members of the organization will be given an overview of the current local freelance writing landscape by seasoned freelance writers, representatives of client companies and select FWGP members.
Guest speakers include Celine Roque, Sharon de Dios, Noemi Pamintuan-Jara, and Bert Sulat; client speakers: Ces Rodriguez of Yahoo.ph, Camsy Ocumen of freelancer.ph and Yasmin Arquiza of GMANews.TV; and panel members: Beverly Siy, Stephanie Gonzaga and Dino Manrique.
Facilitators of FWGP committees will present reports: Education, Ime Morales; Marketing & Resource Mobilization, Claire Agbayani; Web Site & Media, Rom Factolerin & Raymond Dimayuga; Membership, Teena Estrada; Finance & Ethics, Naomi Tupas. Executive Committee members Lorna Israel and Karl de Mesa will give the invocation and deliver the closing remarks, respectively.
Results of the survey on rates for freelance writers which was conducted among FWGP members will also be revealed.
The event will be hosted by Angel Carballo and Viva Andrada. Members Charlie Morales and Peter Allan Mariano will perform during intermissions.
The Second General Assembly of FWGP is supported by FILCOLS, Business World, herword.com, Agimat, Tindahan ng Itlog ni Kuya, Michelle’s Sweet Kisses, Balangay Productions and Air21.
For inquiries, contact: Teena Estrada @09153913129 or Naomi Tupas @09223185858.
♣ Same Sex Marriage in the World
“I think same-sex couples should be able to get married,” U.S. President Barrack Obama tells Robin Roberts in an ABC News Exclusive Interview in May 9. The President expressed his support for same-sex marriage as he said he believes it’s important to “treat others the way you would want to be treated.”
Apparently, Obama’s view on marriage has changed throughout his political career. It is notable that he supported same-sex marriage before becoming president, but then changed that view when he ran for national office in 2006. He has always supported civil unions and opposed the recognition of some same-sex couple’s benefits. His view on the idea of marriage has evolved since taking office and he has now confirmed that he supports gay marriage.
♣ Same Sex Marriage in the Philippines
This issue in the U.S. made the legalization of same-sex marriage in the Philippines a hot topic of debates in the island. To put more wood on the fire, same sex unions have been officiated by the group Metropolitan Community Church (MCC) in Baguio City since last year. As the same sex marriages were publicized, MCC’s Myke Sotero said more same sex couples have applied to be wed by the group.
In BPSU, I noticed that there are students who live up the saying “birds of the same feather flock together”. They are students who are involved in same sex relationship.
I took the courage and was given a chance to interview two of these couples – I called them couples for they live deliberately on the same house and the only thing that’s missing in them is marriage which is currently not allowed in the Philippines. Justin and Carl, not their real names have been living together for three years now.
I asked Justin how they manage to live at home and in the community they belong to, especially in BPSU. He said that their family accepts who they are including their same sex partners, and with that he is very thankful. Carl, Justin’s partner, added that when it comes to school, there are also others who are in relationships like them so they are not timid about it.
When asked what their view on same sex marriage is, they said that if only same sex marriage is legal in the Philippines, they would have been married already. This is the same answer I got from Mark and Alvin, their pseudo names, when I asked if they are in favor of same sex marriage. They further explained that if the community is able to accept their relationship, what more if it becomes legalized.
But despite of these clamor for its legalization, the Philippines seem to have closed its doors for same sex marriage. In an article from the Philippine Star last May 11 this year, Edwin Lacierda, a spokesman of President Benigno Aquino III said that “same sex marriage in the Philippines is legally impossible.” He added that “our laws are very clear on the definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman.”
♣ Same Sex Marriage in the Moral and Legal Standards
Lacierda said that the Philippines and the U.S. have a different “cultural milieu” when it comes to the topic. Apparently, Philippine law makers still uphold and consider the natural law as the source and standard of the laws they pass.
Before passing a law, legislators weigh the gravity its effect to the morale of the people. Here’s the rub. You may have already heard of the familiar saying “not all that is legal is moral, but what is moral is worth legalizing.” Simply stated, you can make something legal, but you can’t make it right. There is a difference between being legal and being moral. There were lots of things in the past that were legal but immoral. Apartheid was legal in South Africa, but it wasn’t moral. Among others, it was a violation of transcendent human rights and ought to have been abolished.
What is legal isn’t always moral. There is a legal right but it may be in violation of a transcendent right, and this is why we take exception. Same sex marriage may be legalized but it remains immoral as it is now.
The Archbishop of Glasgow, Mario Conti, warned politicians not to ignore “the wisdom that is handed down generation to generation in communities of faith” in seeking to give people equal rights.
Politicians seem ready to redefine marriage without any reference to children, or to the natural law written on the heart of mankind, putting the claim of ‘equality and diversity’ on a higher level than faith and reason, and ultimately asserting the moral equivalence between marriage and same-sex unions.
The more that those in government and the judiciary slip society’s moorings from the capstans of virtue, the more our society will descend further into ethical confusion and moral disintegration. Until now, the destiny of this curious case of same sex marriage in our country lies in the hands of its lawmakers, legislators, and politicians.
I wasn’t aware that a text message I was reading is a song.
At first I thought that it was just another boring quotation on love.
However, when a friend told me that it was his favorite song, I immediately looked for it in the internet.
I found out that it is another amazing Filipino Song. I’m very particular when it comes to music. I have a discriminating taste that made me like Filipino Bands less. However, this one made an impact. It did not only catch my attention by its lyrics, the tune and harmony also made it unique and appealing!
The Filipino people impatiently await the singing of the Philippine National Anthem whenever Manny Paquiao has a fight in the boxing arena. It seems that it has been a tradition of the National Historical Institute to censor every artist’s faults in singing the National Anthem on a modified version. It was only recently that Charice Pempengco sang it correctly in two occasions; first at the 2010 Presidential Inauguration, and second, on the Paquiao-Mosley Fight.
Bringing this matter in light, we would try to answer the question: “How is the proper way of singing the Philippine National Anthem?”
Article XVI, Section 2 of the present Philippine Constitution specifies that “The Congress may, by law, adopt a new name for the country, a national anthem, or a national seal, which shall be truly reflective and symbolic of the ideals, history, and traditions of the people. Such law shall take effect only upon its ratification by the people in a national referendum.” At present, the 1998 Republic Act (R.A.) 8491 (the Flag and Heraldic Code of the Philippines) regulates the usage of the Philippine national anthem. It also contains the complete lyrics of “Lupang Hinirang.”
R.A. 8491 specifies that Lupang Hinirang “shall be in accordance with the musical arrangement and composition of Julian Felipe.” However, when literally followed, this means that the national anthem should only be performed by a pianist or by a brass band, as these were the only versions that were produced by Julian Felipe.
Giving them the benefit of the doubt, it is difficult for singers to keep up with the music because the original version was composed in duple time (i.e. in a time signature of 2/4) as compared to the present quadruple time 4/4, making it uncertain if this will either slow down or even double the music’s speed. However, what I can’t understand is that, why do we equate seriousness and solemnity with slowness when it comes to singing of the National Anthem? It’s a march played during the proclamation of the Philippine Independence! Isn’t it supposed to be sung with fervor as it was originally composed?
This is our National Anthem – a symbol of our Nation and a witness to our independence. Give justice to it! Singers should have control as they sing it; without so much embellishments, renditions, and modifications! Artists and Choral Groups are totally in error when they modify the tone, put second voices, etc. on the National Anthem.
We felt so liberal in modifying our National Anthem to suit our musical taste. What we do not realize is that when we continuously stray from its original version and tempo, it somewhat lose its gravity and historicity too.
We should realize that when we sing the National Anthem, we do not perform on a show. Rather, in singing it, we should bear in mind that we should let everybody sing it and feel it to become proud of our country. As the Hymn goes, “Aming ligaya na ‘pag may mang-aapi, ang mamatay ng dahil sa Iyo. (‘Tis our joy, when there be oppressors, to die because of Thee.)”