Is President Aquino an Idiot?

From the Humpty Dumpty New World Dictionary:

• Idiot: (noun)  A person with a good education who applies it poorly.

The top cop in the Philippines is Justice Secretary De Lima. Well, she is in control of the attack dogs, the investigators, the public dicks, the prosecutors.  DILG Secretary Roxas is the top uniformed cop, the guy with the big baton and huge police force. Throw in the army under Secretary of National Defense Gazmin and we have all the muscular power and might of the Philippine State. It is huge. It is ready to pounce.

Sottocopied from Raissa's Top Blog

It is lined up against some skinny guy in a small room with a computer and a keyboard typing words that fly out of his brain as he does his best to agitate for a better Philippines.

The nation that shot an educated, sophisticated, articulate and passionate Dr. Jose Rizal for expressing  opinions is at it again, at its crude best.

  

Expression and oppression. The beauty and the beast. The free and the fear-inspiring.

Here is what Justice Secretary De Lima had to say about the new Cybercrime Law:

• “On a finer legal point, no legislator can unilaterally ask for a suspension of a law nor can we decide to suspend. . .On the ground, we will just be judicious on the first few cases to allay fears of abuse or excesses in the exercise of such power and also to gain trust." [Inquirer]

So the government's stand on this law is clear:

• "Trust us."

Never mind that laws are written in black and white to protect citizens. That is the whole purpose of the Constitution.  It is not written in the warm fuzziness of trust.

• Constitution, Article III, Section 4. No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.

I'm not an attorney, but i know when a law is suggesting ordinary people sit down and shut up and be obedient to their betters. The black and white of the Cybercrime Law is scary. And by being scary, it has the power to oppress and suppress simply having been written.

Look at how many commenters are asking, "can I say this now?"

• "Can I say that Senator Sotto is an idiot?"

• Joe knows. Senator Sotto is an idiot. An idiot is a man who studied Dr. Rizal's works yet does not grasp how oppression works, with the powerful intimidating and arresting the powerless. He inserted the libel section of the law. He whined about cyber-bullies.

Well, that's what Senator Sotto and other privileged lawmakers want. They want people to question, to think one more time, to error on the side of judiciousness. To edit out harsh words. They want protection for the powerful from the people.

The One and Only

They want the Philippines to be a nation of disingenuous sweet words where candor and hot opinion are censored from the public's mouth as if they were overgrown warts carved off the noses of hypersensitive legislators.

Who, really, are we protecting with the libel, snoop and "unplug'em" provisions of the Cybercrime Law? Are we protecting children? Women? The innocent and the helpless? Scam victims? Predator victims?

No. We are protecting the powerful who fear that their power is at risk from some skinny guy with a computer typing "Senator Sotto has no ethical clothes!!!" We are protecting the Good Senator and his colleagues from bullying by the millions of poverty stricken Filipinos and the only advocates they have, bloggers and columnists.

Time to crack down on perverts and bloggers, eh?

President Aquino, following his tried and true pattern of being the mouthpiece for his staff's questionable findings, fell into line on the law, too, with a good amount of equivocating wobble to cover his tender bases:

“We believe that we need to really address crimes that are not clearly covered by laws. But let me repeat, maybe on (online) libel, I’m not in favor of removing (the provision). For example, if you write something and it is libelous, you have a liability. If you’re a broadcaster on radio and TV, you also have responsibility. If what you said was libelous, even on the Internet, maybe it’s still libelous. . . .if what you said was wrong, maybe the one aggrieved or whose rights were impinged should have redress. . . . "

"Rights are always bounded when it impinges on the rights of others. So if the penalties are excessive, have them amended. If some of the procedures are arbitrary, there are (implementing rules and regulations) yet so we can include (provisions) to avoid abuse of the powers that the state will be exercising." [PhilStar]

Maybe this, maybe that. Somehow I am not feeling any lessening in the "chilling effect" that the law imposes.

I am hearing people . . . leaders . . . largely tone-deaf as to the most fundamental right its citizens have. The right to speak openly and freely. To opine. To use language that bites or stings. To advocate for progress by ripping to shreds those who would stand in the way. To call names and issue non-violent threats. "You'll be out of office in 2016, Bubba Sotto!"

Sharp, unkind words. For effect. Like these:

• The President is an idiot if he thinks this law will garner more investments for the Philippines.

• The President is an idiot if he thinks tourism will increase because of the protections this law imposes.

• The President is an idiot if he thinks this law will promote the kind of vibrant discussion that is necessary to bring the Philippines into the modern era of good governance, productive processes and constructive social values.

• The President is an idiot if he thinks this law will advance his advocacy for a better, more honest Philippines.

• The President is an idiot if he thinks a lot of educated people around the globe will NOT arrive at the conclusion "Ah, yes, the Philippines. That's the Banana Republic of Asia, right?"

This is a law with scant protections for little people. The protections for the little people, those of us without attorneys in the closet to advise us on when we are vulnerable to libel charges or having our internet unplugged, is "trust us".

Let's be perfectly clear here. The Cybercrime libel protections are for powerful people with the money to file a libel case and a raft of lawyers at their disposal. People with the authority to shut off criticism simply by filing a charge.

The protection is for Senator Sotto. It is not for JoeAm. Or Raissa. Or benigno. Or Ellen. Or Noemi. Or Angela. Or Cocoy. Or Rappler columnists.

It is not for Jose dela Cruz, whose family will sit down tonight to another meal of salt on rice.

It is protecting the very same people who are inadequate to the task of putting meat on Jose's plate. Inadequate to the task of passing an RH Bill. Inadequate to the task of passing a Freedom of Information Bill.

Bloggers have learned to deal with criticisms that are loud and emotional and insulting and even erroneous. It is their job. It is the nature of the environment they agree to work in. The words fly because they are sparks from the friction of new ideas grinding against old ones that don't work. Sparks of enlightenment. Sparks of progress.

And Senator Sotto is an idiot because an idiot does not grasp that it is HIS job to listen to complaints and insults from the people he represents. Within those complaints and insults are legitimate thoughts and passions that ought to be understood, not crammed into jail.  

The defenders of this monstrosity of totalitarian intimidation have not a clue as to the grace and wisdom of Jose Rizal or Thomas Jefferson. They've gone to the best schools in the world, many in the United States. They have studied law and passed the bar. They have more diplomas on the wall than Jose has plates in the cupboard.

And they are stunningly tone deaf about democracy requiring OPEN DOORS to expression. Not doors with huge, muscular body guards standing by with batons and telescopes and listening devices and pliers to snip the internet lines, determining who can pass through.

Look all you idiot bubba legislators, if there is an error in legal renditions the error MUST BE IN FAVOR OF THE LITTLE PEOPLE. Not the powerful.

Yank the obscene libel provisions and the right to unplug sites without warrant and get on with protecting children and scam victims and predator targets and the real people who need your help.

Stop your outrageous self dealing as if you were equal in vulnerability to a child being dealt naked and violated into the porn market.