POSTSCRIPT
By Federico D. Pascual Jr.
The Philippine Star
By Federico D. Pascual Jr.
The Philippine Star
VEILED WARNING: The Philippine National Police has unofficially beaten the National Bureau of Investigation, supposedly the sole agency probing the Jan. 6 massacre of 13 persons on two vehicles in Atimonan, Quezon. The police have prematurely announced it was an ambush.
With that, the PNP presumably saved face by conceding a measure of blame on policemen (and the soldiers helping out) manning the virtually deserted Atimonan checkpoint where the carnage happened.
Whatever be the final NBI official report, the ambush — plus the followup killing allegedly by the police of a gambling supervisor in Batangas — looks like a veiled warning to jueteng lords that they better suspended operations at least for now, and not talk.
With the illegal numbers game having become a political issue, is the sample elimination of some high-profile jueteng figures part of a campaign to nip a budding problem?
The big question is how high up does the scare campaign, if indeed there is an operation plan, have official blessing.
* * *
POLITICAL COLOR: At the Supreme Court, we are watching if the hearing on the validity of the new Cybercrime Prevention Act will see the justices voting along political lines, with Aquino appointees supporting the law and those on the other side voting against it.
Not a few have noticed that the trend of questioning by Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno during the oral arguments hewed to the thinking of President Noynoy Aquino. Then she just noted the plea for extending the 120-day Temporary Restraining Order on the law.
For his part, the President’s newest appointee, Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, took pains to stress the need for counter-balancing press freedom rights.
But many senior magistrates appeared to think along the constitutional issues raised by those questioning the validity of RA 10175.
* * *
FLAWED LAW: Some of the many legally flawed provisions attacked by the petitioners are:
• Section 6, which punishes cybercrimes by one degree higher than the same criminal acts already covered by the Revised Penal Code.
• Section 7, which provides that prosecution under RA 10175 be without prejudice to any liability under the RPC. Such redundant liability smacks of double jeopardy.
• Section 12, which empowers law enforcement agencies to collect specified data transmitted in real time through a computer system. This is a clear violation of privacy, a sort of eavesdropping without legal basis.
• Section 19, which empowers the Department of Justice to block the flow of computer data found to be in violation of the law. Found by whom, without due process?
• Section 5, which punishes an Internet user for aiding or abetting a cybercrime offense. The provision is silent on what constitutes aiding or abetting. In the Internet, information and opinion flow fast and unhindered, making those who pass on or forward such items potentially liable.
* * *
PRIOR RESTRAINT: The law also empowers the DoJ to take down websites it finds in violation. Has the Aquino justice department been invested with powers reserved for the courts?
Arbitrary closure of websites or threats of it is a case of prior restraint which is pure and simple censorship.
While it penalizes alleged libel both in electronic and the traditional media, the RA 10175 seems confused on the differentiation of the different types of media.
Also, the Solicitor arguing for the government apparently saw no substantial difference between Internet bloggers and mainstream journalists, who are two different practitioners. He was obviously a stranger in the world of media.
* * *
GUN BAN: Back to the debate over the proposed gun ban (only police and military personnel to possess and carry firearms), we received data from reader Ron Nethercutt of Angeles City who said, “As you pointed out in your Postscript column, there is a great deal more to eliminating violence by guns than eliminating guns.”
“Switzerland, where almost every home has an automatic weapon, has the lowest murder rate by firearm than any country,” he said. “Chicago, which has one of the most stringent gun laws in the United States has the highest murder rate by firearms in the US.
“Gun bans don’t work, period. They just get votes for politicians from uneducated voters. We have to find a logical and fact-based way to stop the violence.”
* * *
MURDER RATING: Nethercutt sent a list of countries showing their relative ranking on the number of murders by firearms per 100,000 citizens. With Honduras in No. 1 position with 91.6 murders, the Philippines is No. 98 with 5.4 murders per 100,000 population.
The US is No. 108 with 4.2 murders per 100,000 population. Most of the countries above the US in the list have total gun bans.
We abbreviated the list to fit: (1) Honduras 91.6 murders; (2) El Salvador 69.2; (3) Cote d’lvoire 56.9; (4) Jamaica 52.2; (5) Venezuela 45.1; (6) Belize 41.4; (7) US Virgin Islands 39.2; (8) Guatemala 38.5; (9) Saint Kits and Nevis 38.2; (10) Zambia 38.0; (11) Uganda 36.3; (2) Malawi 36.0; (13) Lesotho 35.2; (14) Trinidad and Tobago 35.2; (15) Colombia 33.4; (16) South Africa 31.8; (17) Congo 30.8; (18) Central African Republic 29.3; (19) Bahamas 27.4; (20) Puerto Rico 26.2;
…and down the list we picked some countries and their relative ratings: (31) Panama 21.6; (32) Brazil; (46) Mexico 16.9; (49) Ecuador 15.2; (50) North Korea 15.2; (59) Papua New Guinea 13.0; (72) Russia 10.2; (81) Mongolia 8.7; (86) Indonesia 8.1; (88 Pakistan 7.8; (98) PHILIPPINES 5.4; (103) Thailand 4.8; (105) Laos 4.6; (108) United States 4.2.
* * *
RESEARCH: Past POSTSCRIPTs can be accessed at manilamail.com. Follow us via Twitter.com/@FDPascual. Send feedback to fdp333@yahoo.com
No comments:
Post a Comment