Regulations on Computer Technology

Computer crimes are already rampant in our society today. Crimes such as hacking and software piracy are posing serious threats even in one’s life. Laws such as the E-Commerce Law of the Philippines and the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines were enacted to protect us from possible threats of these computer crimes. Because of this, I am in favor of enforcement of laws that will control the use of computer technology.

However, there should be an international ruling body that will implement these laws against computer crimes. The scope of these laws should be made globally and not just in one particular community. With this, no one will be spared from being prosecuted regardless of the country where the crime will be committed. However, regulations in using computer technology should not violate people’s rights. Rights to privacy, freedom of expression and rights to free access of information are some of concerns that might be affected when people will be imposed with restrictions in using computers. Thus, enforcement of laws to regulate the use of computer technology must be clearly defined and it must be for the common good, regardless of age, nationality and race.

Leilani Garcia vs Thames International Business School

Case Background:

Leilani Garcia was charged for allegedly hacking the computer system of Thames International Business School. Garcia was the system supervisor of the said school when the alleged crime was committed. She reportedly used the school account given by Cesar Mañalac, the IT support chief of Thames who was also charged with the same offense by the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI).

In Garcia’s counter-affidavit, she argued that she did not illegally hack the computer system of Thames since she was actually given an account by the school’s IT chief. According to her, she was made aware that “it was a common practice for other employees to sometimes access and use the account, as long as the school was not using it.”

This case was the considered the first hacking case in the Philippines filed under the RA 8792 or the E-Commerce Act of 2000.

My Judgement:

First of all, before I give my own judgment, there must be clear evidences to prove that Garcia is indeed guilty of the charges filed against her. With the counter affidavit filed by Garcia to answer the charges against her, she reasoned that the account that she used to access the computer system of Thames was freely given to her by the IT chief of the school. Should she be considered innocent because of this? Maybe, just maybe. If the system administrator gave her the authority to use the account and was fully aware that she was using the account of the school, then there was really no “unauthorized access” made. However, if that was against the Thames computer system policy, then it is clear that what Garcia did was a violation of Sec. 33 of the Republic Act Number 8792. Granted that she was given the authority by the IT chief, but it was against the school policy, then that will still be considered illegal, and thus, she is guilty of the charges filed against her. Garcia may argue that she was not aware of any computer policy in the school that prohibits what she did, but still ignorance of the law cannot serve as an excuse to escape from the charges filed against her. And both Garcia and Mañalac should be given with corresponding punishments for violating the provision in the RA 8792.


Reference:

Albacea, E. A., Payongayong, T. T, Pinpin, A. V. (2003). Computer Ethics. UPOU.