China vs. Philippines

For the past few weeks, a very hot issue about a disputed territory known as the Scarborough Shoal is consistently seen in the headlines which later on led to an alarming case where the foreign nationals who were claiming to be from China defaced a Philippine website specifically the website of the University of the Philippines.

(Photo retrieved on May 4, 2012 from the website http://mytelevision-series.blogspot.com/2012/04/chinese-hackers-deface-philippine.html)

As stated in a news article from Yahoo! News, “A screenshot of the defaced website showed a map with Chinese script that highlighted islands in the South China Sea that are claimed by the Philippines and China.” (Retrieved from http://news.yahoo.com/chinese-hackers-deface-philippine-website-132340683.html)

The caption written in the map as shown in the photo is "We come from China! Huangyan Island is Ours”. Huangyan Island in this case pertains to the Scarborough Shoal as it is the Chinese name of the disputed territory. This is where vessels from China and from Philippines are stationed to assert their claim over the area and neither of the two shows any implications of giving way to the other country.

The act done by the foreign nationals is obviously qualified as HACKING. Under Section 33-a of Republic Act No. 8792 or the “Electronic Commerce Act of 2000”, hacking is defined as:

“(a) Hacking or crackling with refers to unauthorized access into or interference in a computer system/server or information and communication system; or any access in order to corrupt, alter, steal, or destroy using a computer or other similar information and communication devices, without the knowledge and consent of the owner of the computer or information and communications system, including the introduction of computer viruses and the like, resulting in the corruption, destruction, alteration, theft or loss of electronic data messages or electronic documents…”(R.A. No. 8792)

Moreover, under our law, hacking is punishable by a “minimum fine of One Hundred Thousand pesos (P 100,000.00) and a maximum commensurate to the damage incurred and a mandatory imprisonment of six (6) months to three (3) years” (R.A. No. 8792). That is the case if it was committed by a Filipino or citizen of the country since the law has territorial jurisdiction and jurisdiction over the person. Therefore, they can be liable and punished under our law. The problem now is what if hacking was committed by a foreign citizen? How will you make them liable? OR can they be liable? Obviously, Philippines cannot make the foreign citizens liable since our country does not have jurisdiction over the person of the accused. Only nationals in the Philippines will be bound by the law on hacking since the concept of territorial jurisdiction will apply. This is the first thing that the foreign citizens can question if Philippines would want to make them liable. Besides, we do not have any treaty with China regarding this matter (cyber attack/hacking) and therefore, we cannot just sue their nationals right away just because they are suspected of hacking our website. Another point is that the line “We come from China” does not automatically mean that they are Chinese nationals. How sure are we? Do we have sufficient evidence to prove that they are guilty? Anyone can do it and pretend that they are from China.

            If only we have better and stronger laws that will apply not only within our territorial jurisdiction and nationals but even to nationals of other country wherein they can be held liable as long as it involves our country, hackers can be punished and be given what is just. But then again, identifying who really the hackers will be a difficult task. Moreover, a more defined treaty or convention where most (if not all) of the states are signatories will be a good step towards a better fight against there cyber attacks. Again, to reiterate my stand, I believe that the foreign citizens cannot be held liable under the Philippine Law. 

School Policy vs. Cardinal Right

For the past few days, I have been seeing a lot of my twitter friends reacting on this certain issue of a 16-year-old high school girl who won’t be allowed to attend her graduation ceremony for posing in a bikini and posting the photo in her Facebook account. According to several news, St. Theresa's College High School imposed such punishment for violating provisions in the school's Student Handbook which includes a rule against “posing and uploading pictures on the Internet that entail ample body exposure”. 

“STC is a Catholic school governed by the teachings of the Catholic Church. We have to see to it that values are formed,” Lawyer Romeo Balili, counsel for STC told reporters after the hearing. Moreover, Balili said the private school is just doing what is right in disciplining its students. (Mayol, A.V., Cebu Daily News, March 28, 2012, http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/168441/high-school-girl-banned-from-graduation-over-facebook-bikini-photo)

Now, the issue is “Whether the punishment imposed by the school is valid and just?”

Though a school has the power to supervise, control and to make sure that each and every student in the campus complies with the school rules, I believe that it is not applicable in this case. First and foremost, the high school girl’s photo in bikini was taken during an outing and NOT a school activity. This simply means that it is not within the jurisdiction of the school. Second point, wearing a bikini doesn’t automatically mean that it is immoral, indecent, obscene or lewd. If the school is equating such photo to immorality, then does it also mean that those who wear bikini in beaches is immoral? Indecent? Don’t you think that it’s a bit exaggerated? As defined under the Merriam Webster Dictionary, IMMORAL means “conflicting with generally or traditionally held moral principles” and INDECENT means “grossly improper or offensive; inappropriate”. Now, given these definitions, it seems to me that the school is saying that posting a photo in bikini is conflicting with the generally held moral principles. Is it? And that it is grossly improper or inappropriate. Again, is it? Is wearing a bikini in a beach or resort improper? If that’s the case, then I guess everyone should wear a “Baro’t Saya” in beaches/resorts so that it would not be immoral and indecent. Wouldn’t they look so stupid? Third point, should a school policy prevail over a person’s cardinal right? Our 1987 Constitution, Article 3 (Bill of Rights) Section 4 to be specific, clearly and strictly prohibits the abridging of the people’s right to freedom of expression, speech and of the press. If the school’s policy would prevail over this provision in our Constitution, does it mean that a school rule is supreme than our law? If that is the case, then the essence of the 1987 Constitution as being the supreme law of the land would be futile.

Personally, I believe that the punishment imposed by the school is not valid and unjust. This is clearly tantamount to a violation of a person’s cardinal right which is protected under the Constitution. Ergo, the punishment imposed by STC is too harsh. Besides, the high school girl has her freedom of expression and that is by wearing a bikini in a family-related outing. Who are we to abridge her fundamental right? Every action must be justified and supported with legal basis so that we can easily defend such action if questioned by anyone. 

Mr. Sonza vs. Kris Aquino

Last Friday, tropical storm “Sendong” (its international name is “Washi”) caused heavy rains in Mindanao overnight which triggered flashfloods that led to the tragic experience of Cagayan de Oro City, Iligan City, and parts of Zamboanga del Norte where many people were killed and some are still missing until now, not knowing if those missing are still alive or dead. 

Kris Aquino have this daily show of hers known as "KrisTV" and there, she gave her comment, as well as her sisters, to the negative comments or the outcry of the populace regarding PNoy's recent activities despite the fact that his fellow countrymen a.k.a. "HIS BOSS" are suffering because of the tragedy. In response to Kris Aquino's statement, Mr. Jay Sonza wrote his comment entitled "Iparating Ito Kay Kris Aquino" which was posted in his facebook account. You will find Mr. Sonza's comment below.

"Ngayon, 'yun namang party ay matagal nang naka-schedule 'yon. Siyempre, may mga masasamang nangyayari at may malungkot but then, life should go on. Hindi naman pwedeng huminto na lang ang buhay at magmukmok na lang tayo.”

This is what Kris Aquino told the nation Monday morning on her television program.

Bakit, Kris? Bakit?

When your mother died, every single Filipino stopped whatever he or she was doing at that time, and paid homage to her! 

Pang Pnoy, masama bang makipaglamay ka sa amin?

Millions of Filipinos stood in line to view her. Millions waited hours along Luneta, Roxas Boulevard, Quirino Avenue, South Superhighway, South Expressway and Sucat Road to pay their last respects,

Now, your brother is President and he cannot even spend a few minutes attending to relief and avacuation operations in Cagayan de Oro City, Iligan City, Negros Oriental, Compostela Valley and other affected areas?

Kris, daan-daang katao ang namatay Kris. Libo pa ang bilang ng mga nawawala. Ari-arian at tanging yaman ang nasalanta. Fathers and their kids, mothers and their babies, whole generations were wiped out. The entire Cagayan de Oro was almost transformed into a wasteland and you will tell us that ”life should go on...and it will not be good if our lives stop for a while and for us to mourn?”

We mourn for your father, Kris. We vowed to sacrifice our lives for your father get justice. Many of our colleagues were jailed, others are still missing to date.  

Our lives stopped when your father and mother died.

Don’t you ever tell us, us, the Filipino people that we will not mourn our fellow Filipinos, especially the Mindanaoans who died during this typhoon.

We are not like you, who do not care. 

We care for fellow Filipinos, poor ones, who became victims.

More than a thousand lost their lives because of the ingratitude and the ineptitude of their leaders!

Thousands more lost their futures because of the callousness of the leaders like your brother, Kris.

                                A mere apology would have sufficed.

Revising the Juvenile Justice & Welfare Act

It's almost and still I can't sleep. While looking for a good show to watch, a commercial was shown and it's about a debate on the proposed revision on the Juvenile Justice Act. The question goes this way.......

"Payag ka bang ibaba ang edad for criminal liability?"

(Photo from http://leytesamardaily.net/2010/12/ra-9344-the-need-for-review/)

I decided to watch the debate since am interested to hear the arguments of both sides. The debate was really good kaya lang there are some instances when the anti-people are just too inconsiderate. Bakit hindi muna hayaan na makatapos ng sinsabi yung nasa kabilang side dahil bibigyan din naman sila ng time para mag-argue. AND the madam from CHR? Parang galit na galit na si madam. Come on! It's a debate. Don't take it personally against your opponent. 

My cousin asked me if am "pro" or "anti" on the proposed revision. Sa totoo lang? Hati kasi eh. Payag ako na babaan nila ang edad ng criminal liability BUT in offenses which are punishable by prision correccional (six months and one day to six years) and above. There was even this someone who gave the argument that "a 12yr old child who committed the crime of theft acted w/o discernment". Come on! Hindi tanga ang mga kabataan ngayon! Impossible namang hindi alam ng isang bata na mali ang magnakaw, manaksak at pumatay! Furthermore, a lady presented a statistics regarding the percent of adults vs. children who are recorded to have committed a crime. Of course konti lang ang marerecord na krimen na bata ang gumawa simply because it's very illogical to do so. Why waste your money in filing a case against the child when in fact he will not be convicted on the ground of minority?

Kahit ano pang maging resulta, may it be for the benefit of the public and of course which is deemed best for the children so they won't be influenced to commit crimes (may it be a light offense or not).  Ikaw, payag ka ba na ibaba ang criminal liability?

Happy Teachers' Day!

Just like what DepEd said, September is Teacher's Month and it is just right to thank our 

beloved educators for everything.

I simply want to thank all my teachers, from kinder up to now. I know I am not a perfect student, I may not be the best in class but I know deep in my heart that I've learned so much from my teachers. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and for having the patience to deal with your students (just like me). Not to mention the fact that I'm a spoiled brat way back in elementary and HS (I just did). Haha! Moreover, I would like to thank you for teaching me a lot of things, academically and morally. I may not be where I am now without you, teacher. 

Thank you for teaching me how to deal with life and for encouraging me to aim higher and fulfill my dreams. Again, thank you to my teachers for touching my mind, as well as my heart. Happy Teachers' Month!

You may be able to teach me everything that is written in the book but am more thankful because you taught me how to be "ME" - the real me. Para kayong campaign ad ni Noynoy kasi tinuruan nyo ako kung pano pumunta sa tuwid na daan. Haha! Nah... Seriously, you are really amazing. Imagine spending how many hours teaching? And you actually know how to handle every situations involving your naughty students. 

There are a lot of things that I am thankful but I guess if I'll enumerate those, I might end up writing a book. Haha! Again, Happy Teachers' Day! Kudos to all the teachers! ;)

To my Elementary & HS Alma Mater (Jesus Good Shepherd School) and College Alma Mater (St. Scho Manila), thank you for making me a better person. That in all things, God may be glorified! :)

Proposed Anti-Planking Act of 2011

(Photo by Bullit Marquez)

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/62413/2-lawmakers-want-planking-banned

This morning, while I was browsing my Twitter account, I saw a tweet posted which says that there is a bill filed by a congressman proposing and seeking to prohibit “planking”. I tried searching for the whole story regarding that humorous proposed bill and ended up reading this article written by David Dizon (ABS-CBN News Website, September 20, 2011. http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/09/20/11/lawmaker-wants-planking-banned).

Quezon City Rep. Winston "Winnie" Castelo said he was worried after seeing a "planking" protest done by League of Filipino Students members wherein protesters lay face down in the middle of España Avenue and Welcome Rotonda to denounce skyrocketing fuel prices. The incident caused traffic on the major thoroughfare as students and irked many motorists.

Under the proposed Anti-Planking Act of 2011, Castelo proposed the creation of a universal Code of Student Conduct "where planking as a form of redress of grievance be strictly prohibited and appropriate sanctions be applied for violations thereof."

The congressman said schools and universities could impose sanctions on students who conduct planking to air their grievances especially when it poses a danger to themselves or to the public.

A what?! Anti-Planking Act of 2011?! Come on! Our country needs more than that! I just hope that our politicians will be enlightened and be able to pass MORE IMPORTANT bills. But then again, to the people of this country who are making jokes out of this bill, they may have taken the wrong move but that doesn't give you the right to make fun of it. Have some respect! Oh well, this is just my opinion, you may disagree with me but I do respect that. 

Final Destination 5

Final Destination 5 is a 2011 3D horror film written by Eric Heisserer and directed by Steven Quale. It started with the gathering of the co-workers for a company retreat which turned into a very tragic experience. The group includes Sam Lawton (Nicholas D'Agosto), who dreams of an apprenticeship in Paris, his best friend Peter (Miles Fisher), Peter's girlfriend Candice (Ellen Wroe), and her rival Olivia (Jacqueline MacInnes Wood). Along for the trip are Molly Harper (Emma Bell), who breaks up with Sam just before the trip, Peter's co-workers Isaac (P.J. Byrne) and Nathan (Arlen Escarpeta), and their boss Dennis Lapman (David Koechner). To make the story short, Sam Lawton had a premonition that something bad will happen so he warned his co-workers and his boss and got out of the bus to save themselves. Because of what happened, DEATH was after them for they were not supposed to live and be safe. 

Overall, the movie was nice but there are just some scenes that made me think. I had doubts if that can really happen in real life. I found myself asking the question "WHAT IF". Some cause of the character's death in this movie is just so unrealistic. 

The first one who died was Candice (played by Ellen Wroe). Candice bloodily breaks her back in a gymnasium and died instantly. What was shown in the movie was that her legs were also broken in the sense that you can see her flesh (real flesh with all that blood which I find to be so eeeeeewy. LOL). Don't you find it very unrealistic? Of course, her back can be broken but to see the flesh and a lot of blood just because you fell from the bar? Come on, think again! That may be possible when there are sharp objects laid on the floor. Oh well, I really don't buy that scenario. Quite crazy and funny. 

The next person who died in the movie was Isaac (played by P.J. Byrne).  Isaac's head is crushed by a Buddha statue during an acupuncture session at a Chinese Spa. Again, this is also unrealistic. How can your head be crushed just by a statute? Well, not to add that the statute is not that big. Yes, it can damage your head but not to the extent that your head will be crushed. Again, this is unbelievable.  

Olivia (played by Jacqueline MacInnes Wood) died in an accident at a laser eye surgery clinic when the laser malfunctioned and burned her eye. Sam and Molly arrived to save her, but she accidentally stepped on the dislodged eye of the teddy bear she's holding and crashed through a glass window and fell onto the windshield of a nearby car. Her eyeball was dislodged and rolls into the street, promptly getting run over by traffic. How can that possibly happen?! Haha! Again, the eyeball being dislodged was very unbelievable. Moreover, I personally believe that this scene will somehow affect the business of laser ere surgery. Come to think of it, people might be scared of trying that method because of the fear that it may also happen to them. Honestly, laser eye surgery was in my mind before but upon seeing this movie, I suddenly got scared and decided to stick with my eyeglasses. I am not saying that this really happens in the present but again, "WHAT IF". Nothing is impossible, right? 

Nathan (played by Arlen Escarpeta) returned to the plant and accidentally killed his antagonistic co-worker Roy (Brent Stait) during an argument when he shoved him in the path of a hook that was meant to strike him instead. The floor beneath Roy collapsed, causing him to fall and grab onto the cable before impaling his head on the hook.  Well, as to this, it's quite believable especially when the hook is sharp enough (that can surely kill you). Because of what happened, Nathan thought that he is already safe because someone died in exchange to his position. As Peter would put it "kill or be killed". But then again, it was a false hope because Nathan died when a flaming plane wheel from Flight 180 crashed through the roof of the building and crushed Nathan which killed him instantly. 

Dennis (played by David Koechner) was suddenly killed when a stray wrench is propelled through his eyes by a belt sander. That was really a tragic one. You just arrived at the place where someone died then suddenly, you died on the spot. Tsk tsk tsk. His death was actually possible but that would depend on the speed of the propeller. 

Later on, Peter tried to kill Molly believing that by killing someone, he can be saved. Unfortunately, Sam wouldn't let someone hurt his Molly so he defended his ex-girlfriend and that caused the death of Peter. Thinking that everything is already fine, Sam and Molly decided to go to Paris. Both boarded a plane and as they were taking their seats, a fight broke out between two passengers, revealed to be Carter Horton and Alex Browning. Sam and Molly boarded Volée Airlines Flight 180 just moments before the events of the first film and learned of Alex's visions too late to save themselves from the resulting disaster: Molly was bisected by the wing and Sam was burned alive in his seat.

As I have said earlier, it was a nice movie (no doubt) but I just hope that next time, everything in the movie should be realistic. Do not exaggerate things. The sound effect was good, the story was good but of course, there are still some flaws. AND the message that the movie was trying to say was really good. It will somehow make you think. Indeed, life is too short so let us make the most out of it. Furthermore, we should be cautious about things for we will never know how long are we still meant to live in this world. As the song 2012 would put it, "live like it's the end of the world". Be safe always! Again, this is just my opinion. You may agree or disagree with me but I just hope that you respect it. That's all for now.  :)

"Death doesn't want to be cheated" 

- DEATH (Final Destination 5)