ETT MOY
BRON

. “CEIVED
EsQUN 17 2024

EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS )

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES ) i
Second Regular Session ) \

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

__ Introduced by Representative Rufus B. Rodriguez

House Bill No, 7010
EXPLANATORY NOTE

In the case of People vs Santos, Jr., Ressa and Rappler, Inc. decided by the Regional
Trial Court Branch 46 in Manila, defendants Santos, Jr. and Ressa were convicted of violation
of Section 4 (c)(4) of Republic Act No. 10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012

Section 4(c)(4) of RA 10175 provides:

(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.

After the promulgation, retired Supreme Court senior associate Justice Antonio Carpio
said the 12-year prescription period is the "overriding issue in the Rappler case”

RA 10175 did not provide for any prescription period of the crimes punishable in said
law. In filing the case, the Department of Justice used Act No. 3326, which basically provides
that for any other offense punished by imprisonment for six years or more, the prescription
period is 12 years

There have been a lot of differing opinions on when the crime of cyber libel prescribes.
‘Some legal experts argue that since the article involved in the case was published in May
2012, then the alleged crime has prescribed in May 2013 and if, granting for the sake of
argument that it was republished in February 2014, then the complainant only had until
February 2015 to file the case. Complainant Wilfredo Kent filed a complaint against Santos,
Jr., Ressa and Rappler, Inc in the NBI in October 2017 and the case was filed in Court on
February 5, 2019,

Far Easter University Law Dean Mel Sta Maria was quoted as saying that when the
Supreme Court decided the constitutionality of cyber libel in 2014 in the case of Disini et al vs
Secretary of Justice et al, (GR No. 203335-203518, February 11, 2014), it said that “Cyberlibel


is actually not anew crime since Article 353, in relation to Article 355 of the penal code, already
punishes it." And that, "In effect, Section 4(c)(4) above merely affirms that online defamation
constitutes similar means for committing libel.” "Because cyber-libel is not a new crime, then
the one-year prescriptive period applies to it. Moreover, such prescriptive period was not
changed by the new Cybercrime Law."

Further, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) President Atty. Domingo Egon
Cayosa was reported as stating that "May the case highlight the need for clarity in our laws to
leave less room for interpretation or misapplication and fortify our courage to uphold the rule
of law’ and that there were questions and arguments regarding the correct interpretation and
application of jurisprudence and the laws, specifically the Revised Penal Code and the
Cybercrime Law, with respect to “prescription” and “republication,” as well as the Supreme
Court Circular 08-2008 with respect to the penalties imposed

In order to hopefully avoid any further confusion, this bill provides for amendments to
RA 10175 by providing for a prescription period for the offenses punishable by said law.

In view of the foregoing, immediate approval of this measure is earnestly requested.

RUFUS B. ROBRIGUEZ


EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES }
Second Regular Session

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Introduced by Representative Rufus B. Rodriguez

House Bill No. 7010

AN ACT
AMENDING REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10175 ENTITLED “AN ACT DEFINING CYBERCRIME,
PROVIDING FOR THE PREVENTION, INVESTIGATION, SUPPRESSION AND THE
IMPOSITION OF PENALTIES THEREFOR AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES” BY
PROVIDING FOR PRESCRIPTION PERIOD FOR THE OFFENSES PUNISHABLE BY SAID
LAW, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress
assembled:

SECTION 1. A new Section 8 is hereby added to Republic Act 10175 to read as follows:
SEC 8. Prescription. - The punishable acts as provided for in Chapter Il of
this Act shall prescribe in three (3) years from the commission of the
offense except Sec 4 (c)(4) Libel, which shall prescribe in one (1) year from
date of publication

SEC 2. The succeeding Sections are hereby renumbered accordingly.

SEC 3. Repealing Clause. — All laws, decrees or rules inconsistent with this Act are hereby
repealed or modified accordingly.

SEC 4. 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.

Approved,