The Supreme Court on Friday published online its decision on the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012.
The high court declared the following provisions of Republic Act 10175 as unconstitutional, either wholly or contextually:
1. Sec. 4(c)(3) (Unsolicited Commercial Communications)
2. Sec. 12 (Real time collection of traffic data)
3, Sec. 19 (Restricting or blocking access to computer data)
4. Sec. 4(c)(4) (online libel- only where it penalises those who simply receive the post or react to it) but NOT UNCONSTITUTIONAL as far as the original author is concerned.
5. Sec. 5 (aiding or abetting in the commission of a cybercrime/attempt to commit a cybercrime) only in relation to secs. 4(c)(2) (child pornography), 4(c)(3) (unsolicited commercial communications) and 4(c)(4) (libel);
6. Sec. 7 (liability under other laws) only in relation to secs. 4(c)(4) (libel) and 4(c)(2) (child pornography).
"All other provisions not so declared by the Court are considered NOT UNCONSTITUTIONAL," the high court said in a statement.