I.

Plagiarism and other related intellectual property rights

1. Define plagiarism

Plagiarism
Plagiarism is presenting someone else’s work or ideas as your own, with or without their
consent, by incorporating it into your work without full acknowledgement. All published and
unpublished material, whether in manuscript, printed or electronic form, is covered under
this definition. Plagiarism may be intentional or reckless, or unintentional. Under the
regulations for examinations, intentional or reckless plagiarism is a disciplinary offence.

Unintentional plagiarism
Not all cases of plagiarism arise from a deliberate intention to cheat. Sometimes students
may omit to take down citation details when taking notes, or they may be genuinely ignorant
of referencing conventions. However, these excuses offer no sure protection against a charge
of plagiarism. Even in cases where the plagiarism is found to have been neither intentional
nor reckless, there may still be an academic penalty for poor practice.

2. Define copyright, trademark and patent

A copyright protects original works of authorship including literary, dramatic, musical, and
artistic works, such as poetry, novels, movies, songs, computer software, and
architecture. The duration of copyright protection depends on several factors. For works
created by an individual, protection lasts for the life of the author, plus 70 years. For works
created anonymously, pseudonymously, and for hire, protection lasts 95 years from the date
of publication or 120 years from the date of creation, whichever is shorter.

Copyright is a legal right created by the law of a country that grants the creator of an original
work exclusive rights for its use and distribution. This is usually only for a limited time. The
exclusive rights are not absolute but limited by limitations and exceptions to copyright law,
including fair use.

What Is a Trademark or Servicemark?

A trademark is a word, name, symbol or device which is used in trade with goods to indicate
the source of the goods and to distinguish them from the goods of others. A servicemark is
the same as a trademark except that it identifies and distinguishes the source of a service
rather than a product. The terms “trademark” and “mark” are commonly used to refer to
both trademarks and servicemarks.
Trademark rights may be used to prevent others from using a confusingly similar mark, but
not to prevent others from making the same goods or from selling the same goods or services
under a clearly different mark. Trademarks which are used in interstate or foreign commerce
may be registered with the Patent and Trademark Office.

What Is a Patent?

A patent for an invention is the grant of a property right to the inventor, issued by the Patent
and Trademark Office. The term of a new patent is 20 years from the date on which the
application for the patent was filed in the United States or, in special cases, from the date an
earlier related application was filed, subject to the payment of maintenance fees. US patent
grants are effective only within the US, US territories, and US possessions.

The right conferred by the patent grant is, in the language of the statute and of the grant
itself, “the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, or selling” the
invention in the United States or “importing” the invention into the United States. What is
granted is not the right to make, use, offer for sale, sell or import, but the right to exclude
others from making, using, offering for sale, selling or importing the invention

Some additional differences between a copyright and a trademark are as follows:

1. The purpose of a copyright is to protect works of authorship as fixed in a tangible form

of expression. Thus, copyright covers: a) works of art (2 or 3 dimensional), b) photos,
pictures, graphic designs, drawings and other forms of images; c) songs, music and sound
recordings of all kinds; d) books, manuscripts, publications and other written works; and e)
plays, movies, shows, and other performance arts.

2. The purpose of a trademark is to protect words, phrases and logos used in federally
regulated commerce to identify the source of goods and/or services.

3. There may be occasions when both copyright and trademark protection are desired with
respect to the same business endeavor. For example, a marketing campaign for a new
product may introduce a new slogan for use with the product, which also appears in
advertisements for the product. However, copyright and trademark protection will cover
different things. The advertisement’s text and graphics, as published in a particular vehicle,
will be covered by copyright – but this will not protect the slogan as such. The slogan may be
protected by trademark law, but this will not cover the rest of the advertisement. If you want
both forms of protection, you will have to perform both types of registration.
4. If you are interested in protecting a title, slogan, or other short word phrase, generally
you want a trademark. Copyright law does not protect a bare phrase, slogan, or trade name.

5. Whether an image should be protected by trademark or copyright law depends on

whether its use is intended to identify the source of goods or services. If an image is used
temporarily in an ad campaign, it generally is not the type of thing intended to be protected
as a logo.

6. The registration processes of copyright and trademark are entirely different. For
copyright, the filing fee is small, the time to obtain registration is relatively short, and
examination by the Copyright Office is limited to ensuring that the registration application
is properly completed and suitable copies are attached. For trademark, the filing fee is more
substantial, the time to obtain registration is much longer, and examination by the
Trademark Office includes a substantive review of potentially conflicting marks which are
found to be confusingly similar. While copyright registration is primarily an administrative
process, trademark registration is very much an adversarial process.

7. Copyright law provides for compulsory licensing and royalty payments – there is no
analogous concept in trademark law. Plus, the tests and definition of infringement are
considerably different under copyright law and trademark law.

3. Plagiarism v. copyright infringement

II. Laws and policies in information dissemination

A. Right to access to information

1. Censorship and freedom of expression

Censorship, the suppression of words, images, or ideas that are "offensive," happens
whenever some people succeed in imposing their personal political or moral values on
others. Censorship can be carried out by the government as well as private pressure groups.
Censorship by the government is unconstitutional.

Two fundamental principles come into play whenever a court (US) must decide a case
involving freedom of expression. The first is "content neutrality"-- the government cannot
limit expression just because any listener, or even the majority of a community, is offended
by its content. In the context of art and entertainment, this means tolerating some works that
we might find offensive, insulting, outrageous -- or just plain bad.
The second principle is that expression may be restricted only if it will clearly cause direct
and imminent harm to an important societal interest. The classic example is falsely shouting
fire in a crowded theater and causing a stampede. Even then, the speech may be silenced or
punished only if there is no other way to avert the harm.

General information about freedom of expression

Freedom of expression and freedom of opinion are among the most fundamental freedoms
and rights in a democratic society. The opportunity to express one’s view and form an
opinion on different issues has long been considered an important prerequisite for political
processes to function in a democratic way. Freedom of opinion is unlimited, while the right
to freely express one’s view can be restricted and must be exercised with particular
responsibility out of consideration for the rights and freedoms of others. The free word can
cause harm by, for instance, by being perceived as being offensive, inciting discrimination
or acts of violence, or disclosing information that has negative consequences either for
individuals or society as a whole. In other words, freedom of expression has certain
limitations.

Why freedom of expression?

One fundamental concept behind freedom of expression is that everyone is to be able to
study many different opinions about all the issues on which we make joint decisions.
Freedom of expression is normally described as being important for democracy because it
makes it possible to spread information freely, thereby providing citizens and decision-
makers with better opportunities to reach well-founded decisions. Freedom of expression
can also be said to fill a more critical function since well informed citizens and free mass
media are given ample opportunities to review and express their opinions about how
public power is exercised.

Moreover, freedom of expression can contribute to combating corruption. Freedom of

expression can also be motivated from a democratic equality perspective. A political
administration in which decisions are made in accordance with the majority principle only
becomes a legitimate administration if all citizens have had an opportunity to express their
opinion on a certain issue. Freedom of expression is also an individual privilege that gives
individuals the right to express their opinions and communicate with others.

Fundamental principles
One fundamental principle is that constitutionally protected material may be produced and
spread, and that a public authority or other public body may not establish in advance
obstacles to manufacturing and distribution. In other words, censorship is prohibited.
Accountability for what has been printed can only be demanded after the fact and only
against those deemed by law as responsible.
The freedom to publish means that everyone has the right to provide or gather information
for publication on any subject whatsoever without risk of prosecution. Persons who
publish information for publication have the right to remain anonymous and cannot be
prosecuted for their involvement. Only crimes stipulated in a separate catalogue of offences
can give rise to criminal liability, which is sought in a special trial procedure with the
Chancellor of Justice as prosecutor and with a trial by jury.

Offences against the freedom of the press and freedom of expression can be divided
into four categories:
• crimes involving matters of preparedness (a threat to the security of the realm), such as
high treason;
• crimes involving secret information, such as espionage;
• crimes against public interest, such as inciting rebellion and agitation against a national
or ethnic group; and
• crimes against individuals, such as slander.

International rules for freedom of expression

The rules for freedom of expression in most democratic countries are influenced by
international human rights conventions, which are binding on those states that have
acceded to them. Freedom of expression is also guaranteed in other central human rights
documents, including the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, which
stipulates in Article 19 that everyone has the right to hold an opinion and express it orally,
in writing or in visual form. A corresponding right is laid down in Article 19 in the
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which was drafted in 1966. The rules regarding
freedom of expression are worded slightly differently in the European Convention for the
Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (the European Convention on
Human Rights) of 4 November 1950. Article 10 states that everyone has the right to
freedom of expression and that freedom to receive and impart information and ideas is a
part of freedom of expression. The European Convention on Human Rights has applied as
Swedish law since 1995.

2. Freedom of information

Freedom of information is an extension of freedom of speech, a fundamental human

right recognized in international law, which is today understood more generally
as freedom of expression in any medium, be it orally, in writing, print, through
the Internet or through art forms. This means that the protection of freedom of speech as a
right includes not only the content, but also the means of expression

Freedom of information also refers to the right to privacy in the content of

the Internet and information technology. As with the right to freedom of expression,
the right to privacy is a recognized human rights and freedom of information acts as an
extension to this right. Lastly, freedom of information can include opposition to
patents, opposition to copyrights or opposition to intellectual property in general.

It is the right of a citizen to be informed in writing if a governmental agency holds certain

information and to request its disclosure. If refused, he or she can demand to be given the
cause of refusal in writing.

3. Exceptions to Freedom of Information

On November 24, 2016, when the executive order took effect, the 166 exceptions submitted
by the DOJ and OSG were trimmed down to nine exceptions, as follows:

1. Information covered by Executive privilege

2. Privileged information relating to national security, defense or international relations
3. Information concerning law enforcement and protection of public and personal safety
4. Information deemed confidential for the protection of the privacy of persons and certain
individuals such as minors, victims of crimes, or the accused
5. Information, documents or records known by reason of official capacity and are deemed
as confidential, including those submitted or disclosed by entities to government agencies,
tribunals, boards, or officers, in relation to the performance of their functions, or to
inquiries or investigation conducted by them in the exercise of their administrative,
regulatory of quasi-judicial powers
6. Prejudicial premature disclosure
7. Records of proceedings or information from proceedings which, pursuant to law or
relevant rules and regulations, are treated as confidential or privileged
8. Matters considered confidential under banking and finance laws, and their amendatory
laws
9. Other exceptions to the right to information under laws, jurisprudence, rules and
regulations
CASES:

Pearl & Dean (Phil.), Incorporated v. Shoemart, Incorporated

G.R. No. 148222, August 15, 2003

Facts: Pearl & Dean (P&D) is engaged in the manufacture of advertising display units
referred to as light boxes. These units utilize specially printed posters sandwiched between
plastic sheets and illuminated with backlights. It was able to secure registration over these
illuminated display units. The advertising light boxes were marketed under the trademark
“Poster Ads”.
In 1985, P&D negotiated with defendant Shoemart, Inc. (SMI) for the lease and
installation of the light boxes in SM North Edsa. However, since SM North Edsa was under
construction, SMI offered as alternative SM Makati and Cubao. During the signing of the
Contract, SMI only returned the Contract with SM Makati. Manager of petitioner reminded
SMI that their agreement includes SM Cubao. However, SMI did not bother to reply. Instead,
respondent informed petitioner that they are rescinding the contract for SM Makati due to
non-performance.
Two years later, SMI engaged the services of EYD Rainbow Advertising to make the
light boxes. These were delivered in a staggered basis and installed at SM Megamall and SM
City. In 1989, petitioner received reports that exact copy of its light boxes was installed by
SMI. It further discovered that North Edsa Marketing Inc. (NEMI), sister company of SMI, was
set up primarily to sell advertising space in lighted display units located in SMI’s different
branches. Petitioner sent letters to respondents asking them to cease using the light boxes
and the discontinued use of the trademark “Poster Ads”.
Claiming that SMI and NEMI failed to meet its demand, petitioner filed a case for
infringement of trademark and copy right, unfair competition and damages. SMI maintained
that it independently developed its poster panels using commonly known techniques and
available technology without notice of or reference to P&D’s copyright. In addition, it said
that registration of “Poster Ads” obtained by petitioner was only for stationeries such as
letterheads, envelopes and the like. “Poster Ads” is a generic term which cannot be
appropriated as trademark, and, as such, registration of such mark is invalid. It also stressed
that P&D is not entitled to the reliefs sought because the advertising display units contained
no copyright notice as provided for by law.
RTC found SMI and NEMI jointly and severally liable for infringement of copyright
and trademark. CA reversed saying that it agreed with SMI that what was copyrighted was
the technical drawings only and not the light boxes. Light boxes cannot be considered as
either prints, pictorial illustrations, advertising copies, labels, tags or box wraps, to be
properly classified as copyrightable class “O” work. In addition, CA stressed that the
protective mantle of the Trademark Law extends only to the goods used by the first user as
specified in its certificate of registration. The registration of the trademark “Poster Ads”
covers only stationeries such as letterheads, envelopes and calling cards and newsletter.

ISSUES: (1) If the engineering or technical drawings of an advertising display unit are
granted copyright protection is the light box depicted in such drawings ipso facto also
protected by such copyright? (2) Should the light box be registered separately? (3) Can the
owner of the registered trademark legally prevent others from using such mark if it is mere
abbreviation of a term descriptive of his goods, services or business?

Held:
1. No. Copyright is purely statutory. As such, the rights are limited to what the statute
confers. It may be obtained and enjoyed only with respect to the subjects and by the
persons, and on the terms and conditions specified in the statute. Accordingly, it can
cover only the works falling within the statutory enumeration or description.
Petitioner secured copyright under classification class “O” work. Thus, copyright
protection extended only to the technical drawings and not to the light box itself
because the latter was not at all in the category of “prints, pictorial illustrations,
advertising copies, labels, tags and box wraps.
What the law does not include, it excludes, and for the good reason: the light
box was not a literary or artistic piece which could be copyrighted under the
copyright law. And no less clearly, neither could the lack of statutory authority to
make the light box copyrightable be remedied by the simplistic act of entitling the
copyright certificate issued by the National Library as “Advertising Display Units”.
It must be noted that copyright is confined to literary and artistic works which
are original intellectual creations in the literary and artistic domain protected from
the moment of their creation.

2. Yes. Petitioner never secured a patent for the light boxes. It therefore acquired no
patent rights which could have protected its invention, if in fact it really was. And
because it had no patent, petitioner could not legally prevent anyone from
manufacturing or commercially using the contraption. To be able to effectively and
legally preclude others from copying and profiting from the invention, a patent is a
primordial requirement. No patent, no protection. The ultimate goal of a patent
system is to bring new designs and technologies into the public through disclosure.
Ideas, once, disclosed to the public without protection of a valid patent, are subject to
appropriation without significant restraint.
The Patent Law has a three-fold purpose: first, patent law seeks to foster and
reward invention; second, it promotes disclosures of inventions to stimulate further
innovation and to permit the public to practice the invention once the patent expires;
third, the stringent requirements for patent protection seek to ensure that ideas in
the public domain remain there for the free use of the public. It is only after an
exhaustive examination by the patent office that patent is issued. Therefore, not
having gone through the arduous examination for patents, petitioner cannot exclude
other s from the manufacture, sale or commercial use of the light boxes on the sole
basis of its copyright certificate over the technical drawings.

3. Court agrees with CA that the certificate of registration issued by the Director of
Patents can confer the exclusive right to use its own symbol only to those goods
specified in the certificate, subject to any conditions and limitations specified in the
certificate. One who has adopted and used a trademark on his goods does not prevent
the adoption and use of the same trademark by others for products which are of a
different description.
 Assuming arguendo that “Poster Ads” could validly qualify as a trademark, the
failure of petitioner to secure a trademark registration for specific use on the light
boxes meant that there could not have been any trademark infringement since
registration was an essential element thereof.
There is no evidence that petitioner’s use of “poster Ads” was distinctive or
well-known. As noted by CA, petitioner’s expert witness himself had testified that
“Poster Ads” was not too generic a name. SO it was difficult to identify it with any
company. This fact also prevented the application of the doctrine of secondary
meaning. “Poster Ads” was generic and incapable of being used as a trademark
because it was used in the field of poster advertising the very business engaged in by
petitioner. Secondary meaning means that a word or phrase originally incapable of
exclusive appropriation with reference to an article in the market might nevertheless
have been used for so long and so exclusively by one producer with reference to his
article that , in the trade and to that branch of the purchasing public, the word or
phrase has come to mean that the article was his property.
PETITION WAS DENIED.
A. Right to Information
7 CHAVEZ vs PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION ON GOOD GOVERNMENT

Facts:
-Petitioner Francisco I Chavez (in his capacity as taxpayer, citizen and a former government
official) initiated this original action seeking
(1) to prohibit and “enjoin respondents [PCGG and its chairman] from privately
entering into, perfecting and/or executing any agreement with the heirs of the late
President Ferdinand E. Marcos . . . relating to and concerning the properties and assets of
Ferdinand Marcos located in the Philippines and/or abroad — including the so-called
Marcos gold hoard"; and
(2) to “compel respondent[s] to make public all negotiations and agreement, be they
ongoing or perfected, and all documents related to or relating to such negotiations and
agreement between the PCGG and the Marcos heirs."
-Chavez is the same person initiated the prosecution of the Marcoses and their cronies who
committed unmitigated plunder of the public treasury and the systematic subjugation of
the country's economy; he says that what impelled him to bring this action were several
news reports 2 bannered in a number of broadsheets sometime in September 1997. These
news items referred to (1) the alleged discovery of billions of dollars of Marcos assets
deposited in various coded accounts in Swiss banks; and (2) the reported execution of a
compromise, between the government (through PCGG) and the Marcos heirs, on how to
split or share these assets.
-PETITIONER DEMANDS that respondents make public any and all negotiations and
agreements pertaining to PCGG's task of recovering the Marcoses' ill-gotten wealth. He
claims that any compromise on the alleged billions of ill-gotten wealth involves an issue of
"paramount public interest," since it has a "debilitating effect on the country's economy"
that would be greatly prejudicial to the national interest of the Filipino people. Hence, the
people in general have a right to know the transactions or deals being contrived and
effected by the government.
-RESPONDENT ANSWERS that they do not deny forging a compromise agreement with the
Marcos heirs. They claim, though, that petitioner's action is premature, because there is no
showing that he has asked the PCGG to disclose the negotiations and the Agreements. And
even if he has, PCGG may not yet be compelled to make any disclosure, since the proposed
terms and conditions of the Agreements have not become effective and binding.
-PETITIONER INVOKES
Sec. 7 [Article III]. The right of the people to information on matters of public concern
shall be recognized. Access to official records, and to documents, and papers pertaining to
official acts, transactions, or decisions, as well as to government research data used as basis
for policy development, shall be afforded the citizen, subject to such limitations as may be
provided by law.
Sec. 28 [Article II]. Subject to reasonable conditions prescribed by law, the State adopts
and implements a policy of full public disclosure of all its transactions involving public
interest.
-RESPONDENT ANSWERS that the above constitutional provisions refer to completed and
operative official acts, not to those still being considered.
Issue: Whether or not the Court could require the PCGG to disclose to the public the
details of any agreement, perfected or not, with the Marcoses.
Ruling: “WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The General and Supplemental
Agreement dated December 28, 1993, which PCGG and the Marcos heirs entered into are
hereby declared NULL AND VOID for being contrary to law and the Constitution.
Respondent PCGG, its officers and all government functionaries and officials who are or
may be directly ot indirectly involved in the recovery of the alleged ill-gotten wealth of the
Marcoses and their associates are DIRECTED to disclose to the public the terms of any
proposed compromise settlment, as well as the final agreement, relating to such alleged ill-
gotten wealth, in accordance with the discussions embodied in this Decision. No
pronouncement as to cost.”
RD:
- The "information" and the "transactions" referred to in the subject provisions of the
Constitution have as yet no defined scope and extent. There are no specific laws
prescribing the exact limitations within which the right may be exercised or the correlative
state duty may be obliged. However, the following are some of the recognized restrictions:
(1) national security matters and intelligence information
- there is a governmental privilege against public disclosure with respect to state
secrets regarding military, diplomatic and other national security matters. 24 But
where there is no need to protect such state secrets, the privilege may not be
invoked to withhold documents and other information, 25 provided that they are
examined "in strict confidence" and given "scrupulous protection."
(2) trade secrets and banking transactions
-trade or industrial secrets (pursuant to the Intellectual Property Code 27 and other
related laws) as well as banking transactions (pursuant to the Secrecy of Bank
Deposits Act 28) are also exempted from compulsory disclosure
(3) criminal matters
- Also excluded are classified law enforcement matters, such as those relating to the
apprehension, the prosecution and the detention of criminals, which courts neither
may nor inquire into prior to such arrest, detention and prosecution. Efforts at
effective law enforcement would be seriously jeopardized by free public access to,
for example, police information regarding rescue operations, the whereabouts of
fugitives, or leads on covert criminal activities.
(4) other confidential information.
- The Ethical Standards Act 31 further prohibits public officials and employees from
using or divulging "confidential or classified information officially known to them by
reason of their office and not made available to the public." Other acknowledged
limitations to information access include diplomatic correspondence, closed door
Cabinet meetings and executive sessions of either house of Congress, as well as the
internal deliberations of the Supreme Court.
- In Valmonte v. Belmonte Jr., the Court emphasized that the information sought must be
"matters of public concern," access to which may be limited by law. Similarly, the state
policy of full public disclosure extends only to "transactions involving public interest" and
may also be "subject to reasonable conditions prescribed by law."
- As to the meanings of the terms "public interest" and "public concern," the Court, in
Legaspi v. Civil Service Commission, elucidated: “In determining whether or not a
particular information is of public concern there is no rigid test which can be applied. “
“Public concern" like "public interest" is a term that eludes exact definition. Both terms
embrace a broad spectrum of subjects which the public may want to know, either because
these directly affect their lives, or simply because such matters naturally arouse the
interest of an ordinary citizen. In the final analysis, it is for the courts to determine on a
case by case basis whether the matter at issue is of interest or importance, as it relates to or
affects the public.”
-As to whether or not the above cited constitutional provisions guarantee access to
information regarding ongoing negotiations or proposals prior to the final agreement, this
same clarification was sought and clearly addressed by the constitutional commissioners
during their deliberations,
MR. SUAREZ. And when we say "transactions" which should be distinguished from
contracts, agreements, or treaties or whatever, does the Gentleman refer to the steps
leading to the consummation of the contract, or does he refer to the contract itself?
MR. OPLE. The "transactions" used here, I suppose, is generic and, therefore, it can
cover both steps leading to a contract, and already a consummated contract, Mr.
Presiding Officer.
MR. SUAREZ. This contemplates inclusion of negotiations leading to the consummation
of the transaction?
MR. OPLE. Yes, subject to reasonable safeguards on the national interest.
- Considering the intent of the Constitution, the Court believes that it is incumbent upon the
PCGG and its officers, as well as other government representatives, to disclose sufficient
public information on any proposed settlement they have decided to take up with the
ostensible owners and holders of ill-gotten wealth. Such information, though, must pertain
to definite propositions of the government, not necessarily to intra-agency or inter-agency
recommendations or communications during the stage when common assertions are still in
the process of being formulated or are in the "exploratory" stage. There is a need, of course,
to observe the same restrictions on disclosure of information in general, as discussed
above— such as on matters involving national security, diplomatic or foreign relations,
intelligence and other classified information.
Gonzalez v. Narvasa

Facts: Petitioner Ramon Gonzales, in his capacity as a citizen and taxpayer, assails the
constitutionality of the creation of the PreparatoryCommission on
Constitutional Reform (PCCR) and of the positions of presidential consultants, advisers and
assistants.

The PCCR was created by Pres. Estrada by virtue of EO 43 in order to study and
recommend proposed amendments and/or revisions to the Constitution, and the manner
of implementing them.

Issue: Whether or not the petitioner has legal standing to file the case

Held: In assailing the constitutionality of EO 43, petitioner asserts his interest as a citizen
and taxpayer.

A citizen acquires standing only if he can establish that he has suffered some actual or
threatened injury as a result of the allegedly illegal conduct of the government; the injury is
fairly traceable to the challenged action; and the injury is likely to be addressed by a
favorable action. Petitioner has not shown that he has sustained or in danger of sustaining
anypersonal injury attributable to the creation of the PCCR and of the positions of
presidential consultants, advisers and assistants. Neither does he claim that his rights
or privileges have been or are in danger of being violated, nor that he shall be subjected to
any penalties or burdens as a result of the issues raised.

In his capacity as a taxpayer, a taxpayer is deemed to have the standing to raise a

constitutional issue when it is established that public funds have disbursed in
alleged contravention of the law or the Constitution. Thus, payer’s action is properly
brought only when there is an exercise by Congress of its taxing or spending power. In the
creation of PCCR, it is apparent that there is no exercise by Congress of its taxing or
spending power. The PCCR was created by the President by virtue of EO 43 as amended by
EO 70. The appropriations for the PCCR were authorized by the President, not by Congress.
The funds used for the PCCR were taken from funds intended for the Office of the
President, in the exercise of the Chief Executive’s power to transfer funds pursuant to Sec.
25(5) of Art. VI of the Constitution. As to the creation of the positions of presidential
consultants, advisers and assistants, the petitioner has not alleged thenecessary facts so as
to enable the Court to determine if he possesses a taxpayer’s interest in this particular
issue.
Bantay Republic Act. Vs. COMELEC (G.R. No. 177271) Digest

FACTS:
Before the Court are two consolidated petitions for certiorari and mandamus to nullify and
set aside certain issuances of the Commission on Elections (Comelec) respecting party-list
groups which have manifested their intention to participate in the party-list elections on May
14, 2007.
A number of organized groups filed the necessary manifestations and subsequently were
accredited by the Comelec to participate in the 2007 elections. Bantay Republic Act (BA-RA
7941) and the Urban Poor for Legal Reforms (UP-LR) filed with the Comelec an Urgent
Petition seeking to disqualify the nominees of certain party-list organizations. Meanwhile
petitioner Rosales, in G.R. No. 177314, addressed 2 letters to the Director of the Comelec’s
Law Department requesting a list of that groups’ nominees. Evidently unbeknownst then to
Ms. Rosales, et al., was the issuance of Comelec en banc Resolution 07-0724 under date April
3, 2007 virtually declaring the nominees’ names confidential and in net effect denying
petitioner Rosales’ basic disclosure request. According to COMELEC, there is nothing in R.A.
7941 that requires the Comelec to disclose the names of nominees, and that party list
elections must not be personality oriented according to Chairman Abalos.
In the first petition (G.R. No. 177271), BA-RA 7941 and UP-LR assail the Comelec resolutions
accrediting private respondents Biyaheng Pinoy et al., to participate in the forthcoming
party-list elections without simultaneously determining whether or not their respective
nominees possess the requisite qualifications defined in R.A. No. 7941, or the "Party-List
System Act" and belong to the marginalized and underrepresented sector each seeks to.
In the second petition (G.R. No. 177314), petitioners Loreta Ann P. Rosales, Kilosbayan
Foundation and Bantay Katarungan Foundation impugn Comelec Resolution dated April 3,
2007.
While both petitions commonly seek to compel the Comelec to disclose or publish the names
of the nominees of the various party-list groups named in the petitions, BA-RA 7941 and UP-
LR have the additional prayers that the 33 private respondents named therein be "declare[d]
as unqualified to participate in the party-list elections and that the Comelec be enjoined from
allowing respondent groups from participating in the elections.
ISSUE:
1. Can the Court cancel the accreditation accorded by the Comelec to the respondent party-
list groups named in their petition on the ground that these groups and their respective
nominees do not appear to be qualified.
2. Whether respondent Comelec, by refusing to reveal the names of the nominees of the
various party-list groups, has violated the right to information and free access to documents
as guaranteed by the Constitution; and
3. Whether respondent Comelec is mandated by the Constitution to disclose to the public the
names of said nominees.
Ruling:
1. The Court is unable to grant the desired plea of petitioners BA-RA 7941 and UP-LR for
cancellation of accreditation on the grounds thus advanced in their petition. The exercise
would require the Court to make a factual determination, a matter which is outside the office
of judicial review by way of special civil action for certiorari. In certiorari proceedings, the
Court is not called upon to decide factual issues and the case must be decided on the
undisputed facts on record. The sole function of a writ of certiorari is to address issues of
want of jurisdiction or grave abuse of discretion and does not include a review of the
tribunal’s evaluation of the evidence. Also, the petitioner’s posture that the COMELEC
committed grave abuse of discretion when it granted the assailed accreditations without
simultaneously determining the qualifications of their nominees is without basis, Nowhere
in R .A. No. 7941 is there a requirement that the qualification of a party-list nominee be
determined simultaneously with the accreditation of an organization.
2. Section 7, Article III of the Constitution, viz:
Sec.7. The right of the people to information on matters of public concern shall be recognized.
Access to official records, and to documents, and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions,
or decisions, as well to government research data used as basis for policy development, shall be
afforded the citizen, subject to such limitations as may be provided by law.
Section 28, Article II of the Constitution reading:
Sec. 28. Subject to reasonable conditions prescribed by law, the State adopts and implements a
policy of full public disclosure of all its transactions involving public interest.
As may be noted, no national security or like concerns is involved in the disclosure of the
names of the nominees of the partylist groups in question. Doubtless, the Comelec committed
grave abuse of discretion in refusing the legitimate demands of the petitioners for a list of
the nominees of the party-list groups subject of their respective petitions. Mandamus,
therefore, lies.
The last sentence of Section 7 of R.A. 7941 reading: "[T]he names of the party-list nominees
shall not be shown on the certified list" is certainly not a justifying card for the Comelec to
deny the requested disclosure. To us, the prohibition imposed on the Comelec under said
Section 7 is limited in scope and duration, meaning, that it extends only to the certified list
which the same provision requires to be posted in the polling places on election day. To
stretch the coverage of the prohibition to the absolute is to read into the law something that
is not intended. As it were, there is absolutely nothing in R.A. No. 7941 that prohibits the
Comelec from disclosing or even publishing through mediums other than the "Certified List"
the names of the party-list nominees. The Comelec obviously misread the limited
nondisclosure aspect of the provision as an absolute bar to public disclosure before the May
2007 elections. The interpretation thus given by the Comelec virtually tacks an
unconstitutional dimension on the last sentence of Section 7 of R.A. No. 7941.
WHEREFORE, the petition in G.R. No. 177271 is partly DENIED insofar as it seeks to nullify
the accreditation of the respondents named therein. However, insofar as it seeks to compel
the Comelec to disclose or publish the names of the nominees of party-list groups, sectors or
organizations accredited to participate in the May 14, 2007 elections, the same petition and
the petition in G.R. No. 177314 are GRANTED.
B. Right to Privacy and Confidentialty
OPLE V. TORRES

FACTS:

- Sen. Blas Ople filed a petition to invalidate Administrative Order no. 308 also known as The
Adoption Of A National Computerized Identification Reference System issued by Pres. Fidel
V. Ramos. The goal of A.O. no. 308 is to provide a convenient way of transacting business
with basic service and social security providers and other governmental instrumentalities.

- Petitioner contends that the establishment of a national computerized identification

reference system requires a legislative act. He claims that A.O. no. 308 is not a mere
administrative order, but a law, hence beyond the power of the President to issue which
makes the act unconstitutional. He further argued that the appropriation of public funds for
the implementation of the act is also beyond the power of the president for such is within
the authority of the congress. Lastly, Ople asserted that the implementation of A.O. no. 308
will violate the rights if the citizens to privacy.

- Three main purposes of the ID system presented by the respondents: (1) streamline and
speed up the implementation of basic government services, (2) eradicate fraud by avoiding
duplication of service, and (3) generate population data for development planning. The ID
system will use biometrics which requires the use of an individual’s physiological and
behavioral characteristic that will be stored in a computer. Each one will be issued a Personal
Identification Number (PIN) and all of his transactions may be recorded.

- Respondents argued that AO 308 was issued within the executive and administrative
powers of the President without encroaching on the legislative powers of the congress and
that fund necessary for the implementation of the ID reference system may be sourced from
the budgets of the concerned agencies

ISSUE: Whether or not A.O. No. 308 violates the right of privacy.

HELD:

Yes. The right to privacy as such is accorded recognition independently of its identification
with liberty; in itself, it is fully deserving of constitutional protection.

The right of privacy is guaranteed in several provisions of the Constitution:

"Sections 3 (1), 1, 2, 6, 8 and 17 of the Bill of Rights

"Sec. 3. The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except upon
lawful order of the court, or when public safety or order requires otherwise as prescribed
by law."
"Sec. 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law,
nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws."
"Sec. 2. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects
against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall
be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable
cause to be determined personally by the judge after examination under oath or
affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and particularly
describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized."
"Sec. 6. The liberty of abode and of changing the same within the limits prescribed by law
shall not be impaired except upon lawful order of the court. Neither shall the right to travel
be impaired except in the interest of national security, public safety, or public health, as
may be provided by law."
"Sec. 8. The right of the people, including those employed in the public and private sectors,
to form unions, associations, or societies for purposes not contrary to law shall not be
abridged."

"Sec. 17. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself."

The right to privacy is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution, hence, it is the
burden of government to show that A.O. No. 308 is justified by some compelling state
interest and that it is narrowly drawn. A.O. No. 308 is predicated on two considerations: (1)
the need to provide our citizens and foreigners with the facility to conveniently transact
business with basic service and social security providers and other government
instrumentalities and (2) the need to reduce, if not totally eradicate, fraudulent
transactions and misrepresentations by persons seeking basic services. It is debatable
whether these interests are compelling enough to warrant the issuance of A.O. No. 308.

But what is not arguable is the broadness, the vagueness, the overbreadth of A.O. No. 308
which if implemented will put our people's right to privacy in clear and present danger.
The possibilities of abuse and misuse of the PRN, biometrics and computer technology are
accentuated when we consider that the individual lacks control over what can be read or
placed on his ID, much less verify the correctness of the data encoded. They threaten the
very abuses that the Bill of Rights seeks to prevent.
DISINI v. SECRETARY OF JUSTICE
G.R. No. 203335

FACTS OF THE CASE

These consolidated petitions seek to declare several provisions of R.A. 10175, known as The
Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 unconstitutional and void. This case holds a handful of
petitions seeking the removal of different sections deemed to be infringing on privacy rights
and more.
For this instance, the focus is the creation of the “Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating
Center” which, in the same breath, promulgates powers and functions to the agents of the
said center. “Petitioners mainly contend that Congress invalidly delegated its power when it
gave the Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center (CICC) the power to formulate a
national cybersecurity plan without any sufficient standards or parameters for it to follow.”
“Cybersecurity refers to the collection of tools, policies, risk management approaches,
actions, training, best practices, assurance and technologies that can be used to protect cyber
environment and organization and user’s assets. This definition serves as the parameters
within which CICC should work in formulating the cybersecurity plan.”
ISSUES/GROUNDS:
1. Sections 4(c)(4), 6, 7, 12 and 19 of The Cybercrime Act violate the petitioners’
constitutionally protected rights to freedom of expression, due process, equal
protection, privacy of communications, as well as the Constitutional sanctions against
double jeopardy, undue delegation of legislative authority and the right against
unreasonable searches and seizure;

o • Sections 6 and 7 of the Cybercrime Act more than doubles the liability for
imprisonment for any violation of existing penal laws are in violation of the
petitioners’ right against Double Jeopardy;

o • Section 12 of the Cybercrime Act, which permits the NBI and the PNP “with
due cause” to engage in real time collection of traffic data without the benefit
of the intervention of a judge, violates the Petitioners’ Constitutionally-
protected right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizure as well as
the right to the privacy of communications;

o • Section 19 of the Cybercrime Act, which authorizes the Respondent Secretary

of DOJ to block or restrict access to any content upon a prima facie finding that
the same violates the law, contains an undue delegation of legislative
authority, infringes upon the judicial power of the judiciary, and violates the
Petitioners’ Constitutionally-protected right to due process and freedom of
expression; and

o • Section 4(c)(4) defines libel as a cybercrime and in relation to Section 6 of

the law increased the penalty from 6 months to 4 years and 2 months to the
greater period of 6 years to 10 years, infringes upon the right to freedom of
 expression and also restricts the freedom of the press. Under Section 12,
a prima facie finding by the Secretary of DOJ can trigger an order directed at
service providers to block access to the said material without the benefit of a
trial or a conviction. Thus, RA 10175 infringes upon the right to freedom of
expression and also restricts the freedom of the press. The increased penalties,
plus the ease by which allegedly libelous materials can be removed from
access, work together as a “chilling effect” upon protected speech.

2. No other plain, speedy, or adequate remedy in the court of law, and that this Petition
is therefore cognizable by the SC’s judicial power under Article VIII, Section 1 par. 2
of the Constitution and pursuant to Rule 65, Sec. 1 of the 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure, as amended.

ARGUMENTS/DISCUSSIONS:
1. The Cybercrime Act Violates Free Speech:

o • imposes heavier penalties for online libel than paper-based libel; single act
of online libel will result in two convictions penalized separately under the RP
and the Cybercrime Act;

o online libel under the Cybercrime Act will ensure the imprisonment of the
accused and for a much longer period. Such changes will result in a chilling
effect upon the freedom of speech;

o • with the passage of the Cybercrime Act, Senator Vicente Sotto III’s earlier
threat to criminally prosecute all bloggers and internet users who were critical
of his alleged plagiarism of online materials for use in his speech against the
Reproductive Health Bill became real; threat of criminal prosecution under RA
10175 will work to preclude people such as Petitioners from posting social
commentaries online, thus creating a “chilling effect” upon the freedom of
expression;

o • gives the DOJ Secretary blanket authority to restrain and block access to
content whether authored by private citizens or the organized press sans any
hearing of any kind but merely upon a mere prima facie showing that a
particular Internet article constitutes online libel;

o • respondents must demonstrate how the Cybercrime Act will fare under strict
scrutiny

2. Sections 6 and 7 of the Cybercrime Act violate the Double Jeopardy and Equal
Protection Clauses of the Constitution:
 o • Persons who commit crimes using information and communication
technologies (ICTs) face the possibility of being imprisoned more than double
the imprisonment laid down in the RPC or special law, simply by the passage
of the Cybercrime Act;

o • the cybercrimes defined and punished under Section 6 of the Act are
absolutely identical to the crimes defined in the RPC and special laws which
raises the possibility that an accused will be punished twice for the same
offense in violation of the Constitution;

o • Congress created a class of offenders who commit crimes “by, through or

with the use” of ICTs in violation of the equal protection clause

3. The Real Time Collection of Traffic Date Violate the Right to Privacy and the Right
Against Unreasonable Searches and Seizure:

o • No compelling state interest that justifies real time collection of data; the
authority vested on the Philippine National Police and the National Bureau of
Investigation to collect data is not bounded by any reasonable standard except
“due cause” which presumably, the PNP and NBI will determine for itself;

o • While the privacy of suspected terrorists, through the Human Security Act,
are protected by the intervention of the Court of Appeals before surveillance
operations are conducted, the privacy of all citizens may be infringed without
judicial participation in the Cybercrime Act;

o • Neither the PNP nor the NBI is required to justify the incursion into the right
to privacy;

o No limits imposed upon the PNP or the NBI since they can lawfully collect
traffic data at all times without interruption;

o • No stated justification for this warrant-free unlimited incursion into the

privacy of citizens

4. The Respondent DOJ Secretary’s Take Down Authority under Section 19 of the
Cybercrime Act violates Due Process and is an Undue Delegation of Legislative
Authority

o • The DOJ Secretary’s overwhelming powers to order the restriction or

blocking of access to certain content upon a mere prima facie finding without
any need for a judicial determination is in clear violation of petitioners’
Constitutionally protected right to due process;
o • The Cybercrime Act contemplates that the respondent DOJ Secretary will be
“judge, jury and executioner” of all cybercrime-related complaints;

o To consider that all penal provisions in all specials laws are cybercrimes under
Section 6, it • follows that:

1. Complaints filed by intellectual property rights owners may be acted

upon the Respondent DOJ Secretary to block access to websites and
content upon a mere prima facie showing of an infringement;

2. Foreign sites (e.g. Amazon.com) offering goods on retail to Philippine

citizens may be blocked for violating the Retail Trade Law;

3. Foreign service providers such as Skype may be blocked from offering

voice services without securing a license from the National
Telecommunications Communication;

4. YouTube video may be blocked for presumably violating the IP Code.

o • The Cybercrime Act fails the two tests laid down by the Court in Abakada
Guro Party List v. Purisima (GR No. 166715) to determine the validity of
delegation of legislative power: (1) the completeness test and (2) the sufficient
standard test

1. Nowhere in the Cybercrime Act’s declaration of policy does it lay down

the legislative policy with respect to the blocking of content. No limits
upon the takedown power of the respondent DOJ Secretary;

2. Prima facie standard is not enough to prevent the DOJ Secretary from
exercising infinite discretion and becoming the supreme authority in
the Philippine Internet landscape.
RHONDA AVE S. VIVARES and SPS. MARGARITA and DAVID SUZARA, Petitioners, v. ST.
THERESA’S COLLEGE, MYLENE RHEZA T. ESCUDERO, and JOHN DOES, Respondents.

G.R. No. 202666 September 29, 2014

TOPIC: right to informational privacy, writ of habeas data

PONENTE: Velasco, Jr.
PREFATORY:
The individual’s desire for privacy is never absolute, since participation in society is an
equally powerful desire. Thus each individual is continually engaged in a personal
adjustment process in which he balances the desire for privacy with the desire for disclosure
and communication of himself to others, in light of the environmental conditions and social
norms set by the society in which he lives.
– Alan Westin, Privacy and Freedom (1967)
FACTS:
Julia and Julienne, both minors, were graduating high school students at St. Theresa’s College
(STC), Cebu City. Sometime in January 2012, while changing into their swimsuits for a beach
party they were about to attend, Julia and Julienne, along with several others, took digital
pictures of themselves clad only in their undergarments. These pictures were then uploaded
by Angela on her Facebook profile.
At STC, Mylene Escudero, a computer teacher at STC’s high school department, learned from
her students that some seniors at STC posted pictures online, depicting themselves from the
waist up, dressed only in brassieres. Escudero then asked her students if they knew who the
girls in the photos are. In turn, they readily identified Julia and Julienne, among others.
Using STC’s computers, Escudero’s students logged in to their respective personal Facebook
accounts and showed her photos of the identified students, which include: (a) Julia and
Julienne drinking hard liquor and smoking cigarettes inside a bar; and (b) Julia and Julienne
along the streets of Cebu wearing articles of clothing that show virtually the entirety of their
black brassieres.
Also, Escudero’s students claimed that there were times when access to or the availability of
the identified students’ photos was not confined to the girls’ Facebook friends, but were, in
fact, viewable by any Facebook user.
Investigation ensued. Then Julia, Julienne and other students involved were barred from
joining the commencement exercises.
Petitioners, who are the respective parents of the minors, filed a Petition for the Issuance of
a Writ of Habeas Data. RTC dismissed the petition for habeas data on the following grounds:
1. Petitioners failed to prove the existence of an actual or threatened violation of the
minors’ right to privacy, one of the preconditions for the issuance of the writ of habeas
data.

2. The photos, having been uploaded on Facebook without restrictions as to who may
view them, lost their privacy in some way.

3. STC gathered the photographs through legal means and for a legal purpose, that is,
the implementation of the school’s policies and rules on discipline.
ISSUE:
Whether or not there was indeed an actual or threatened violation of the right to privacy in
the life, liberty, or security of the minors involved in this case. (Is there a right to
informational privacy in online social network activities of its users?)
HELD: (Note that you can skip the preliminary discussions and check the ruling at the latter
part)
Nature of Writ of Habeas Data
It is a remedy available to any person whose right to privacy in life, liberty or security is
violated or threatened by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a
private individual or entity engaged in the gathering, collecting or storing of data or
information regarding the person, family, home and correspondence of the aggrieved party.
It is an independent and summary remedy designed to protect the image, privacy, honor,
information, and freedom of information of an individual, and to provide a forum to enforce
one’s right to the truth and to informational privacy. It seeks to protect a person’s right to
control information regarding oneself, particularly in instances in which such information is
being collected through unlawful means in order to achieve unlawful ends.
In developing the writ of habeas data, the Court aimed to protect an individual’s right to
informational privacy, among others. A comparative law scholar has, in fact, defined habeas
data as “a procedure designed to safeguard individual freedom from abuse in the
information age.”
Issuance of writ of habeas data; requirements
1. The existence of a person’s right to informational privacy

2. An actual or threatened violation of the right to privacy in life, liberty or security of

the victim (proven by at least substantial evidence)

Note that the writ will not issue on the basis merely of an alleged unauthorized access to
information about a person.
The writ of habeas data is not only confined to cases of extralegal killings and enforced
disappearances
The writ of habeas data can be availed of as an independent remedy to enforce one’s right to
privacy, more specifically the right to informational privacy. The remedies against the
violation of such right can include the updating, rectification, suppression or destruction of
the database or information or files in possession or in control of respondents. Clearly then,
the privilege of the Writ of Habeas Data may also be availed of in cases outside of extralegal
killings and enforced disappearances.
Meaning of “engaged” in the gathering, collecting or storing of data or information
Habeas data is a protection against unlawful acts or omissions of public officials and of
private individuals or entities engaged in gathering, collecting, or storing data about the
aggrieved party and his or her correspondences, or about his or her family.
Such individual or entity need not be in the business of collecting or storing data.
To “engage” in something is different from undertaking a business endeavour. To
“engage” means “to do or take part in something.” It does not necessarily mean that the
activity must be done in pursuit of a business. What matters is that the person or entity
must be gathering, collecting or storing said data or information about the aggrieved party
or his or her family. Whether such undertaking carries the element of regularity, as when
one pursues a business, and is in the nature of a personal endeavour, for any other reason or
even for no reason at all, is immaterial and such will not prevent the writ from getting to said
person or entity.
As such, the writ of habeas data may be issued against a school like STC.
Right to informational privacy
Right to informational privacy is the right of individuals to control information about
themselves. Several commentators regarding privacy and social networking sites, however,
all agree that given the millions of OSN users, “in this Social Networking environment,
privacy is no longer grounded in reasonable expectations, but rather in some theoretical
protocol better known as wishful thinking.” So the underlying question now is: Up to what
extent is the right to privacy protected in OSNs?

Facebook Privacy Tools

To address concerns about privacy, but without defeating its purpose, Facebook was armed
with different privacy tools designed to regulate the accessibility of a user’s profile as well
as information uploaded by the user. In H v. W, the South Gauteng High Court recognized this
ability of the users to “customize their privacy settings,” but did so with this caveat:
“Facebook states in its policies that, although it makes every effort to protect a user’s
information, these privacy settings are not foolproof.”
For instance, a Facebook user can regulate the visibility and accessibility of digital images
(photos), posted on his or her personal bulletin or “wall,” except for the user’s profile picture
and ID, by selecting his or her desired privacy setting:
1. Public – the default setting; every Facebook user can view the photo;

2. Friends of Friends – only the user’s Facebook friends and their friends can view the
photo;

3. Friends – only the user’s Facebook friends can view the photo;

4. Custom – the photo is made visible only to particular friends and/or networks of the
Facebook user; and

5. Only Me – the digital image can be viewed only by the user.

The foregoing are privacy tools, available to Facebook users, designed to set up barriers to
broaden or limit the visibility of his or her specific profile content, statuses, and photos,
among others, from another user’s point of view. In other words, Facebook extends its users
an avenue to make the availability of their Facebook activities reflect their choice as to
“when and to what extent to disclose facts about themselves – and to put others in the
position of receiving such confidences.”
LONE ISSUE:
NONE. The Supreme Court held that STC did not violate petitioners’ daughters’ right to
privacy as the subject digital photos were viewable either by the minors’ Facebook friends,
or by the public at large.
Without any evidence to corroborate the minors’ statement that the images were visible only
to the five of them, and without their challenging Escudero’s claim that the other students
were able to view the photos, their statements are, at best, self-serving, thus deserving scant
consideration.
It is well to note that not one of petitioners disputed Escudero’s sworn account that her
students, who are the minors’ Facebook “friends,” showed her the photos using their own
Facebook accounts. This only goes to show that no special means to be able to view the
allegedly private posts were ever resorted to by Escudero’s students, and that it is
reasonable to assume, therefore, that the photos were, in reality, viewable either by (1) their
Facebook friends, or (2) by the public at large.
Considering that the default setting for Facebook posts is “Public,” it can be surmised that
the photographs in question were viewable to everyone on Facebook, absent any proof that
petitioners’ children positively limited the disclosure of the photograph. If such were the
case, they cannot invoke the protection attached to the right to informational privacy.
US v. Gines-Perez: A person who places a photograph on the Internet precisely intends to
forsake and renounce all privacy rights to such imagery, particularly under circumstances
such as here, where the Defendant did not employ protective measures or devices that would
have controlled access to the Web page or the photograph itself.
United States v. Maxwell: The more open the method of transmission is, the less privacy
one can reasonably expect. Messages sent to the public at large in the chat room or e-mail
that is forwarded from correspondent to correspondent loses any semblance of privacy.
The Honorable Supreme Court continued and held that setting a post’s or profile detail’s
privacy to “Friends” is no assurance that it can no longer be viewed by another user who is
not Facebook friends with the source of the content. The user’s own Facebook friend can
share said content or tag his or her own Facebook friend thereto, regardless of whether the
user tagged by the latter is Facebook friends or not with the former. Also, when the post is
shared or when a person is tagged, the respective Facebook friends of the person who shared
the post or who was tagged can view the post, the privacy setting of which was set at
“Friends.” Thus, it is suggested, that a profile, or even a post, with visibility set at “Friends
Only” cannot easily, more so automatically, be said to be “very private,” contrary to
petitioners’ argument.
No privacy invasion by STC; fault lies with the friends of minors
Respondent STC can hardly be taken to task for the perceived privacy invasion since it was
the minors’ Facebook friends who showed the pictures to Tigol. Respondents were mere
recipients of what were posted. They did not resort to any unlawful means of gathering the
information as it was voluntarily given to them by persons who had legitimate access to the
said posts. Clearly, the fault, if any, lies with the friends of the minors. Curiously enough,
however, neither the minors nor their parents imputed any violation of privacy against the
students who showed the images to Escudero.
Different scenario of setting is set on “Me Only” or “Custom”
Had it been proved that the access to the pictures posted were limited to the original
uploader, through the “Me Only” privacy setting, or that the user’s contact list has been
screened to limit access to a select few, through the “Custom” setting, the result may have
been different, for in such instances, the intention to limit access to the particular post,
instead of being broadcasted to the public at large or all the user’s friends en masse, becomes
more manifest and palpable.
R.A. 8293 (1996) – Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines, Part IV (Law on
Copyright).

PART IV
The Law on Copyright
CHAPTER I
Preliminary Provisions
SECTION 171. Definitions. — For the purpose of this Act, the following terms
have the following meaning:
171.1. "Author" is the natural person who has created the work;
171.2. A "collective work" is a work which has been created by two (2) or
more natural persons at the initiative and under the direction of
another with the understanding that it will be disclosed by the latter
under his own name and that contributing natural persons will not be
identified;
171.3. "Communication to the public" or "communicate to the public" means
the making of a work available to the public by wire or wireless
means in such a way that members of the public may access these
works from a place and time individually chosen by them;
171.4. A "computer" is an electronic or similar device having informationprocessing
capabilities, and a "computer program" is a set of
instructions expressed in words, codes, schemes or in any other
form, which is capable when incorporated in a medium that the
computer can read, of causing the computer to perform or achieve a
particular task or result;
171.5. "Public lending" is the transfer of possession of the original or a copy
of a work or sound recording for a limited period, for non-profit
purposes, by an institution the services of which are available to the
public, such as public library or archive;
171.6. "Public performance", in the case of a work other than an audiovisual
work, is the recitation, playing, dancing, acting or otherwise
performing the work, either directly or by means of any device or
process; in the case of an audiovisual work, the showing of its
images in sequence and the making of the sounds accompanying it
audible; and, in the case of a sound recording, making the recorded
sounds audible at a place or at places where persons outside the
normal circle of a family and that family's closest social
acquaintances are or can be present, irrespective of whether they are
or can be present at the same place and at the same time, or at
different places and/or at different times, and where the performance
can be perceived without the need for communication within the
meaning of Subsection 171.3;
171.7. "Published works" means works, which, with the consent of the
authors, are made available to the public by wire or wireless means
in such a way that members of the public may access these works
from a place and time individually chosen by them: Provided, That
availability of such copies has been such, as to satisfy the reasonable
requirements of the public, having regard to the nature of the work;
171.8. "Rental" is the transfer of the possession of the original or a copy of a
work or a sound recording for a limited period of time, for profitmaking
purposes;
171.9. "Reproduction" is the making of one (1) or more copies of a work or
a sound recording in any manner or form (Sec. 41 (E), P.D. No. 49
a);
171.10.A "work of applied art" is an artistic creation with utilitarian functions
or incorporated in a useful article, whether made by hand or
produced on an industrial scale;
171.11.A "work of the Government of the Philippines" is a work created by
an officer or employee of the Philippine Government or any of its
subdivisions and instrumentalities, including government-owned or
controlled corporations as a part of his regularly prescribed official
duties.
CHAPTER II
Original Works
SECTION 172. Literary and Artistic Works. —
172.1. Literary and artistic works, hereinafter referred to as "works", are
original intellectual creations in the literary and artistic domain
protected from the moment of their creation and shall include in
particular:
a. Books, pamphlets, articles and other writings;
b. Periodicals and newspapers;
c. Lectures, sermons, addresses, dissertations prepared for oral
delivery, whether or not reduced in writing or other material
form;
d. Letters;
e. Dramatic or dramatico-musical compositions; choreographic
works or entertainment in dumb shows;
f. Musical compositions, with or without words;
g. Works of drawing, painting, architecture, sculpture, engraving,
lithography or other works of art; models or designs for works of
art;
h. Original ornamental designs or models for articles of manufacture,
whether or not registrable as an industrial design, and other
works of applied art;
i. Illustrations, maps, plans, sketches, charts and three-dimensional
works relative to geography, topography, architecture or science;
j. Drawings or plastic works of a scientific or technical character;
k. Photographic works including works produced by a process
analogous to photography; lantern slides;
l. Audiovisual works and cinematographic works and works
produced by a process analogous to cinematography or any
process for making audio-visual recordings;
m. Pictorial illustrations and advertisements;
n. Computer programs; and
o. Other literary, scholarly, scientific and artistic works.
172.2. Works are protected by the sole fact of their creation, irrespective of
their mode or form of expression, as well as of their content, quality
and purpose. (Sec. 2, P.D. No. 49a) cda
CHAPTER III
Derivative Works
SECTION 173. Derivative Works. —
173.1. The following derivative works shall also be protected by copyright:
a. Dramatizations, translations, adaptations, abridgments,
arrangements, and other alterations of literary or artistic works;
and
b. Collections of literary, scholarly or artistic works, and compilations
of data and other materials which are original by reason of the
selection or coordination or arrangement of their contents. (Sec.
2, [P] and [Q], P.D. No. 49)
173.2. The works referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b) of Subsection 173.1
shall be protected as new works: Provided however, That such new
work shall not affect the force of any subsisting copyright upon the
original works employed or any part thereof, or be construed to imply
any right to such use of the original works, or to secure or extend
copyright in such original works. (Sec. 8, P.D. 49; Art. 10, TRIPS)
SECTION 174. Published Edition of Work. — In addition to the right to
publish granted by the author, his heirs, or assigns, the publisher shall have
a copyright consisting merely of the right of reproduction of the typographical
arrangement of the published edition of the work. (n)
CHAPTER IV
Works Not Protected
SECTION 175. Unprotected Subject Matter. — Notwithstanding the
provisions of Sections 172 and 173, no protection shall extend, under this
law, to any idea, procedure, system, method or operation, concept, principle,
discovery or mere data as such, even if they are expressed, explained,
illustrated or embodied in a work; news of the day and other miscellaneous
facts having the character of mere items of press information; or any official
text of a legislative, administrative or legal nature, as well as any official
translation thereof. (n)
SECTION 176. Works of the Government. —
176.1. No copyright shall subsist in any work of the Government of the
Philippines. However, prior approval of the government agency or
office wherein the work is created shall be necessary for exploitation
of such work for profit. Such agency or office may, among other
things, impose as a condition the payment of royalties. No prior
approval or conditions shall be required for the use for any purpose
of statutes, rules and regulations, and speeches, lectures, sermons,
addresses, and dissertations, pronounced, read or rendered in courts
of justice, before administrative agencies, in deliberative assemblies
and in meetings of public character. (Sec. 9, first par., P.D. No. 49)
176.2. The author of speeches, lectures, sermons, addresses, and
dissertations mentioned in the preceding paragraphs shall have the
exclusive right of making a collection of his works. (n)
176.3. Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions, the Government is not
precluded from receiving and holding copyrights transferred to it by
assignment, bequest or otherwise; nor shall publication or
republication by the Government in a public document of any work in
which copyright is subsisting be taken to cause any abridgment or
annulment of the copyright or to authorize any use or appropriation
of such work without the consent of the copyright owner. (Sec. 9,
third par., P.D. No. 49)
[REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10173]
AN ACT PROTECTING INDIVIDUAL PERSONAL INFORMATION IN INFORMATION AND
COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS IN THE GOVERNMENT AND THE PRIVATE SECTOR,
CREATING FOR THIS PURPOSE A NATIONAL PRIVACY COMMISSION, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES
Be it enacted, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress
assembled:
CHAPTERI
GENERAL PROVISIONS

SECTION 1. Short Title. – This Act shall be known as the “Data Privacy Act of 2012”.
SEC. 2. Declaration of Policy. – It is the policy of the State to protect the fundamental human
right of privacy, of communication while ensuring free flow of information to promote
innovation and growth. The State recognizes the vital role of information and
communications technology in nation-building and its inherent obligation to ensure that
personal information in information and communications systems in the government and in
the private sector are secured and protected.
SEC. 3. Definition of Terms. – Whenever used in this Act, the following terms shall have the
respective meanings hereafter set forth:
(a) Commission shall refer to the National Privacy Commission created by virtue of this Act.
(b) Consent of the data subject refers to any freely given, specific, informed indication of will,
whereby the data subject agrees to the collection and processing of personal information
about and/or relating to him or her. Consent shall be evidenced by written, electronic or
recorded means. It may also be given on behalf of the data subject by an agent specifically
authorized by the data subject to do so.
(c) Data subject refers to an individual whose personal information is processed.
(d) Direct marketing refers to communication by whatever means of any advertising or
marketing material which is directed to particular individuals.
(e) Filing system refers to any act of information relating to natural or juridical persons to
the extent that, although the information is not processed by equipment operating
automatically in response to instructions given for that purpose, the set is structured, either
by reference to individuals or by reference to criteria relating to individuals, in such a way
that specific information relating to a particular person is readily accessible.
(f) Information and Communications System refers to a system for generating, sending,
receiving, storing or otherwise processing electronic data messages or electronic documents
and includes the computer system or other similar device by or which data is recorded,
transmitted or stored and any procedure related to the recording, transmission or storage
of electronic data, electronic message, or electronic document.
(g) Personal information refers to any information whether recorded in a material form or
not, from which the identity of an individual is apparent or can be reasonably and directly
ascertained by the entity holding the information, or when put together with other
information would directly and certainly identify an individual.
(h) Personal information controller refers to a person or organization who controls the
collection, holding, processing or use of personal information, including a person or
organization who instructs another person or organization to collect, hold, process, use,
transfer or disclose personal information on his or her behalf. The term excludes:
(1) A person or organization who performs such functions as instructed by another person
or organization; and
(2) An individual who collects, holds, processes or uses personal information in connection
with the individual’s personal, family or household affairs.
(i) Personal information processor refers to any natural or juridical person qualified to act as
such under this Act to whom a personal information controller may outsource the processing
of personal data pertaining to a data subject.
(j) Processing refers to any operation or any set of operations performed upon personal
information including, but not limited to, the collection, recording, organization, storage,
updating or modification, retrieval, consultation, use, consolidation, blocking, erasure or
destruction of data.
(k) Privileged information refers to any and all forms of data which under the Rules of Court
and other pertinent laws constitute privileged communication.
(l) Sensitive personal information refers to personal information:
(1) About an individual’s race, ethnic origin, marital status, age, color, and religious,
philosophical or political affiliations;
(2) About an individual’s health, education, genetic or sexual life of a person, or to any
proceeding for any offense committed or alleged to have been committed by such person,
the disposal of such proceedings, or the sentence of any court in such proceedings;
(3) Issued by government agencies peculiar to an individual which includes, but not limited
to, social security numbers, previous or cm-rent health records, licenses or its denials,
suspension or revocation, and tax returns; and
(4) Specifically established by an executive order or an act of Congress to be kept classified.
SEC. 4. Scope. – This Act applies to the processing of all types of personal information and to
any natural and juridical person involved in personal information processing including those
personal information controllers and processors who, although not found or established in
the Philippines, use equipment that are located in the Philippines, or those who maintain an
office, branch or agency in the Philippines subject to the immediately succeeding
paragraph: Provided, That the requirements of Section 5 are complied with.
This Act does not apply to the following:
(a) Information about any individual who is or was an officer or employee of a government
institution that relates to the position or functions of the individual, including:
(1) The fact that the individual is or was an officer or employee of the government institution;
(2) The title, business address and office telephone number of the individual;
(3) The classification, salary range and responsibilities of the position held by the individual;
and
(4) The name of the individual on a document prepared by the individual in the course of
employment with the government;
(b) Information about an individual who is or was performing service under contract for a
government institution that relates to the services performed, including the terms of the
contract, and the name of the individual given in the course of the performance of those
services;
(c) Information relating to any discretionary benefit of a financial nature such as the granting
of a license or permit given by the government to an individual, including the name of the
individual and the exact nature of the benefit;
(d) Personal information processed for journalistic, artistic, literary or research purposes;
(e) Information necessary in order to carry out the functions of public authority which
includes the processing of personal data for the performance by the independent, central
monetary authority and law enforcement and regulatory agencies of their constitutionally
and statutorily mandated functions. Nothing in this Act shall be construed as to have
amended or repealed Republic Act No. 1405, otherwise known as the Secrecy of Bank
Deposits Act; Republic Act No. 6426, otherwise known as the Foreign Currency Deposit Act;
and Republic Act No. 9510, otherwise known as the Credit Information System Act (CISA);
(f) Information necessary for banks and other financial institutions under the jurisdiction of
the independent, central monetary authority or Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas to comply with
Republic Act No. 9510, and Republic Act No. 9160, as amended, otherwise known as the Anti-
Money Laundering Act and other applicable laws; and
(g) Personal information originally collected from residents of foreign jurisdictions in
accordance with the laws of those foreign jurisdictions, including any applicable data privacy
laws, which is being processed in the Philippines.
SEC. 5. Protection Afforded to Journalists and Their Sources. – Nothing in this Act shall be
construed as to have amended or repealed the provisions of Republic Act No. 53, which
affords the publishers, editors or duly accredited reporters of any newspaper, magazine or
periodical of general circulation protection from being compelled to reveal the source of any
news report or information appearing in said publication which was related in any
confidence to such publisher, editor, or reporter.
SEC. 6. Extraterritorial Application. – This Act applies to an act done or practice engaged in
and outside of the Philippines by an entity if:
(a) The act, practice or processing relates to personal information about a Philippine citizen
or a resident;
(b) The entity has a link with the Philippines, and the entity is processing personal
information in the Philippines or even if the processing is outside the Philippines as long as
it is about Philippine citizens or residents such as, but not limited to, the following:
(1) A contract is entered in the Philippines;
(2) A juridical entity unincorporated in the Philippines but has central management and
control in the country; and
(3) An entity that has a branch, agency, office or subsidiary in the Philippines and the parent
or affiliate of the Philippine entity has access to personal information; and
(c) The entity has other links in the Philippines such as, but not limited to:
(1) The entity carries on business in the Philippines; and
(2) The personal information was collected or held by an entity in the Philippines.
CHAPTER II
THE NATIONAL PRIVACY COMMISSION
SEC. 7. Functions of the National Privacy Commission. – To administer and implement the
provisions of this Act, and to monitor and ensure compliance of the country with
international standards set for data protection, there is hereby created an independent body
to be known as the National Privacy Commission, winch shall have the following functions:
(a) Ensure compliance of personal information controllers with the provisions of this Act;
(b) Receive complaints, institute investigations, facilitate or enable settlement of complaints
through the use of alternative dispute resolution processes, adjudicate, award indemnity on
matters affecting any personal information, prepare reports on disposition of complaints
and resolution of any investigation it initiates, and, in cases it deems appropriate, publicize
any such report: Provided, That in resolving any complaint or investigation (except where
amicable settlement is reached by the parties), the Commission shall act as a collegial body.
For this purpose, the Commission may be given access to personal information that is subject
of any complaint and to collect the information necessary to perform its functions under this
Act;
(c) Issue cease and desist orders, impose a temporary or permanent ban on the processing
of personal information, upon finding that the processing will be detrimental to national
security and public interest;
(d) Compel or petition any entity, government agency or instrumentality to abide by its
orders or take action on a matter affecting data privacy;
(e) Monitor the compliance of other government agencies or instrumentalities on their
security and technical measures and recommend the necessary action in order to meet
minimum standards for protection of personal information pursuant to this Act;
(f) Coordinate with other government agencies and the private sector on efforts to formulate
and implement plans and policies to strengthen the protection of personal information in
the country;
(g) Publish on a regular basis a guide to all laws relating to data protection;
(h) Publish a compilation of agency system of records and notices, including index and other
finding aids;
(i) Recommend to the Department of Justice (DOJ) the prosecution and imposition of
penalties specified in Sections 25 to 29 of this Act;
(j) Review, approve, reject or require modification of privacy codes voluntarily adhered to
by personal information controllers: Provided, That the privacy codes shall adhere to the
underlying data privacy principles embodied in this Act: Provided, further,That such privacy
codes may include private dispute resolution mechanisms for complaints against any
participating personal information controller. For this purpose, the Commission shall
consult with relevant regulatory agencies in the formulation and administration of privacy
codes applying the standards set out in this Act, with respect to the persons, entities,
business activities and business sectors that said regulatory bodies are authorized to
principally regulate pursuant to the law: Provided, finally. That the Commission may review
such privacy codes and require changes thereto for purposes of complying with this Act;
(k) Provide assistance on matters relating to privacy or data protection at the request of a
national or local agency, a private entity or any person;
(l) Comment on the implication on data privacy of proposed national or local statutes,
regulations or procedures, issue advisory opinions and interpret the provisions of this Act
and other data privacy laws;
(m) Propose legislation, amendments or modifications to Philippine laws on privacy or data
protection as may be necessary;
(n) Ensure proper and effective coordination with data privacy regulators in other countries
and private accountability agents, participate in international and regional initiatives for
data privacy protection;
(o) Negotiate and contract with other data privacy authorities of other countries for cross-
border application and implementation of respective privacy laws;
(p) Assist Philippine companies doing business abroad to respond to foreign privacy or data
protection laws and regulations; and
(q) Generally perform such acts as may be necessary to facilitate cross-border enforcement
of data privacy protection.
SEC. 8. Confidentiality. – The Commission shall ensure at all times the confidentiality of any
personal information that comes to its knowledge and possession.
SEC. 9. Organizational Structure of the Commission. – The Commission shall be attached to
the Department of Information and Communications Technology (DICT) and shall be headed
by a Privacy Commissioner, who shall also act as Chairman of the Commission. The Privacy
Commissioner shall be assisted by two (2) Deputy Privacy Commissioners, one to be
responsible for Data Processing Systems and one to be responsible for Policies and Planning.
The Privacy Commissioner and the two (2) Deputy Privacy Commissioners shall be
appointed by the President of the Philippines for a term of three (3) years, and may be
reappointed for another term of three (3) years. Vacancies in the Commission shall be filled
in the same manner in which the original appointment was made.
The Privacy Commissioner must be at least thirty-five (35) years of age and of good moral
character, unquestionable integrity and known probity, and a recognized expert in the field
of information technology and data privacy. The Privacy Commissioner shall enjoy the
benefits, privileges and emoluments equivalent to the rank of Secretary.
The Deputy Privacy Commissioners must be recognized experts in the field of information
and communications technology and data privacy. They shall enjoy the benefits, privileges
and emoluments equivalent to the rank of Undersecretary.
The Privacy Commissioner, the Deputy Commissioners, or any person acting on their behalf
or under their direction, shall not be civilly liable for acts done in good faith in the
performance of their duties. However, he or she shall be liable for willful or negligent acts
done by him or her which are contrary to law, morals, public policy and good customs even
if he or she acted under orders or instructions of superiors: Provided, That in case a lawsuit
is filed against such official on the subject of the performance of his or her duties, where such
performance is lawful, he or she shall be reimbursed by the Commission for reasonable costs
of litigation.
SEC. 10. The Secretariat. – The Commission is hereby authorized to establish a Secretariat.
Majority of the members of the Secretariat must have served for at least five (5) years in any
agency of the government that is involved in the processing of personal information
including, but not limited to, the following offices: Social Security System (SSS), Government
Service Insurance System (GSIS), Land Transportation Office (LTO), Bureau of Internal
Revenue (BIR), Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PhilHealth), Commission on
Elections (COMELEC), Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA), Department of Justice (DOJ), and
Philippine Postal Corporation (Philpost).
CHAPTER III
PROCESSING OF PERSONAL INFORMATION
SEC. 11. General Data Privacy Principles. – The processing of personal information shall be
allowed, subject to compliance with the requirements of this Act and other laws allowing
disclosure of information to the public and adherence to the principles of transparency,
legitimate purpose and proportionality.
Personal information must, be:
(a) Collected for specified and legitimate purposes determined and declared before, or as
soon as reasonably practicable after collection, and later processed in a way compatible with
such declared, specified and legitimate purposes only;
(b) Processed fairly and lawfully;
(c) Accurate, relevant and, where necessary for purposes for which it is to be used the
processing of personal information, kept up to date; inaccurate or incomplete data must be
rectified, supplemented, destroyed or their further processing restricted;
(d) Adequate and not excessive in relation to the purposes for which they are collected and
processed;
(e) Retained only for as long as necessary for the fulfillment of the purposes for which the
data was obtained or for the establishment, exercise or defense of legal claims, or for
legitimate business purposes, or as provided by law; and
(f) Kept in a form which permits identification of data subjects for no longer than is necessary
for the purposes for which the data were collected and processed: Provided, That personal
information collected for other purposes may lie processed for historical, statistical or
scientific purposes, and in cases laid down in law may be stored for longer periods: Provided,
further,That adequate safeguards are guaranteed by said laws authorizing their processing.
The personal information controller must ensure implementation of personal information
processing principles set out herein.
SEC. 12. Criteria for Lawful Processing of Personal Information. – The processing of personal
information shall be permitted only if not otherwise prohibited by law, and when at least
one of the following conditions exists:
(a) The data subject has given his or her consent;
(b) The processing of personal information is necessary and is related to the fulfillment of a
contract with the data subject or in order to take steps at the request of the data subject prior
to entering into a contract;
(c) The processing is necessary for compliance with a legal obligation to which the personal
information controller is subject;
(d) The processing is necessary to protect vitally important interests of the data subject,
including life and health;
(e) The processing is necessary in order to respond to national emergency, to comply with
the requirements of public order and safety, or to fulfill functions of public authority which
necessarily includes the processing of personal data for the fulfillment of its mandate; or
(f) The processing is necessary for the purposes of the legitimate interests pursued by the
personal information controller or by a third party or parties to whom the data is disclosed,
except where such interests are overridden by fundamental rights and freedoms of the data
subject which require protection under the Philippine Constitution.
SEC. 13. Sensitive Personal Information and Privileged Information. – The processing of
sensitive personal information and privileged information shall be prohibited, except in the
following cases:
(a) The data subject has given his or her consent, specific to the purpose prior to the
processing, or in the case of privileged information, all parties to the exchange have given
their consent prior to processing;
(b) The processing of the same is provided for by existing laws and
regulations: Provided, That such regulatory enactments guarantee the protection of the
sensitive personal information and the privileged information: Provided, further, That the
consent of the data subjects are not required by law or regulation permitting the processing
of the sensitive personal information or the privileged information;
(c) The processing is necessary to protect the life and health of the data subject or another
person, and the data subject is not legally or physically able to express his or her consent
prior to the processing;
(d) The processing is necessary to achieve the lawful and noncommercial objectives of public
organizations and their associations: Provided, That such processing is only confined and
related to the bona fide members of these organizations or their associations: Provided,
further, That the sensitive personal information are not transferred to third
parties: Provided, finally, That consent of the data subject was obtained prior to processing;
(e) The processing is necessary for purposes of medical treatment, is carried out by a medical
practitioner or a medical treatment institution, and an adequate level of protection of
personal information is ensured; or
(f) The processing concerns such personal information as is necessary for the protection of
lawful rights and interests of natural or legal persons in court proceedings, or the
establishment, exercise or defense of legal claims, or when provided to government or public
authority.
SEC. 14. Subcontract of Personal Information. – A personal information controller may
subcontract the processing of personal information: Provided, That the personal information
controller shall be responsible for ensuring that proper safeguards are in place to ensure the
confidentiality of the personal information processed, prevent its use for unauthorized
purposes, and generally, comply with the requirements of this Act and other laws for
processing of personal information. The personal information processor shall comply with
all the requirements of this Act and other applicable laws.
SEC. 15. Extension of Privileged Communication. – Personal information controllers may
invoke the principle of privileged communication over privileged information that they
lawfully control or process. Subject to existing laws and regulations, any evidence gathered
on privileged information is inadmissible.
CHAPTER IV
RIGHTS OF THE DATA SUBJECT
SEC. 16. Rights of the Data Subject. – The data subject is entitled to:
(a) Be informed whether personal information pertaining to him or her shall be, are being
or have been processed;
(b) Be furnished the information indicated hereunder before the entry of his or her personal
information into the processing system of the personal information controller, or at the next
practical opportunity:
(1) Description of the personal information to be entered into the system;
(2) Purposes for which they are being or are to be processed;
(3) Scope and method of the personal information processing;
(4) The recipients or classes of recipients to whom they are or may be disclosed;
(5) Methods utilized for automated access, if the same is allowed by the data subject, and the
extent to which such access is authorized;
(6) The identity and contact details of the personal information controller or its
representative;
(7) The period for which the information will be stored; and
(8) The existence of their rights, i.e., to access, correction, as well as the right to lodge a
complaint before the Commission.
Any information supplied or declaration made to the data subject on these matters shall not
be amended without prior notification of data subject: Provided, That the notification under
subsection (b) shall not apply should the personal information be needed pursuant to
a subpoena or when the collection and processing are for obvious purposes, including when
it is necessary for the performance of or in relation to a contract or service or when necessary
or desirable in the context of an employer-employee relationship, between the collector and
the data subject, or when the information is being collected and processed as a result of legal
obligation;
(c) Reasonable access to, upon demand, the following:
(1) Contents of his or her personal information that were processed;
(2) Sources from which personal information were obtained;
(3) Names and addresses of recipients of the personal information;
(4) Manner by which such data were processed;
(5) Reasons for the disclosure of the personal information to recipients;
(6) Information on automated processes where the data will or likely to be made as the sole
basis for any decision significantly affecting or will affect the data subject;
(7) Date when his or her personal information concerning the data subject were last
accessed and modified; and
(8) The designation, or name or identity and address of the personal information controller;
(d) Dispute the inaccuracy or error in the personal information and have the personal
information controller correct it immediately and accordingly, unless the request is
vexatious or otherwise unreasonable. If the personal information have been corrected, the
personal information controller shall ensure the accessibility of both the new and the
retracted information and the simultaneous receipt of the new and the retracted information
by recipients thereof: Provided, That the third parties who have previously received such
processed personal information shall he informed of its inaccuracy and its rectification upon
reasonable request of the data subject;
(e) Suspend, withdraw or order the blocking, removal or destruction of his or her personal
information from the personal information controller’s filing system upon discovery and
substantial proof that the personal information are incomplete, outdated, false, unlawfully
obtained, used for unauthorized purposes or are no longer necessary for the purposes for
which they were collected. In this case, the personal information controller may notify third
parties who have previously received such processed personal information; and
(f) Be indemnified for any damages sustained due to such inaccurate, incomplete, outdated,
false, unlawfully obtained or unauthorized use of personal information.
SEC. 17. Transmissibility of Rights of the Data Subject. – The lawful heirs and assigns of the
data subject may invoke the rights of the data subject for, which he or she is an heir or
assignee at any time after the death of the data subject or when the data subject is
incapacitated or incapable of exercising the rights as enumerated in the immediately
preceding section.
SEC. 18. Right to Data Portability. – The data subject shall have the right, where personal
information is processed by electronic means and in a structured and commonly used
format, to obtain from the personal information controller a copy of data undergoing
processing in an electronic or structured format, which is commonly used and allows for
further use by the data subject. The Commission may specify the electronic format referred
to above, as well as the technical standards, modalities and procedures for their transfer.
SEC. 19. Non-Applicability. – The immediately preceding sections are not applicable if the
processed personal information are used only for the needs of scientific and statistical
research and, on the basis of such, no activities are carried out and no decisions are taken
regarding the data subject: Provided, That the personal information shall be held under strict
confidentiality and shall be used only for the declared purpose. Likewise, the immediately
preceding sections are not applicable to processing of personal information gathered for the
purpose of investigations in relation to any criminal, administrative or tax liabilities of a data
subject.
CHAPTER V
SECURITY OF PERSONAL INFORMATION
SEC. 20. Security of Personal Information. – (a) The personal information controller must
implement reasonable and appropriate organizational, physical and technical measures
intended for the protection of personal information against any accidental or unlawful
destruction, alteration and disclosure, as well as against any other unlawful processing.
(b) The personal information controller shall implement reasonable and appropriate
measures to protect personal information against natural dangers such as accidental loss or
destruction, and human dangers such as unlawful access, fraudulent misuse, unlawful
destruction, alteration and contamination.
(c) The determination of the appropriate level of security under this section must take into
account the nature of the personal information to be protected, the risks represented by the
processing, the size of the organization and complexity of its operations, current data privacy
best practices and the cost of security implementation. Subject to guidelines as the
Commission may issue from time to time, the measures implemented must include:
(1) Safeguards to protect its computer network against accidental, unlawful or unauthorized
usage or interference with or hindering of their functioning or availability;
(2) A security policy with respect to the processing of personal information;
(3) A process for identifying and accessing reasonably foreseeable vulnerabilities in its
computer networks, and for taking preventive, corrective and mitigating action against
security incidents that can lead to a security breach; and
(4) Regular monitoring for security breaches and a process for taking preventive, corrective
and mitigating action against security incidents that can lead to a security breach.
(d) The personal information controller must further ensure that third parties processing
personal information on its behalf shall implement the security measures required by this
provision.
(e) The employees, agents or representatives of a personal information controller who are
involved in the processing of personal information shall operate and hold personal
information under strict confidentiality if the personal information are not intended for
public disclosure. This obligation shall continue even after leaving the public service,
transfer to another position or upon termination of employment or contractual relations.
(f) The personal information controller shall promptly notify the Commission and affected
data subjects when sensitive personal information or other information that may, under the
circumstances, be used to enable identity fraud are reasonably believed to have been
acquired by an unauthorized person, and the personal information controller or the
Commission believes (bat such unauthorized acquisition is likely to give rise to a real risk of
serious harm to any affected data subject. The notification shall at least describe the nature
of the breach, the sensitive personal information possibly involved, and the measures taken
by the entity to address the breach. Notification may be delayed only to the extent necessary
to determine the scope of the breach, to prevent further disclosures, or to restore reasonable
integrity to the information and communications system.
(1) In evaluating if notification is unwarranted, the Commission may take into account
compliance by the personal information controller with this section and existence of good
faith in the acquisition of personal information.
(2) The Commission may exempt a personal information controller from notification where,
in its reasonable judgment, such notification would not be in the public interest or in the
interests of the affected data subjects.
(3) The Commission may authorize postponement of notification where it may hinder the
progress of a criminal investigation related to a serious breach.
CHAPTER VI
ACCOUNTABILITY FOR TRANSFER OF PERSONAL INFORMATION
SEC. 21. Principle of Accountability. – Each personal information controller is responsible for
personal information under its control or custody, including information that have been
transferred to a third party for processing, whether domestically or internationally, subject
to cross-border arrangement and cooperation.
(a) The personal information controller is accountable for complying with the requirements
of this Act and shall use contractual or other reasonable means to provide a comparable level
of protection while the information are being processed by a third party.
(b) The personal information controller shall designate an individual or individuals who are
accountable for the organization’s compliance with this Act. The identity of the individual(s)
so designated shall be made known to any data subject upon request.
CHAPTER VII
SECURITY OF SENSITIVE PERSONAL
INFORMATION IN GOVERNMENT
SEC 22. Responsibility of Heads of Agencies. – All sensitive personal information maintained
by the government, its agencies and instrumentalities shall be secured, as far as practicable,
with the use of the most appropriate standard recognized by the information and
communications technology industry, and as recommended by the Commission. The head of
each government agency or instrumentality shall be responsible for complying with the
security requirements mentioned herein while the Commission shall monitor the
compliance and may recommend the necessary action in order to satisfy the minimum
standards.
SEC. 23. Requirements Relating to Access by Agency Personnel to Sensitive Personal
Information. – (a) On-site and Online Access – Except as may be allowed through guidelines
to be issued by the Commission, no employee of the government shall have access to
sensitive personal information on government property or through online facilities unless
the employee has received a security clearance from the head of the source agency.
(b) Off-site Access – Unless otherwise provided in guidelines to be issued by the Commission,
sensitive personal information maintained by an agency may not be transported or accessed
from a location off government property unless a request for such transportation or access
is submitted and approved by the head of the agency in accordance with the following
guidelines:
(1) Deadline for Approval or Disapproval – In the case of any request submitted to the head
of an agency, such head of the agency shall approve or disapprove the request within two (2)
business days after the date of submission of the request. In case there is no action by the
head of the agency, then such request is considered disapproved;
(2) Limitation to One thousand (1,000) Records – If a request is approved, the head of the
agency shall limit the access to not more than one thousand (1,000) records at a time; and
(3) Encryption – Any technology used to store, transport or access sensitive personal
information for purposes of off-site access approved under this subsection shall be secured
by the use of the most secure encryption standard recognized by the Commission.
The requirements of this subsection shall be implemented not later than six (6) months after
the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 24. Applicability to Government Contractors. – In entering into any contract that may
involve accessing or requiring sensitive personal information from one thousand (1,000) or
more individuals, an agency shall require a contractor and its employees to register their
personal information processing system with the Commission in accordance with this Act
and to comply with the other provisions of this Act including the immediately preceding
section, in the same manner as agencies and government employees comply with such
requirements.
CHAPTER VIII
PENALTIES
SEC. 25. Unauthorized Processing of Personal Information and Sensitive Personal Information.
– (a) The unauthorized processing of personal information shall be penalized by
imprisonment ranging from one (1) year to three (3) years and a fine of not less than Five
hundred thousand pesos (Php500,000.00) but not more than Two million pesos
(Php2,000,000.00) shall be imposed on persons who process personal information without
the consent of the data subject, or without being authorized under this Act or any existing
law.
(b) The unauthorized processing of personal sensitive information shall be penalized by
imprisonment ranging from three (3) years to six (6) years and a fine of not less than Five
hundred thousand pesos (Php500,000.00) but not more than Four million pesos
(Php4,000,000.00) shall be imposed on persons who process personal information without
the consent of the data subject, or without being authorized under this Act or any existing
law.
SEC. 26. Accessing Personal Information and Sensitive Personal Information Due to
Negligence. – (a) Accessing personal information due to negligence shall be penalized by
imprisonment ranging from one (1) year to three (3) years and a fine of not less than Five
hundred thousand pesos (Php500,000.00) but not more than Two million pesos
(Php2,000,000.00) shall be imposed on persons who, due to negligence, provided access to
personal information without being authorized under this Act or any existing law.
(b) Accessing sensitive personal information due to negligence shall be penalized by
imprisonment ranging from three (3) years to six (6) years and a fine of not less than Five
hundred thousand pesos (Php500,000.00) but not more than Four million pesos
(Php4,000,000.00) shall be imposed on persons who, due to negligence, provided access to
personal information without being authorized under this Act or any existing law.
SEC. 27. Improper Disposal of Personal Information and Sensitive Personal Information. – (a)
The improper disposal of personal information shall be penalized by imprisonment ranging
from six (6) months to two (2) years and a fine of not less than One hundred thousand pesos
(Php100,000.00) but not more than Five hundred thousand pesos (Php500,000.00) shall be
imposed on persons who knowingly or negligently dispose, discard or abandon the personal
information of an individual in an area accessible to the public or has otherwise placed the
personal information of an individual in its container for trash collection.
b) The improper disposal of sensitive personal information shall be penalized by
imprisonment ranging from one (1) year to three (3) years and a fine of not less than One
hundred thousand pesos (Php100,000.00) but not more than One million pesos
(Php1,000,000.00) shall be imposed on persons who knowingly or negligently dispose,
discard or abandon the personal information of an individual in an area accessible to the
public or has otherwise placed the personal information of an individual in its container for
trash collection.
SEC. 28. Processing of Personal Information and Sensitive Personal Information for
Unauthorized Purposes. – The processing of personal information for unauthorized purposes
shall be penalized by imprisonment ranging from one (1) year and six (6) months to five (5)
years and a fine of not less than Five hundred thousand pesos (Php500,000.00) but not more
than One million pesos (Php1,000,000.00) shall be imposed on persons processing personal
information for purposes not authorized by the data subject, or otherwise authorized under
this Act or under existing laws.
The processing of sensitive personal information for unauthorized purposes shall be
penalized by imprisonment ranging from two (2) years to seven (7) years and a fine of not
less than Five hundred thousand pesos (Php500,000.00) but not more than Two million
pesos (Php2,000,000.00) shall be imposed on persons processing sensitive personal
information for purposes not authorized by the data subject, or otherwise authorized under
this Act or under existing laws.
SEC. 29. Unauthorized Access or Intentional Breach. – The penalty of imprisonment ranging
from one (1) year to three (3) years and a fine of not less than Five hundred thousand pesos
(Php500,000.00) but not more than Two million pesos (Php2,000,000.00) shall be imposed
on persons who knowingly and unlawfully, or violating data confidentiality and security data
systems, breaks in any way into any system where personal and sensitive personal
information is stored.
SEC. 30. Concealment of Security Breaches Involving Sensitive Personal Information. – The
penalty of imprisonment of one (1) year and six (6) months to five (5) years and a fine of not
less than Five hundred thousand pesos (Php500,000.00) but not more than One million
pesos (Php1,000,000.00) shall be imposed on persons who, after having knowledge of a
security breach and of the obligation to notify the Commission pursuant to Section 20(f),
intentionally or by omission conceals the fact of such security breach.
SEC. 31. Malicious Disclosure. – Any personal information controller or personal information
processor or any of its officials, employees or agents, who, with malice or in bad faith,
discloses unwarranted or false information relative to any personal information or personal
sensitive information obtained by him or her, shall be subject to imprisonment ranging from
one (1) year and six (6) months to five (5) years and a fine of not less than Five hundred
thousand pesos (Php500,000.00) but not more than One million pesos (Php1,000,000.00).
SEC. 32. Unauthorized Disclosure. – (a) Any personal information controller or personal
information processor or any of its officials, employees or agents, who discloses to a third
party personal information not covered by the immediately preceding section without the
consent of the data subject, shall he subject to imprisonment ranging from one (1) year to
three (3) years and a fine of not less than Five hundred thousand pesos (Php500,000.00) but
not more than One million pesos (Php1,000,000.00).
(b) Any personal information controller or personal information processor or any of its
officials, employees or agents, who discloses to a third party sensitive personal information
not covered by the immediately preceding section without the consent of the data subject,
shall be subject to imprisonment ranging from three (3) years to five (5) years and a fine of
not less than Five hundred thousand pesos (Php500,000.00) but not more than Two million
pesos (Php2,000,000.00).
SEC. 33. Combination or Series of Acts. – Any combination or series of acts as defined in
Sections 25 to 32 shall make the person subject to imprisonment ranging from three (3)
years to six (6) years and a fine of not less than One million pesos (Php1,000,000.00) but not
more than Five million pesos (Php5,000,000.00).
SEC. 34. Extent of Liability. – If the offender is a corporation, partnership or any juridical
person, the penalty shall be imposed upon the responsible officers, as the case may be, who
participated in, or by their gross negligence, allowed the commission of the crime. If the
offender is a juridical person, the court may suspend or revoke any of its rights under this
Act. If the offender is an alien, he or she shall, in addition to the penalties herein prescribed,
be deported without further proceedings after serving the penalties prescribed. If the
offender is a public official or employee and lie or she is found guilty of acts penalized under
Sections 27 and 28 of this Act, he or she shall, in addition to the penalties prescribed herein,
suffer perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification from office, as the case may be.
SEC. 35. Large-Scale. – The maximum penalty in the scale of penalties respectively provided
for the preceding offenses shall be imposed when the personal information of at least one
hundred (100) persons is harmed, affected or involved as the result of the above mentioned
actions.
SEC. 36. Offense Committed by Public Officer. – When the offender or the person responsible
for the offense is a public officer as defined in the Administrative Code of the Philippines in
the exercise of his or her duties, an accessory penalty consisting in the disqualification to
occupy public office for a term double the term of criminal penalty imposed shall he applied.
SEC. 37. Restitution. – Restitution for any aggrieved party shall be governed by the provisions
of the New Civil Code.
CHAPTER IX
MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
SEC. 38. Interpretation. – Any doubt in the interpretation of any provision of this Act shall be
liberally interpreted in a manner mindful of the rights and interests of the individual about
whom personal information is processed.
SEC. 39. Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR). – Within ninety (90) days from the
effectivity of this Act, the Commission shall promulgate the rules and regulations to
effectively implement the provisions of this Act.
SEC. 40. Reports and Information. – The Commission shall annually report to the President
and Congress on its activities in carrying out the provisions of this Act. The Commission shall
undertake whatever efforts it may determine to be necessary or appropriate to inform and
educate the public of data privacy, data protection and fair information rights and
responsibilities.
SEC. 41. Appropriations Clause. – The Commission shall be provided with an initial
appropriation of Twenty million pesos (Php20,000,000.00) to be drawn from the national
government. Appropriations for the succeeding years shall be included in the General
Appropriations Act. It shall likewise receive Ten million pesos (Php10,000,000.00) per year
for five (5) years upon implementation of this Act drawn from the national government.
SEC. 42. Transitory Provision. – Existing industries, businesses and offices affected by the
implementation of this Act shall be given one (1) year transitory period from the effectivity
of the IRR or such other period as may be determined by the Commission, to comply with
the requirements of this Act.
In case that the DICT has not yet been created by the time the law takes full force and effect,
the National Privacy Commission shall be attached to the Office of the President.
SEC. 43. Separability Clause. – If any provision or part hereof is held invalid or
unconstitutional, the remainder of the law or the provision not otherwise affected shall
remain valid and subsisting.
SEC. 44. Repealing Clause. – The provision of Section 7 of Republic Act No. 9372, otherwise
known as the “Human Security Act of 2007”, is hereby amended. Except as otherwise
expressly provided in this Act, all other laws, decrees, executive orders, proclamations and
administrative regulations or parts thereof inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed or
modified accordingly.
SEC. 45. Effectivity Clause. – This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its publication in
at least two (2) national newspapers of general circulation.
Republic Act No. 6713 February 20, 1989

AN ACT ESTABLISHING A CODE OF CONDUCT AND ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC

OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES, TO UPHOLD THE TIME-HONORED PRINCIPLE OF PUBLIC
OFFICE BEING A PUBLIC TRUST, GRANTING INCENTIVES AND REWARDS FOR
EXEMPLARY SERVICE, ENUMERATING PROHIBITED ACTS AND TRANSACTIONS AND
PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF 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 "Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for
Public Officials and Employees."
Section 2. Declaration of Policies. - It is the policy of the State to promote a high standard of
ethics in public service. Public officials and employees shall at all times be accountable to the
people and shall discharge their duties with utmost responsibility, integrity, competence,
and loyalty, act with patriotism and justice, lead modest lives, and uphold public interest
over personal interest.
Section 3. Definition of Terms. - As used in this Act, the term:
(a) "Government" includes the National Government, the local governments, and all other
instrumentalities, agencies or branches of the Republic of the Philippines including
government-owned or controlled corporations, and their subsidiaries.lawphi1.net
(b) "Public Officials" includes elective and appointive officials and employees, permanent or
temporary, whether in the career or non-career service, including military and police
personnel, whether or not they receive compensation, regardless of amount.
(c) "Gift" refers to a thing or a right to dispose of gratuitously, or any act or liberality, in favor
of another who accepts it, and shall include a simulated sale or an ostensibly onerous
disposition thereof. It shall not include an unsolicited gift of nominal or insignificant value
not given in anticipation of, or in exchange for, a favor from a public official or employee.
(d) "Receiving any gift" includes the act of accepting directly or indirectly, a gift from a
person other than a member of his family or relative as defined in this Act, even on the
occasion of a family celebration or national festivity like Christmas, if the value of the gift is
neither nominal nor insignificant, or the gift is given in anticipation of, or in exchange for, a
favor.
(e) "Loan" covers both simple loan and commodatum as well as guarantees, financing
arrangements or accommodations intended to ensure its approval.
(f) "Substantial stockholder" means any person who owns, directly or indirectly, shares of
stock sufficient to elect a director of a corporation. This term shall also apply to the parties
to a voting trust.
(g) "Family of public officials or employees" means their spouses and unmarried children
under eighteen (18) years of age.
(h) "Person" includes natural and juridical persons unless the context indicates otherwise.
(i) "Conflict of interest" arises when a public official or employee is a member of a board, an
officer, or a substantial stockholder of a private corporation or owner or has a substantial
interest in a business, and the interest of such corporation or business, or his rights or duties
therein, may be opposed to or affected by the faithful performance of official duty.
(j) "Divestment" is the transfer of title or disposal of interest in property by voluntarily,
completely and actually depriving or dispossessing oneself of his right or title to it in favor
of a person or persons other than his spouse and relatives as defined in this Act.
(k) "Relatives" refers to any and all persons related to a public official or employee within
the fourth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity, including bilas, inso and balae.
Section 4. Norms of Conduct of Public Officials and Employees. - (A) Every public official and
employee shall observe the following as standards of personal conduct in the discharge and
execution of official duties:
(a) Commitment to public interest. - Public officials and employees shall always uphold the
public interest over and above personal interest. All government resources and powers of
their respective offices must be employed and used efficiently, effectively, honestly and
economically, particularly to avoid wastage in public funds and revenues.
(b) Professionalism. - Public officials and employees shall perform and discharge their duties
with the highest degree of excellence, professionalism, intelligence and skill. They shall enter
public service with utmost devotion and dedication to duty. They shall endeavor to
discourage wrong perceptions of their roles as dispensers or peddlers of undue patronage.
(c) Justness and sincerity. - Public officials and employees shall remain true to the people at
all times. They must act with justness and sincerity and shall not discriminate against
anyone, especially the poor and the underprivileged. They shall at all times respect the rights
of others, and shall refrain from doing acts contrary to law, good morals, good customs,
public policy, public order, public safety and public interest. They shall not dispense or
extend undue favors on account of their office to their relatives whether by consanguinity or
affinity except with respect to appointments of such relatives to positions considered strictly
confidential or as members of their personal staff whose terms are coterminous with theirs.
(d) Political neutrality. - Public officials and employees shall provide service to everyone
without unfair discrimination and regardless of party affiliation or preference.
(e) Responsiveness to the public. - Public officials and employees shall extend prompt,
courteous, and adequate service to the public. Unless otherwise provided by law or when
required by the public interest, public officials and employees shall provide information of
their policies and procedures in clear and understandable language, ensure openness of
information, public consultations and hearings whenever appropriate, encourage
suggestions, simplify and systematize policy, rules and procedures, avoid red tape and
develop an understanding and appreciation of the socio-economic conditions prevailing in
the country, especially in the depressed rural and urban areas.
(f) Nationalism and patriotism. - Public officials and employees shall at all times be loyal to
the Republic and to the Filipino people, promote the use of locally produced goods, resources
and technology and encourage appreciation and pride of country and people. They shall
endeavor to maintain and defend Philippine sovereignty against foreign intrusion.
(g) Commitment to democracy. - Public officials and employees shall commit themselves to
the democratic way of life and values, maintain the principle of public accountability, and
manifest by deeds the supremacy of civilian authority over the military. They shall at all
times uphold the Constitution and put loyalty to country above loyalty to persons or party.
(h) Simple living. - Public officials and employees and their families shall lead modest lives
appropriate to their positions and income. They shall not indulge in extravagant or
ostentatious display of wealth in any form.
(B) The Civil Service Commission shall adopt positive measures to promote (1) observance
of these standards including the dissemination of information programs and workshops
authorizing merit increases beyond regular progression steps, to a limited number of
employees recognized by their office colleagues to be outstanding in their observance of
ethical standards; and (2) continuing research and experimentation on measures which
provide positive motivation to public officials and employees in raising the general level of
observance of these standards.
Section 5. Duties of Public Officials and Employees. - In the performance of their duties, all
public officials and employees are under obligation to:lawphi1.net
(a) Act promptly on letters and requests. - All public officials and employees shall, within
fifteen (15) working days from receipt thereof, respond to letters, telegrams or other means
of communications sent by the public. The reply must contain the action taken on the
request.
(b) Submit annual performance reports. - All heads or other responsible officers of offices
and agencies of the government and of government-owned or controlled corporations shall,
within forty-five (45) working days from the end of the year, render a performance report
of the agency or office or corporation concerned. Such report shall be open and available to
the public within regular office hours.
(c) Process documents and papers expeditiously. - All official papers and documents must be
processed and completed within a reasonable time from the preparation thereof and must
contain, as far as practicable, not more than three (3) signatories therein. In the absence of
duly authorized signatories, the official next-in-rank or officer in charge shall sign for and in
their behalf.
(d) Act immediately on the public's personal transactions. - All public officials and employees
must attend to anyone who wants to avail himself of the services of their offices and must, at
all times, act promptly and expeditiously.
(e) Make documents accessible to the public. - All public documents must be made accessible
to, and readily available for inspection by, the public within reasonable working hours.
Section 6. System of Incentives and Rewards. - A system of annual incentives and rewards is
hereby established in order to motivate and inspire public servants to uphold the highest
standards of ethics. For this purpose, a Committee on Awards to Outstanding Public Officials
and Employees is hereby created composed of the following: the Ombudsman and Chairman
of the Civil Service Commission as Co-Chairmen, and the Chairman of the Commission on
Audit, and two government employees to be appointed by the President, as members.
It shall be the task of this Committee to conduct a periodic, continuing review of the
performance of public officials and employees, in all the branches and agencies of
Government and establish a system of annual incentives and rewards to the end that due
recognition is given to public officials and employees of outstanding merit on the basis of the
standards set forth in this Act.
The conferment of awards shall take into account, among other things, the following: the
years of service and the quality and consistency of performance, the obscurity of the position,
the level of salary, the unique and exemplary quality of a certain achievement, and the risks
or temptations inherent in the work. Incentives and rewards to government officials and
employees of the year to be announced in public ceremonies honoring them may take the
form of bonuses, citations, directorships in government-owned or controlled corporations,
local and foreign scholarship grants, paid vacations and the like. They shall likewise be
automatically promoted to the next higher position with the commensurate salary suitable
to their qualifications. In case there is no next higher position or it is not vacant, said position
shall be included in the budget of the office in the next General Appropriations Act. The
Committee on Awards shall adopt its own rules to govern the conduct of its activities.
Section 7. Prohibited Acts and Transactions. - In addition to acts and omissions of public
officials and employees now prescribed in the Constitution and existing laws, the following
shall constitute prohibited acts and transactions of any public official and employee and are
hereby declared to be unlawful:
(a) Financial and material interest. - Public officials and employees shall not, directly or
indirectly, have any financial or material interest in any transaction requiring the approval
of their office.
(b) Outside employment and other activities related thereto. - Public officials and employees
during their incumbency shall not:
(1) Own, control, manage or accept employment as officer, employee, consultant, counsel,
broker, agent, trustee or nominee in any private enterprise regulated, supervised or licensed
by their office unless expressly allowed by law;
(2) Engage in the private practice of their profession unless authorized by the Constitution
or law, provided, that such practice will not conflict or tend to conflict with their official
functions; or
(3) Recommend any person to any position in a private enterprise which has a regular or
pending official transaction with their office.
These prohibitions shall continue to apply for a period of one (1) year after resignation,
retirement, or separation from public office, except in the case of subparagraph (b) (2)
above, but the professional concerned cannot practice his profession in connection with any
matter before the office he used to be with, in which case the one-year prohibition shall
likewise apply.
(c) Disclosure and/or misuse of confidential information. - Public officials and employees
shall not use or divulge, confidential or classified information officially known to them by
reason of their office and not made available to the public, either:
(1) To further their private interests, or give undue advantage to anyone; or
(2) To prejudice the public interest.
(d) Solicitation or acceptance of gifts. - Public officials and employees shall not solicit or
accept, directly or indirectly, any gift, gratuity, favor, entertainment, loan or anything of
monetary value from any person in the course of their official duties or in connection with
any operation being regulated by, or any transaction which may be affected by the functions
of their office.
As to gifts or grants from foreign governments, the Congress consents to:
(i) The acceptance and retention by a public official or employee of a gift of nominal value
tendered and received as a souvenir or mark of courtesy;
(ii) The acceptance by a public official or employee of a gift in the nature of a scholarship or
fellowship grant or medical treatment; or
(iii) The acceptance by a public official or employee of travel grants or expenses for travel
taking place entirely outside the Philippine (such as allowances, transportation, food, and
lodging) of more than nominal value if such acceptance is appropriate or consistent with the
interests of the Philippines, and permitted by the head of office, branch or agency to which
he belongs.
The Ombudsman shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the
purpose of this subsection, including pertinent reporting and disclosure requirements.
Nothing in this Act shall be construed to restrict or prohibit any educational, scientific or
cultural exchange programs subject to national security requirements.
Section 8. Statements and Disclosure. - Public officials and employees have an obligation to
accomplish and submit declarations under oath of, and the public has the right to know, their
assets, liabilities, net worth and financial and business interests including those of their
spouses and of unmarried children under eighteen (18) years of age living in their
households.
(A) Statements of Assets and Liabilities and Financial Disclosure. - All public officials and
employees, except those who serve in an honorary capacity, laborers and casual or
temporary workers, shall file under oath their Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth
and a Disclosure of Business Interests and Financial Connections and those of their spouses
and unmarried children under eighteen (18) years of age living in their households.
The two documents shall contain information on the following:
(a) real property, its improvements, acquisition costs, assessed value and current fair market
value;
(b) personal property and acquisition cost;
(c) all other assets such as investments, cash on hand or in banks, stocks, bonds, and the like;
(d) liabilities, and;
(e) all business interests and financial connections.
The documents must be filed:
(a) within thirty (30) days after assumption of office;
(b) on or before April 30, of every year thereafter; and
(c) within thirty (30) days after separation from the service.
All public officials and employees required under this section to file the aforestated
documents shall also execute, within thirty (30) days from the date of their assumption of
office, the necessary authority in favor of the Ombudsman to obtain from all appropriate
government agencies, including the Bureau of Internal Revenue, such documents as may
show their assets, liabilities, net worth, and also their business interests and financial
connections in previous years, including, if possible, the year when they first assumed any
office in the Government.
Husband and wife who are both public officials or employees may file the required
statements jointly or separately.
The Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth and the Disclosure of Business Interests
and Financial Connections shall be filed by:
(1) Constitutional and national elective officials, with the national office of the Ombudsman;
(2) Senators and Congressmen, with the Secretaries of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, respectively; Justices, with the Clerk of Court of the Supreme Court; Judges,
with the Court Administrator; and all national executive officials with the Office of the
President.
(3) Regional and local officials and employees, with the Deputy Ombudsman in their
respective regions;
(4) Officers of the armed forces from the rank of colonel or naval captain, with the Office of
the President, and those below said ranks, with the Deputy Ombudsman in their respective
regions; and
(5) All other public officials and employees, defined in Republic Act No. 3019, as amended,
with the Civil Service Commission.
(B) Identification and disclosure of relatives. - It shall be the duty of every public official or
employee to identify and disclose, to the best of his knowledge and information, his relatives
in the Government in the form, manner and frequency prescribed by the Civil Service
Commission.
(C) Accessibility of documents. - (1) Any and all statements filed under this Act, shall be made
available for inspection at reasonable hours.
(2) Such statements shall be made available for copying or reproduction after ten (10)
working days from the time they are filed as required by law.
(3) Any person requesting a copy of a statement shall be required to pay a reasonable fee to
cover the cost of reproduction and mailing of such statement, as well as the cost of
certification.
(4) Any statement filed under this Act shall be available to the public for a period of ten (10)
years after receipt of the statement. After such period, the statement may be destroyed
unless needed in an ongoing investigation.
(D) Prohibited acts. - It shall be unlawful for any person to obtain or use any statement filed
under this Act for:
(a) any purpose contrary to morals or public policy; or
(b) any commercial purpose other than by news and communications media for
dissemination to the general public.
Section 9. Divestment. - A public official or employee shall avoid conflicts of interest at all
times. When a conflict of interest arises, he shall resign from his position in any private
business enterprise within thirty (30) days from his assumption of office and/or divest
himself of his shareholdings or interest within sixty (60) days from such assumption.
The same rule shall apply where the public official or employee is a partner in a partnership.
The requirement of divestment shall not apply to those who serve the Government in an
honorary capacity nor to laborers and casual or temporary workers.
Section 10. Review and Compliance Procedure. - (a) The designated Committees of both
Houses of the Congress shall establish procedures for the review of statements to determine
whether said statements which have been submitted on time, are complete, and are in
proper form. In the event a determination is made that a statement is not so filed, the
appropriate Committee shall so inform the reporting individual and direct him to take the
necessary corrective action.
(b) In order to carry out their responsibilities under this Act, the designated Committees of
both Houses of Congress shall have the power within their respective jurisdictions, to render
any opinion interpreting this Act, in writing, to persons covered by this Act, subject in each
instance to the approval by affirmative vote of the majority of the particular House
concerned.
The individual to whom an opinion is rendered, and any other individual involved in a
similar factual situation, and who, after issuance of the opinion acts in good faith in
accordance with it shall not be subject to any sanction provided in this Act.
(c) The heads of other offices shall perform the duties stated in subsections (a) and (b) hereof
insofar as their respective offices are concerned, subject to the approval of the Secretary of
Justice, in the case of the Executive Department and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court,
in the case of the Judicial Department.
Section 11. Penalties. - (a) Any public official or employee, regardless of whether or not he
holds office or employment in a casual, temporary, holdover, permanent or regular capacity,
committing any violation of this Act shall be punished with a fine not exceeding the
equivalent of six (6) months' salary or suspension not exceeding one (1) year, or removal
depending on the gravity of the offense after due notice and hearing by the appropriate body
or agency. If the violation is punishable by a heavier penalty under another law, he shall be
prosecuted under the latter statute. Violations of Sections 7, 8 or 9 of this Act shall be
punishable with imprisonment not exceeding five (5) years, or a fine not exceeding five
thousand pesos (P5,000), or both, and, in the discretion of the court of competent
jurisdiction, disqualification to hold public office.
(b) Any violation hereof proven in a proper administrative proceeding shall be sufficient
cause for removal or dismissal of a public official or employee, even if no criminal
prosecution is instituted against him.
(c) Private individuals who participate in conspiracy as co-principals, accomplices or
accessories, with public officials or employees, in violation of this Act, shall be subject to the
same penal liabilities as the public officials or employees and shall be tried jointly with them.
(d) The official or employee concerned may bring an action against any person who obtains
or uses a report for any purpose prohibited by Section 8 (D) of this Act. The Court in which
such action is brought may assess against such person a penalty in any amount not to exceed
twenty-five thousand pesos (P25,000). If another sanction hereunder or under any other law
is heavier, the latter shall apply.
Section 12. Promulgation of Rules and Regulations, Administration and Enforcement of this
Act. - The Civil Service Commission shall have the primary responsibility for the
administration and enforcement of this Act. It shall transmit all cases for prosecution arising
from violations of this Act to the proper authorities for appropriate action: Provided,
however, That it may institute such administrative actions and disciplinary measures as may
be warranted in accordance with law. Nothing in this provision shall be construed as a
deprivation of the right of each House of Congress to discipline its Members for disorderly
behavior.
The Civil Service Commission is hereby authorized to promulgate rules and regulations
necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act, including guidelines for individuals who
render free voluntary service to the Government. The Ombudsman shall likewise take steps
to protect citizens who denounce acts or omissions of public officials and employees which
are in violation of this Act.
Section 13. Provisions for More Stringent Standards. - Nothing in this Act shall be construed
to derogate from any law, or any regulation prescribed by any body or agency, which
provides for more stringent standards for its official and employees.
Section 14. Appropriations. - The sum necessary for the effective implementation of this Act
shall be taken from the appropriations of the Civil Service Commission. Thereafter, such sum
as may be needed for its continued implementation shall be included in the annual General
Appropriations Act.
Section 15. Separability Clause. - If any provision of this Act or the application of such
provision to any person or circumstance is declared invalid, the remainder of the Act or the
application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected by such
declaration.
Section 16. Repealing Clause. - All laws, decrees and orders or parts thereof inconsistent
herewith, are deemed repealed or modified accordingly, unless the same provide for a
heavier penalty.
Section 17. Effectivity. - This Act shall take effect after thirty (30) days following the
completion of its publication in the Official Gazette or in two (2) national newspapers of
general circulation.

Approved, February 20, 1989.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE PHILIPPINES

EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 02

OPERATIONALIZING IN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH THE PEOPLE’S CONSTITUTIONAL

RIGHT TO INFORMATION AND THE STATE POLICIES TO FULL PUBLIC DISCLOSURE
AND TRANSPARENCY IN THE PUBLIC SERVICE AND PROVIDING GUIDELINES
THEREFOR

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 28, Article II of the 1987 Constitution, the State adopts and
implements a policy of full public disclosure of all its transactions involving public interest,
subject to reasonable conditions prescribed by law;
WHEREAS, Section 7, Article III of the Constitution guarantees the right of the people to
information on matters of public concern;
WHEREAS, the incorporation of this right in the Constitution is a recognition of the
fundamental role of free and open exchange of information in a democracy, meant to
enhance transparency and accountability in government official acts, transactions, or
decisions;
WHEREAS, the Executive Branch recognizes the urgent need to operationalize these
Constitutional provisions;
WHEREAS, the President, under Section 17, Article VII of the Constitution, has control over
all executive departments, bureaus and offices, and the duty to ensure that the laws be
faithfully executed;
WHEREAS, the Data Privacy Act of 2012 (R.A. 10173), including its implementing Rules and
Regulations, strengthens the fundamental human right of privacy, and of communication
while ensuring the free flow of information to promote innovation and growth;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, RODRIGO ROA DUTERTE, President of the Philippines, by virtue of
the powers vested in me by the Constitution and existing laws, do hereby order:
SECTION 1. Definition. For the purpose of this Executive Order, the following terms shall
mean:
(a) “Information” shall mean any records, documents, papers, reports, letters, contracts,
minutes and transcripts of official meetings, maps, books, photographs, data, research
materials, films, sound and video recording, magnetic or other tapes, electronic data,
computer stored data, any other like or similar data or materials recorded, stored or
archived in whatever format, whether offline or online, which are made, received, or kept in
or under the control and custody of any government office pursuant to law, executive order,
and rules and regulations or in connection with the performance or transaction of official
business by any government office.
(b) “Official record/records” shall refer to information produced or received by a public
officer or employee, or by a government office in an official capacity or pursuant to a public
function or duty.
(c) “Public record/records” shall include information required by laws, executive orders,
rules, or regulations to be entered, kept and made publicly available by a government office.
SECTION 2. Coverage. This order shall cover all government offices under the Executive
Branch, including but not limited to the national government and all its offices, departments,
bureaus, offices, and instrumentalities, including government-owned or -controlled
corporations, and state universities and colleges. Local government units (LGUs) are
encouraged to observe and be guided by this Order.
SECTION 3. Access to information. Every Filipino shall have access to information, official
records, public records and to documents and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions
or decisions, as well as to government research data used as basis for policy development.
SECTION 4. Exception. Access to information shall be denied when the information falls
under any of the exceptions enshrined in the Constitution, existing law or jurisprudence.
The Department of Justice and the Office of the Solicitor General are hereby directed to
prepare an inventory of such exceptions and submit the same to the Office of the President
within thirty (30) calendar days from the date of effectivity of this Order.
The Office of the President shall thereafter, immediately circularize the inventory of
exceptions for the guidance of all government offices and instrumentalities covered by this
Order and the general public.
Said inventory of exceptions shall periodically be updated to properly reflect any change in
existing law and jurisprudence and the Department of Justice and the Office of the Solicitor
General are directed to update the inventory of exceptions as the need to do so arises, for
circularization as hereinabove stated.
SECTION 5. Availability of SALN. Subject to the provisions contained in Sections 3 and 4 of
this Order, all public officials are reminded of their obligation to file and make available for
scrutiny their Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN) in accordance with
existing laws, rules and regulations, and the spirit and letter of this Order.
SECTION 6. Application and Interpretation. There shall be a legal presumption in favor of
access to information, public records and official records. No request for information shall
be denied unless it clearly falls under any of the exceptions listed in the inventory or updated
inventory of exceptions circularized by the Office of the President provided in the preceding
section.
The determination of the applicability of any of the exceptions to the request shall be the
responsibility of the Head of the Office which is in custody or control of the information,
public record or official record, or the responsible central or field officer duly designated by
him in writing.
In making such determination, the Head of the Office or his designated officer shall exercise
reasonable diligence to ensure that no exception shall be used or availed of to deny any
request for information or access to public records, or official records if the denial is intended
primarily and purposely to cover up a crime, wrongdoing, graft or corruption.
SECTION 7. Protection of Privacy. While providing access to information, public records,
and official records, responsible officials shall afford full protection to the right to privacy of
the individual as follows:
(a) Each government office per Section 2 hereof shall ensure that personal information in its
custody or under its control is disclosed or released only if it is material or relevant to the
subject-matter of the request and its disclosure is permissible under this order or existing
law, rules or regulations;
(b) Each government office must protect personal information in its custody or control by
making reasonable security arrangements against leaks or premature disclosure of personal
information which unduly exposes the individual whose personal information is requested,
to vilification, harassment or any other wrongful acts.
(c) Any employee, official or director of a government office per Section 2 hereof who has
access, authorized or unauthorized, to personal information in the custody of the office, must
not disclose that information except when authorized under this order or pursuant to
existing laws, rules or regulation.
SECTION 8. People’s Freedom to Information (FOI) Manual. For the effective
implementation of this Order, every government office is directed to prepare within one
hundred twenty (120) calendar days from the effectivity of this Order, its own People’s FOI
Manual, which shall include among others the following provisions:
(a) The location and contact information of the head, regional, provincial, and field offices,
and other established places where the public can obtain information or submit requests;
(b) The person or office responsible for receiving requests for information;
(c) The procedure for the filing and processing of the request as specified in the succeeding
section 8 of this Order.
(d) The standard forms for the submission of requests and for the proper acknowledgment
of requests;
(e) The process for the disposition of requests;
(f) The procedure for the administrative appeal of any denial for access to information; and
(g) The schedule of applicable fees.
SECTION 9. Procedure. The following procedure shall govern the filing and processing of
request for access to information:
(a) Any person who requests access to information shall submit a written request to the
government office concerned. The request shall state the name and contact information of
the requesting party, provide valid proof of his identification or authorization, reasonably
describe the information requested, and the reason for, or purpose of, the request for
information: Provided, that no request shall be denied or refused acceptance unless the
reason for the request is contrary to law, existing rules and regulations or it is one of the
exceptions contained in the inventory or updated inventory of exception as hereinabove
provided.
(b) The public official receiving the request shall provide reasonable assistance, free of
charge, to enable, to enable all requesting parties and particularly those with special needs,
to comply with the request requirements under this Section.
(c) The request shall be stamped by the government office, indicating the date and time of
receipt and the name, rank, title and position of the receiving public officer or employee with
the corresponding signature, and a copy thereof furnished to the requesting party. Each
government office shall establish a system to trace the status of all requests for information
received by it.
(d) The government office shall respond to a request fully compliant with requirements of
sub-section (a) hereof as soon as practicable but not exceeding fifteen (15) working days
from the receipt thereof. The response mentioned above refers to the decision of the agency
or office concerned to grant or deny access to the information requested.
(e) The period to respond may be extended whenever the information requested requires
extensive search of the government office’s records facilities, examination of voluminous
records, the occurrence of fortuitous cases or other analogous cases. The government office
shall notify the person making the request of the extension, setting forth the reasons for such
extension. In no case shall the extension go beyond twenty (20) working days unless
exceptional circumstances warrant a longer period.
(f) Once a decision is made to grant the request, the person making the request shall be
notified of such decision and directed to pay any applicable fees.
SECTION 10. Fees. Government offices shall not charge any fee for accepting requests for
access to information. They may, however, charge a reasonable fee to reimburse necessary
costs, including actual costs of reproduction and copying of the information required, subject
to existing rules and regulations. In no case shall the applicable fees be so onerous as to
defeat the purpose of this Order.
SECTION 11. Identical or Substantially Similar Requests. The government office shall not
be required to act upon an unreasonable subsequent identical or substantially similar
request from the same requesting party whose request from the same requesting party
whose request has already been previously granted or denied by the same government
office.
SECTION 12. Notice of Denial. If the government office decides to deny the request, in
whole or in part, it shall as soon as practicable, in any case within fifteen (15) working days
from the receipt of the request, notify the requesting party the denial in writing. The notice
shall clearly set forth the ground or grounds for denial and the circumstances on which the
denial is based. Failure to notify the requesting party of the action taken on the request
within the period herein stipulated shall be deemed a denial of the request for access to
information.
SECTION 13. Remedies in Cases of Denial of Request for Access to Information.
(a) Denial of any request for access to information may be appealed to the person or office
next higher in the authority, following the procedure mentioned in Section 7 (f) of this Order:
Provided, that the written appeal must be filed by the same person making the request
within fifteen (15) working days from the notice of denial or from the lapse of the relevant
period to respond to the request.
(b) The appeal be decided by the person or office next higher in authority within thirty (30)
working days from the filing of said written appeal. Failure of such person or office to decide
within the afore-stated period shall be deemed a denial of the appeal.
(c) Upon exhaustion of administrative appeal remedies, the requesting part may file the
appropriate case in the proper courts in accordance with the Rules of Court.
SECTION 14. Keeping of Records. Subject to existing laws, rules, and regulations,
government offices shall create and/or maintain accurate and reasonably complete records
of important information in appropriate formats, and implement a records management
system that facilitates easy identification, retrieval and communication of information to the
public.
SECTION 15. Administrative Liability. Failure to comply with the provisions of this Order
may be a ground for administrative and disciplinary sanctions against any erring public
officer or employee as provided under existing laws or regulations.
SECTION 16. Implementing Details. All government offices in the Executive Branch are
directed to formulate their respective implementing details taking into consideration their
mandates and the nature of information in their custody or control, within one hundred
twenty (120) days from the effectivity of this Order.
SECTION 17. Separability Clause. If any section or part of this Order is held
unconstitutional or invalid, the other sections or provisions not otherwise affected shall
remain in full force or effect.
SECTION 18. Repealing Clause. All orders, rules and regulations, issuances or any part
thereof inconsistent with the provisions of this Executive Order are hereby repealed,
amended or modified accordingly: Provided, that the provisions of Memorandum Circular
No. 78 (s. 1964), as amended, shall not be deemed repealed pending further review.
SECTION 19. Effectivity. This Order shall take effect immediately upon publication in a
newspaper of general circulation.
DONE, in the City of Manila, this 23rd day of July in the year of our Lord two thousand and
sixteen.
(Sgd.) RODRIGO ROA DUTERTE
President of the Philippines