Every enactment, amendment and Supreme Court reading on file for this law, in the order they happened.
Statutes that changed this one.
RA 10175, s. 2012
President Benigno Aquino III signed the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 on September 12, 2012, penalizing cybercrimes including illegal access, cyber-squatting, cybersex, and online libel. It became the Philippines' first comprehensive law addressing crimes committed through information and communications technology.
RA 10175, s. 2012
The Cybercrime Prevention Act was scheduled to take effect on October 3, 2012, fifteen days after its publication in two newspapers of general circulation. However, multiple petitions were filed before the Supreme Court seeking to declare the law unconstitutional, particularly challenging the online libel provision and the takedown clause.
G.R. No. 203335
The Supreme Court issued a 120-day Temporary Restraining Order on October 9, 2012, preventing implementation of RA 10175 just days before it was to take effect. This was the Court's first major intervention in the controversial cybercrime law, responding to widespread concern about its impact on free expression.
G.R. No. 203335
The Supreme Court extended the Temporary Restraining Order for another 120 days on February 5, 2013, continuing the suspension of RA 10175's implementation. This extension indicated the complexity of constitutional issues the Court needed to resolve and gave more time for oral arguments and deliberation.
G.R. No. 203335
The Supreme Court rendered its landmark decision on February 18, 2014, upholding most provisions of RA 10175 but declaring certain portions unconstitutional. The Court struck down the criminalization of online libel insofar as it includes the original author, the constitutionality of which is challenged, and provisions allowing unsupervised enforcement measures.
G.R. No. 203335
The Supreme Court issued a resolution on September 23, 2014, modifying its February 2014 decision by further limiting the scope of online libel. The Court clarified that only the original author of libelous material can be held liable, excluding those who merely react, comment, or share the post.
G.R. No. 203335
The Supreme Court's modified decision in the Disini case became final and executory on February 24, 2015, after all motions for reconsideration were resolved. This allowed the implementation of RA 10175 with the constitutional limitations imposed by the Court.
DOJ Department Order No. 548, s. 2015
The Department of Justice issued amended Implementing Rules and Regulations for RA 10175 to conform with the Supreme Court's decision in Disini. The revised IRR incorporated the constitutional limitations on online libel and removed provisions on unsupervised website takedowns.
G.R. No. 208566
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of columnist Ramon Tulfo for online libel under the Cybercrime Prevention Act, marking the first major criminal case reaching the High Court under RA 10175. The decision clarified the application of the law post-Disini ruling.
G.R. No. 252578
The Court of Appeals upheld the conviction of journalist Maria Ressa and former Rappler researcher Reynaldo Santos Jr. for cyber libel, ruling that republication of an article after RA 10175's effectivity falls within the law's coverage. The case drew international attention to press freedom issues in the Philippines.
G.R. No. 252578
The Supreme Court acquitted Maria Ressa and Reynaldo Santos Jr. of cyber libel on July 19, 2022, ruling that the article in question was published before RA 10175 took effect and that minor corrections did not constitute republication. The decision was a landmark victory for press freedom.
G.R. No. 248560
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction under RA 10175 for producing and distributing child pornography through online platforms. The decision clarified the scope of cybercrime provisions protecting children and upheld strict penalties for child exploitation.