Deliberate misreading of the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime led to an erroneous Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012

Tarlac Congresswoman Susan Yap, wife of ex-Legislator Yap, is the author of the much-criticized Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012. Yap says she authored the bill in because the Philippines is signatory to an international convention on cybercrime prevention.

She, however, did not specify this convention.

The Budapest Convention on Cybercrime is, at present, the only international treaty which tries to combat cybercrime by "harmonising national laws, improving investigative techniques and increasing international cooperation." This convention involves all forms of online criminal activity including copyright infringement, computer-related fraud, child pornography and violations of network security. 

The Council of Europe, together with Canada, Japan and China, drew this document up.

I read the Budapest Convention, and really, there is nothing wrong with this which took effect in 2006. If the Philippines is one of the signatories of such a convention, it is expected considering that the forms of cybercrimes which sprouted in the Philippines are also similar with those encountered by other countries.

What is most perplexing to me is the interpretation of members of the Philippine Congress. Congresswoman Yap interpreted this convention to mean that signatory states are mandated to craft their own cybercrime bill to coincide with the contents of this convention.

What an erroneous interpretation! There is nothing in the bill which encourages states to draft new legislation. Even the European Union (EU) and the United States are not required to draft a new cybercrime law. 

The convention only seeks to harmonize what? It seeks international cooperation in combatting the serious cybercrimes especially child pornography, computer-related fraud, etal. Signatory states are just required to harmonize their existing laws on cybercrime with those contained in this convention. 

Now, does the international community condemn online libel as part of cybercrime? NO!!

Nowhere in the convention seeks the destruction of the freedom of speech and privacy laws, such as the one now inserted in the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 in the Philippines.

Throughout the world, the trend really is the de-criminalization of libel. Now, with online libel having a harsher or stiffer penalty than print or electronic media libel, it shows how different Filipinos especially those in the elite groups, view democracy.

Let me state here what EU High Commissioner Catherine Ashton said in a Cyberspace Conference in Budapest:

"We should find ways to apply the principles of

those commonly accepted laws also in this new

domain, rather than starting to draft new ones," she

said.

 The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guarantees the right to privacy, right to freedom of expression and sanctions against enticement to hatred, while the Geneva Convention safeguards the rule of law during wartime.

Read more: http://www.techcentral.ie/20026/new-cybercrime-laws-not-necessary-says-eu-chief#ixzz28PyDsXEy