Supreme Court, Disini v. Secretary of Justice, G.R. No. 203335, February 11, 2014

Document type
Court Decision
In a recent decision by the country’s Supreme Court, two provisions of the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 (see above) were stricken down and declared void for being unconstitutional. 
(i) In its original text, the law provided for the real-time collection of traffic data by law enforcement authorities and service providers were required to “cooperate and assist law enforcement authorities in the collection or recording” of said traffic data. Section 12 previously read as:

"Real-Time Collection of Traffic Data. — Law enforcement authorities, with due cause, shall be authorized to collect or record by technical or electronic means traffic data in real-time associated with specified communications transmitted by means of a computer system.

Traffic data refer only to the communication’s origin, destination, route, time, date, size, duration, or type of underlying service, but not content, nor identities.

All other data to be collected or seized or disclosed will require a court warrant.

Service providers are required to cooperate and assist law enforcement authorities in the collection or recording of the above-stated information.

The court warrant required under this section shall only be issued or granted upon written application and the examination under oath or affirmation of the applicant and the witnesses he may produce and the showing: (1) that there are reasonable grounds to believe that any of the crimes enumerated hereinabove has been committed, or is being committed, or is about to be committed: (2) that there are reasonable grounds to believe that evidence that will be obtained is essential to the conviction of any person for, or to the solution of, or to the prevention of, any such crimes; and (3) that there are no other means readily available for obtaining such evidence."

(ii) Moreover, it also authorized the Department of Justice to order the blocking or restriction of access to a computer data if the latter is prima facie found to be in violation of the law. This is found under then Section 19: "Restricting or Blocking Access to Computer Data. — When a computer data is prima facie found to be in violation of the provisions of this Act, the DOJ shall issue an order to restrict or block access to such computer data."
Topic, claim, or defense
Cyber Security
Document type
Court Decision
Issuing entity
Appellate Domestic Court
Type of service provider
General or Non-Specified
Issues addressed
Trigger for OSP obligations
OSP obligation considered
Data Retention or Disclosure
Block or Remove
Type of law