There are sixteen types of cybercrime covered by the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012. This is § 11. Tasks of law enforcement authorities. — In order to ensure that the technical nature of cybercrime and its prevention are highlighted, and taking into account international cooperation procedures, law enforcement authorities, in particular the services or units responsible for investigating cybercrime, are required to submit regular and timely reports to the Ministry of Justice (DOJ), including the Results before the operation, after the operation and the investigation, as well as other documents that may be required. Verification and monitoring. This modern law makes it possible to investigate and prosecute crimes online and promotes international cooperation on cybercrime issues. (d) To facilitate international cooperation in the field of intelligence, investigation, training and capacity-building in preventing, combating and prosecuting cybercrime; The Act also mandates the National Bureau of Investigation and the Philippine National Police to organize a cybercrime unit of special investigators whose job will be to deal only with cases of violations of the law under the supervision of the Department of Justice. The Entity may, among other things, collect real-time traffic data from Internet service providers with good cause, require the disclosure of computer data within 72 hours of receiving a court order from a service provider, and conduct searches and seizures of data and computer devices. As mentioned earlier, this cybercrime law is punitive in nature.
Therefore, the law punishes any person who attempts to commit a cybercrime or who intentionally facilitates or supports the execution of a cybercrime, as defined and punished under the law itself or in connection with the revised Penal Code. A comparison between the cybercrime prevention laws and the policies of the Philippines and India shows similarities to some extent and, at the same time, there are slight differences. The comparison of the offer of cyber defamation in the two countries shows that both countries adopted this provision and immediately attracted the disagreement of Internet users. In India, section 66A of the Information Technology Act 2000 defines the penalty for sending “offensive” messages via the computer, mobile phones or tablets. Because the government had not defined the term “offensive,” it was used to suppress freedom of expression. In 2015, the Supreme Court repealed this law. In the Philippines, the same outcry was heard from internet users when cyber defamation was introduced as a criminal offence under the Cyber Prevention Act of 2012. In Disini v. Minister of Justice, the validity of the rule on online defamation has been challenged (G.R.
203335, February 11, 2014). The Supreme Court, on the other hand, has ruled that defamation is not constitutionally protected speech. As a result, the slander of the Internet is not unconstitutional. There may be different approaches to the provisions of the law in different countries, but to say that strict enforcement of the cyber law is essential to combat cybercrime. Technological crimes are not only limited to a geographic region, but are also a global phenomenon, and strict cybersecurity laws are essential around the world. While the designated authorities` measures and responses to cybercrime are far from perfect, it is a law that continually seeks to improve the protection of the rights of every Filipino internet user. Brad Adams, executive director of the Asia division at Human Rights Watch, said, “The Cybercrime Act must be repealed or replaced: “It violates Filipinos` right to freedom of expression and is totally incompatible with the Philippine government`s obligations under international law.” The use of the Internet, computers and similar digital technologies, as well as actions of the public, governmental and commercial sectors, are subject to cybercrime legislation, which includes rules of evidence and criminal procedures, as well as other criminal justice issues related to cybercrime. (b) To coordinate the development of appropriate and effective measures to prevent and combat cybercrime activities in accordance with this Act; (e) Coordinate the support and participation of the business sector, local government agencies and non-governmental organizations in cybercrime prevention programmes and other articles 5: in addition to what is specified in section 4, other offences are included. It is aid, encouragement or incitement and attempt to commit cybercrime.
(h) carry out all other matters related to the prevention and fight against cybercrime, including capacity building and all other functions and obligations that may be necessary for the proper implementation of this Law. The National Bureau of Investigation and the Philippine National Police are the agencies responsible for enforcing the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012. The two organize a cybercrime unit or center with special investigators to handle cases that exclusively affect violations of this 2012 Cybercrime Prevention Act. The Prevention of Cybercrime Act of 2012, officially registered as Republic Act No. 10175, is a law of the Philippines passed on September 12, 2012. It aims to address legal issues related to online interactions and the Internet in the Philippines. Cybercrime offences included in the bill include cybersquatting,, child pornography, identity theft, illegal access to data and defamation.  In order to combat and prevent cybercrime, the Government of the Philippines has amended Republic Act No. Prevention 101175 or Cyber Control Act 2012. This law was signed on 12 September 2012 by the President of the Philippines, Mr. Benigno Aquino.
The original purpose of this law was to punish acts such as, child pornography, identity theft, etc. § 10 Law enforcement authorities. — The National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) and the Philippine National Police (PNP) shall be responsible for effectively and efficiently pursuing the provisions of this Act. The NBI and PNP organize a cybercrime unit or center with special investigators to deal exclusively with cases of violation of this law. ABS. 4. Cybercrime. — The following acts constitute the offence of cybercrime punishable under this Act: The Philippines legal framework for cybercrime and electronic evidence is essentially in line with the Budapest Convention, with the Cybercrime Prevention Act coming into force in February 2014. Cybercrime, also known as computer crime, is the use of a computer as a tool to promote illegal purposes such as fraud trafficking, child pornography, intellectual property infringement, identity theft or invasion of privacy. The difference between traditional crimes and cybercrime lies in the use of the computer to commit such crimes. Primarily, cybercrime is an attack on the information of individuals, governments or companies. The Cybercrime Act also provides for regulations to reduce the risk and/or harm to individuals, businesses and infrastructure in the event of cybercrime.
Accordingly, cybercrime law includes substantive, procedural and preventive law. Special cybercrime courts should be appointed, with judges specially trained to deal with cybercrime cases. A new Philippine law on “cybercrime” significantly increases penalties for criminal defamation and gives authorities excessive and unchecked powers to shut down websites and monitor online information, Human Rights Watch said today. Several of the definitions of cybercrime under the Prevention of Cybercrime Act 2012 are based on the Budapest Convention`s definition of illegal access and interception, data and system disruption, misuse of devices, computer counterfeiting and computer fraud.