ICE BREAKER THIS OR THAT

1. Identity Theft or Online Scam

2. Unauthorized access to computer systems or making false statements about individuals online
3. Threatening to disclose sensitive information or Engaging violence through electronic means

ICE BREAKER 2 TRUTHS 1 LIE

the Act intends to create a legal framework that supports and promotes the use of electronic means for various
types of transactions (TRUE)
This Act shall apply to any kind of electronic data message and electronic document used in the context of
commercial and non-commercial activities to include domestic and international dealings, transactions,
arrangements, agreements, contracts and exchanges and storage of information. (TRUE)
Electronic data message refers to information or the representation of information, data, figures, symbols or
other modes of written expression, described or however represented, by which a right is established or an
obligation extinguished, or by which a fact may be proved and affirmed, which is received, recorded,
transmitted, stored, processed, retrieved or produced electronically.

HISTORY: ARA
On 14 June 2000, President Joseph E. Estrada signed into law R.A. 8792 "An Act Providing For The
Recognition And Use of Electronic Commercial And Non-Commercial Transactions, Penalties For
Unlawful Use Thereof, And Other Purposes, also known as the "Electronic Commerce Act." It is a
landmark legislation in the history of the Philippines. Not only has this bill made the country a legitimate player
in the global marketplace. The Philippine Internet community has played a major role in pushing for its
passage. This law aims to facilitate domestic and international transactions through the utilization of electronic
mediums and technology to recognize the authenticity and reliability of electronic documents.
The Philippine E-Commerce Act, also known as Republic Act No. 8792, serves as the legal framework for
conducting business activities online. It addresses a range of topics such as electronic agreements,
safeguarding data privacy, combating cybercrime, and upholding consumer rights. Additionally, the Act
delineates the responsibilities of online enterprises, which encompass recognizing the legitimacy of electronic
signatures, ensuring compliance with data protection measures, and adhering to consumer protection statutes.
In its Declaration of Policy (Section 2), it is declared that "The State recognizes the vital role of information and
communications technology (ICI) in nation building. The Objective and Sphare of Application of the new law
are as hereunder stated:

OBJECTIVE
Sec. 3. Objective - This Act aims to facilitate domestic and international dealings, transactions, arrangements,
agreements, contracts and exchanges and storage of information through the utilization of electronic, optical
and similar medium, mode, instrumentality and technology to recognize the authenticity and reliability of
electronic data messages or electronic documents related to such activities and to promote the universal use
of electronic transactions in the government and by the general public.
Section 3 of the Act outlines its objective, which is to streamline and enable both domestic and international
dealings, transactions, agreements, contracts, and exchanges using electronic, optical, and similar mediums
and technologies. The Act seeks to establish mechanisms that validate the authenticity and reliability of
electronic data messages or documents involved in such activities. Furthermore, it aims to encourage the
widespread adoption of electronic transactions not only within the government but also among the general
public. Essentially, the Act intends to create a legal framework that supports and promotes the use of electronic
means for various types of transactions, thereby facilitating efficiency and convenience in modern business
practice

1. Identity Theft or Online Scam

2. Unauthorized access to computer systems or making false statements about individuals online
3. Threatening to disclose sensitive information or Engaging violence through electronic means

Sec. 4. Sphere of Application - This Act shall apply to any kind of electronic data message and electronic
document used in the context of commercial and non-commercial activities to include domestic and
international dealings, transactions, arrangements, agreements, contracts and exchanges and storage of
information.
Section 4 of the Act defines the scope of its application. It states that the Act is applicable to all types of
electronic data messages and electronic documents used in both commercial and non-commercial activities.
This includes a wide range of transactions, dealings, arrangements, agreements, contracts, and exchanges,
whether they occur within the country (domestic) or involve parties from different countries (international).
Additionally, the Act covers the storage of information related to these activities. In essence, this section
clarifies that the Act is not limited to specific types of electronic communications but rather encompasses a
broad spectrum of electronic interactions, regardless of their commercial or non-commercial nature and their
geographical scope.

This statement suggests that while the internet may not quickly supplant the role of traditional shopping malls,
which remain popular gathering places for Filipinos of all ages seeking comfort in air-conditioned
environments, the tradition of "malling" as a favored social activity is likely to persist for some time. However,
there's a shift occurring as traditional brick-and-mortar businesses adapt to the online landscape. As more of
these businesses incorporate online strategies into their operations, the idea of online shopping could become
more widely accepted among Filipino consumers sooner than initially expected. This indicates a gradual but
significant change in consumer behavior towards embracing digital shopping experiences, although the
cultural significance of physical malls and the social aspect of "malling" may endure for the foreseeable future.

LEGAL RECOGNITION OF ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS, AND

ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES
(SECTION 6-15)
The new law defines in Section 5 thereof what constitutes "electronic data message", "electronic signature"
and "electronic document", as follows: (if need ng definition of terms, mayroong provided sa links na
sinend ko, paki-check na lang for other terms)
c) "Electronic data message" refers to information generated, sent, received or stored by electronic, optical or
similar means.
e) "Electronic signature" refers to any distinctive mark, characteristic and/or sound in electronic form,
representing the identity of a person and attached to or logically associated with the electronic data message
or electronic document or any methodology or procedures employed or adopted by a person and executed or
adopted by such person with the intention of authenticating or approving an electronic data message or
electronic document.
f) "Electronic document" refers to information or the representation of information, data, figures, symbols or
other modes of written expression, described or however represented, by which a right is established or an
obligation extinguished, or by which a fact may be proved and affirmed, which is received, recorded,
transmitted, stored, processed, retrieved or produced electronically. It includes digitally signed documents and
any print-out or output, readable by sight or other means, which accurately reflects the electronic data
message or electronic document. For purposes of these Rules, the term “electronic document” may be used
interchangeably with electronic data message”.
The new law gives legal recognition to electronic data messages, electronic documents and electronic
signatures.
In cases of documents and signatures in electric form:
Sec. 6. Legal Recognition of Electronic Data Message - Information shall not be denied validity or
enforceability solely on the ground that it is in the form of an electronic data message purporting to give rise to
such legal effect, or that it is merely incorporated by reference in that electronic data message.
For evidentiary purposes:
Sec. 7. Legal Recognition of Electronic Documents - Electronic documents shall have the legal effect,
validity or enforceability as any other document or legal writing, and

(a) Where the law requires a document to be in writing, that requirement is met by an electronic document if
the said electronic document maintains its integrity and reliability and can be authenticated so as to be usable
for subsequent reference, in that -
i) The electronic document has remained complete and unaltered, apart from the addition of any
endorsement and any authorized change, or any change which arises in the normal course of
communication, storage and display; and
ii) The electronic document is reliable in the light of the purpose for which it was generated and in the
light of all relevant circumstances.

(b) Paragraph (a) applies whether the requirement therein is in the form of an obligation or whether the law
simply provides consequences for the document not being presented or retained in its original form. (c)Where
the law requires that a document be presented or retained in its original form, that requirement is met by an
electronic document if -
i) There exists a reliable assurance as to the integrity of the document from the time when it was first
generated in its final form; and
ii) That document is capable of being displayed to the person to whom it is to be presented: Provided,
That no provision of this Act shall apply to vary any and all requirements of existing laws on formalities
required in the execution of documents for their validity.
For evidentiary purposes, an electronic document shall be the functional equivalent of a written document
under existing laws. (Section 7)

This Act does not modify any statutory rule relating to the admissibility of electronic data messages or
electronic documents, except the rules relating to authentication and best evidence.
As to electronic signature placed on the electronic document:
Sec. 8. Legal Recognition of Electronic Signatures - An electronic signature on the electronic documents
shall be equivalent to the signature of a person on a written document if the signature is an electronic signature
and proved by showing that a prescribed procedure, not alterable by the parties interested in the electronic
document, existed under which:

a) A method is used to identify the party sought to be bound and to indicate said party’s access to the
electronic document necessary for his consent or approval through the electronic signature;

b) Said method is reliable and appropriate for the purpose for which the electronic document was generated or
communicated, in the light of all circumstances, including any relevant agreement;

c) It is necessary for the party sought to be bound, in order to proceed further with the transaction, to have
executed or provided the electronic signature; and

d) The other party is authorized and enabled to verify the electronic signature and to make the decision to
proceed with the transaction authenticated by the same.

In furtherance of the support in favor of the recognition of electronic signature, it shall be presumed that
electronic signature is the signature of the person to whom it correlates and it was affixed by that person with
the intention of signing or approving the electronic document unless the person relying on the electronically
signed electronic document knows or has noticed of defects in or unreliability of the signature or reliance on
the electronic signature is not reasonable under the circumstances. (Section 8)

The foregoing provisions put at rest the legal debate on whether or not Philippine Courts will accept electronic
contracts or documents as evidence.
The Rules of Court (Rules 128-134) govern court procedures and processes. Rule 130, at Section 2 of the
same, provides that documentary evidence are "those which consist of writings or any material containing
letters, words, figures, symbols, or other modes of written expressions offered as proof of its contents." Are
electronically generated data or documents covered under the said Rules?
CASE 1
People vs. Burgos, 200 SCRA 67
Nine (9) private respondents were charged with violation of the Anti-Subversion Act (RA No. 1700)by the Office
of the City Prosecutor of Cebu. During the bail in the RTC, Branch 17 of Cebu City, Judge Burgos denied the
prosecution's request for its witness, Computer Programmer Eulogio Llego to print in open court the materials
encoded in the diskettes that were seized from private respondents. The denial of the request was anchored
on the ground that the diskettes were in the possession of the prosecution since the start of the hearing, and
that as admitted by the prosecution witness himself, their contents could be manipulated or altered.
The Supreme Court, in a sedition case (People vs. Burgos, 200 SCRA 67), had occasion to rule on
whether evidence submitted in electronic form could be admissible as evidence. Burgos argued that the
evidence – contained in diskettes – which the military had sought to introduce against him could not be
admissible as the military could have tampered with it. The judge in the lower court agreed with him and
disallowed the presentation of the evidence. In the Supreme Court, the lower court was reversed and was
directed to admit the evidence. But instead of ruling, however, on whether an electronic –generated evidence
was admissible or not, it relied on the presumption of regularity in the performance of public service. It allowed
the introduction of the evidence on the ground that there was no showing that the military had tampered with
the diskette. Thus, the issue of electronically generated documents/data as evidence was not squarely decided
upon.
The new law now expressly provides that for evidentiary purposes, an electronic document shall be the
functional equivalent of a written document under existing laws. Under this principle of "functional equivalent"
any electronic data message, document or signature, which is the functional equivalent of a written document
or original signature, it is now clearly admissible as evidence. The operative words for admissibility are
"integrity", "reliability" and "can be authenticated".
HELD:
Therefore, hold that the printing out of data (if any) encoded in the diskettes should be allowed. Indeed, the
presumption that official duty has been regularly performed prevails, in the absence of any evidence to the
contrary. -This case was before the effectivity of the E-Commerce Act -Acc. to the Supreme Court, the
evidence was allowed not because of the authenticity of the contents of the diskette but because there is a
presumption that the official duty has been regularly performed insofar as the police officers are concerned. -
Without touching the merits of the authenticity of the electronic evidence presented, the Supreme Court
decided in favor of the prosecution based on the presumption of regularity of performance of duty.

Thus, Sections 10 and 11 of the new law provides:

Sec. 10. Original Documents - (1) Where the law requires information to be presented or retained in its
original form, that requirement is met by an electronic data message or electronic document if:
a) the integrity of the information from the time when it was first generated in its final form, as an electronic
data message or electronic document is shown by evidence aliunde or otherwise; and b) where it is required
that information be presented, that the information is capable of being displayed to the person to whom it is to
be presented.
(2) Paragraph (1) applies whether the requirement therein is in the form of an obligation or whether the law
simply provides consequences for the information not being presented or retained in its original form.
(3) For the purposes of subparagraph (a) of paragraph (1):

a) the criteria for assessing integrity shall be whether the information has remained complete and
unaltered, apart from the addition of any endorsement and any change which arises in the normal
course of communication, storage and display; and
b) the standard of reliability required shall be assessed in the light of the purpose for which the
information was generated and in the light of all the relevant circumstances.

Sec. 11. Authentication of Electronic Data Messages and Electronic Documents - Until the Supreme
Court by appropriate rules shall have so provided, electronic documents, electronic data messages and
electronic signatures, shall be authenticated by demonstrating, substantiating and validating a claimed identity
of a user, device, or another entity in an information or communication system, among other ways.
The new law further provides in Section 12 thereof that electronic messages and electronic documents are
admissible and have evidential weight. Thus:

ADMISSIBILITY AND WEIGHT OF ELECTRONIC DATA

(SECTION 12-13)

SECTION 12(12). Admissibility and Evidential Weight of Electronic Data Messages or Electronic Documents.
— In any legal proceedings, nothing in the application of the rules on evidence shall deny the admissibility of
an electronic data message or electronic document in evidence —
a. On the sole ground that it is in electronic form; or
b. On the ground that it is not in the standard written form, and the electronic data message or electronic
document meeting, and complying with the requirements under Sections 6 or 7 hereof shall be the best
evidence of the agreement and transaction contained therein.

KEY POINTS TO CONSIDER

a. Electronic data messages are admissible in legal proceedings without denial based on electronic form.
b. Admissibility is not denied based on electronic form.
c. Not being in the standard written form does not hinder admissibility.
d. Documents meeting requirements under Sections 6 or 7 are the best evidence of the contained
agreement and transaction.
e. The evidential weight is assessed based on reliability in generation, storage, communication, and
identification of the originator.
f. Retention requirements in original form are satisfied by electronic data messages.
g. Retained documents must remain accessible, in the original format, and enable identification of
originator, addressee, date, and time.
h. Third-party services can be used, provided conditions in paragraph (a) are met.

Conclusion
These sections remove barriers to the admissibility of electronic evidence in legal proceedings,
recognizing the importance of electronic forms without prejudice. Section 12 firmly establishes the admissibility
of electronic data messages and documents, emphasizing that their electronic nature alone should not be a
basis for denial. The section also prioritizes electronic records meeting specific requirements as the best
evidence of agreements and transactions. Section 13 addresses the retention of electronic data messages,
providing clarity on satisfying legal requirements by retaining them electronically. It acknowledges the role of
third-party services, ensuring that the essential characteristics of accessibility, format, and identification are
maintained.

PROOF AND CROSS-EXAMINATION

(SECTION 14-15)

KEY POINTS TO CONSIDER

a. Matters related to admissibility and presumption of integrity may be presumed by affidavit.
b. Deponents of affidavits can be cross-examined by an adverse party in legal proceedings.
c. Deponents of affidavits introduced in evidence can be cross-examined by an adverse party.
d. Any party has the right to cross-examine a person referred to in Section 11, paragraph 4, sub-
paragraph c.

Conclusion
 They play a pivotal role in shaping the legal landscape concerning electronic evidence and affidavits.
Section 14 allows for the establishment of crucial matters related to admissibility and presumption of integrity
through affidavits, streamlining legal proceedings and promoting efficiency. Section 15 emphasizes the
importance of cross-examination, ensuring that parties involved in legal proceedings have the right to question
the deponent of an affidavit introduced as evidence. This promotes transparency, accountability, and fair
representation, safeguarding the integrity of the legal process.
Sec. 14. Admissibility and Evidential Weight of Electronic Data Messages or Electronic Documents - In
any legal proceedings, nothing in the application of the rules on evidence shall deny the admissibility of an
electronic data message or electronic document in evidence -
a. On the sole ground that it is in electronic form; or
b. On the ground that it is not in the standard written form, and the electronic data message or electronic
document meeting, and complying with the requirements under Sections 6 or 7 hereof shall be the best
evidence of the agreement and transaction contained therein.
In assessing the evidential weight of an electronic data message or electronic document, the reliability of the
manner in which it was generated, stored or communicated, the reliability of the manner in which its originator
was identified, and other relevant factors shall be given due regard.

COMMUNICATION OF ELECTRONIC DATA MESSAGES OR

DOCUMENTS ARA
(SECTION 16 - 24)
Under the Civil Code of the Philippines, all contracts have three (3) essential elements, these are,
consent of the contracting parties, the object which is the subject matter of the contract and cause of the
obligation which is established (Article 1318 of the Civil Code). Consent is manifested by the meeting of the
offer and the acceptance upon the thing and the cause which are to constitute the contract (1319 of the Civil
Code). Under RA 8792, except when otherwise agreed by the parties, an offer and its acceptance and such
other elements for the formation of contracts may be expressed, demonstrated, and proved by means of
electronic data messages or electronic documents. No contract shall be denied validity or enforceability on the
sole ground that it is in the form of an electronic data message or electronic document, or that any or all of the
elements required under existing laws for the formation of contracts is expressed, demonstrated and proved by
means of electronic data messages or electronic documents (Sec. 16 (1) of RA 8792).

With the passage of the foregoing, the State emphasized the principle that contracts shall be obligatory, in
whatever form they may have been entered into, provided all the essential requisites for their validity are
present (Article 1356 of the Civil Code).

The electronic transactions made through networking among banks, or linkages thereof with other
entities or networks, and vice versa, shall be deemed consummated upon the actual dispensing of cash, or the
debit of one account, and the corresponding credit to another, whether such transaction is initiated by the
depositor, or by an authorized collecting party. The obligation of one bank, entity, or person similarly situated to
another arising therefrom shall be considered absolute, and shall not be subjected to the process of preference
of credits (Sec. 16 (2) of RA 8792)

RECOGNITION AND ATTRIBUTION OF ELECTRONIC DATA

(SECTION 17-18)

Section 18. Attribution of Electronic Data Message. -

(1) An electronic data message or electronic document is that of the originator if it was sent by the originator
himself.

(2) As between the originator and the addressee, an electronic data message or electronic document is
deemed to be that of the originator if it was sent:

(a) by a person who had the authority to act on behalf of the originator with respect to that electronic data
message or electronic document; or

(b) by an information system programmed by, or on behalf of the originator to operate automatically.

(3) As between the originator and the addressee, an addressee is entitled to regard an electronic data
message or electronic document as being that of the originator, and to act on that assumption, if:

(a) in order to ascertain whether the electronic data message or electronic document was that of the originator,
the addressee properly applied a procedure previously agreed to by the originator for that purpose; or

(b) the electronic data message or electronic document as received by the addressee resulted from the actions
of a person whose relationship with the originator or with any agent of the originator enabled that person to
gain access to a method used by the originator to identify electronic data messages as his own.

(4) Paragraph (3) does not apply:

(a) as of the time when the addressee has both received notice from the originator that the electronic data
message or electronic document is not that of the originator, and has reasonable time to act accordingly; or

(b) in a case within paragraph (3) sub-paragraph (b), at any time when the addressee knew or should have
known, had it exercised reasonable care of used any agreed procedure, that the electronic data message or
electronic document was not that of the originator.

(5) Where an electronic data message or electronic document is that of the originator or is deemed to be that
of the originator, or the addressee is entitled to act on that assumption, then, as between the originator and the
addressee, the addressee is entitled to regard the electronic data message or electronic document as received
as being what the originator intended to send, and to act on that assumption. The addressee is not so entitled
when it knew or should have known, had it exercised treasonable care or used any agreed procedure, that the
transmission resulted in any error in the electronic data message or electronic document as received.

(6) The addressee is entitled to regard each electronic data message or electronic document received as a
separate electronic data message or electronic document and to act on that assumption, except to the extent
that it duplicates another electronic data message or electronic document and the addressee knew or should
have known, had it exercised reasonable care or used any agreed procedure, that the electronic data message
or electronic document was a duplicate.

KEY POINTS TO CONSIDER

a. Declarations of will or statements in electronic form between originator and addressee are legally
effective.
 b. Legal effect, validity, or enforceability cannot be denied solely based on being in the form of an
electronic data message or document.
c. An electronic data message is considered that of the originator if sent by the originator.
d. Deemed originator if sent by an authorized person or an automated system programmed by the
originator.
e. The addressee can assume the originator if they followed agreed procedures or the message resulted
from someone with access to the originator's identification method.
f. Addressee's entitlement is limited when notified of non-originator status or when it knew or should have
known about the error.

Conclusion
Section 17 addresses the recognition of electronic data messages or documents between parties,
asserting their legal effect, validity, and enforceability. This provision ensures that the form of an electronic
message does not undermine its legal standing, promoting confidence in the use of digital communications for
legal purposes.
Section 18 delves into the attribution of electronic data messages, providing a structured framework to
identify the originator. It takes into account not only the direct actions of the originator but also the authority of
individuals acting on their behalf and the role of automated systems. This section establishes a clear and
equitable basis for determining the authenticity and responsibility of electronic communications, aligning legal
principles with the dynamics of electronic transactions.

HANDLING ERRORS IN ELECTRONIC DATA

(Section 19)

KEY POINTS TO CONSIDER

a. The addressee is entitled to regard the received electronic data message as intended by the originator,
unless they knew or should have known about errors or incorrect destination.
b. Conditions for disregarding the intended message include errors during transmission or sending to an
incorrect information system.

Conclusion
This section outlines the entitlement of the addressee to regard an electronic data message or
document as what the originator intended to send, reinforcing the principle that the recipient can act on the
assumption that the received message accurately reflects the originator's intent.
Crucially, Section 19 establishes conditions under which the addressee's entitlement may be
disregarded, emphasizing the importance of due diligence. If errors occur during transmission or if the
electronic data message is sent to an unintended information system, the addressee is expected to exercise
reasonable care or use appropriate procedures to discern and rectify any discrepancies.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF ELECTRONIC MESSAGES

(Section 20)
SECTION 20. Agreement on Acknowledgment of Receipt of Electronic Data Messages or Electronic
Documents. — The following rules shall apply where, on or before sending an electronic data message
 or electronic document, the originator and the addressee have agreed, or in that electronic document or
electronic data message, the originator has requested, that receipt of the electronic document or
electronic data message be acknowledged:

a.) Where the originator has not agreed with the addressee that the acknowledgment be given in a
particular form or by a particular method, an acknowledgment may be given by or through any
communication by the addressee, automated or otherwise, or any conduct of the addressee, sufficient
to indicate to the originator that the electronic data message or electronic document has been received.
b.) Where the originator has stated that the effect or significance of the electronic data message or
electronic document is conditional on receipt of the acknowledgment thereof, the electronic data
message or electronic document is treated as though it has never been sent, until the acknowledgment
is received.
c.) Where the originator has not stated that the effect or significance of the electronic data message or
electronic document is conditional on receipt of the acknowledgment, and the acknowledgment has not
been received by the originator within the time specified or agreed or, if no time has been specified or
agreed, within a reasonable time, the originator may give notice to the addressee stating that no
acknowledgment has been received and specifying a reasonable time by which the acknowledgment
must be received; and if the acknowledgment is not received within the time specified in subparagraph
(c), the originator may, upon notice to the addressee, treat the electronic data message or electronic
document as though it had never been sent, or exercise any other rights it may have.

KEY POINTS TO CONSIDER

a. Rules for acknowledgment are defined, including methods and conditions.
b. The acknowledgment's impact on the message's significance is considered, and procedures for non-
receipt are outlined.

Conclusion
It talks about a clear framework for acknowledging the receipt of electronic data messages or
documents, emphasizing the importance of agreed-upon procedures between the originator and the
addressee. The flexibility in acknowledgment methods, as outlined in Section 20, ensures adaptability to
various communication channels. It recognizes that acknowledgment can be automated or manual, offering
practicality in a diverse digital landscape. Moreover, Section 20 addresses the significance of acknowledgment
in determining the effect of the electronic data message or document. By allowing parties to condition the
impact of the message on the receipt of acknowledgment, it enhances precision in electronic transactions.

SECTION 21(20). Time of Dispatch of Electronic Data Messages or Electronic Documents. — Unless
otherwise agreed between the originator and the addressee, the dispatch of an electronic data message or
electronic document occurs when it enters an information system outside the control of the originator or of the
person who sent the electronic data message or electronic document on behalf of the originator.

 Dispatch refers to the act of sending or transmitting the electronic data message or document from the
originator to the addressee.
 According to the statement, the dispatch of an electronic data message or document is considered to
occur at the moment it enters an information system that is outside the control of the originator or the
 person sending the message on behalf of the originator. In simpler terms, it's when the message leaves
the sender's sphere of influence and enters the broader electronic communication network.
 This principle is important in understanding the legal and technical aspects of electronic
communication, particularly in contexts like contract law or electronic commerce, where the timing of
dispatch can have significant implications for determining responsibilities, liabilities, and the validity of
agreements. It essentially clarifies when the sender relinquishes control over the message and when it
becomes the responsibility of the broader communication infrastructure to deliver it to the intended
recipient.

CASE 2
Virgilio O. Garcillano (petitioner) vs The House of Representatives Committees on Public Information,
Public Order and Safety, National Defense and Security, Information and Communications TechnologY,
Suffrage and Electoral Reforms (respondents) - G.R. No. 179275

During the hype of the Arroyo administration, a new controversy arose. During the 2007 election the
conversation of President Arroyo and the herein petitioner Virgilio Garciliano, COMELEC regional director,
regarding the desire of the president to have a favourable outcome in terms of his senatoriables. Such
conversation was recorded and was played during the house of representative investigation. Because of such
a turn of events, a petition was filed before the court praying that such playing of the illegally seized
communication was in violation of RA 4200 or the anti-wire tapping law. Also such petition for injunction prays
that the Senate committee be prevented from further conducting such investigation for the basic reason that
there was no proper publication of the senate rules, empowering them to make such investigation of the
unlawfully seized documents.

Issue:
Whether or not there was proper publication of the rules as to empower the senate to further proceed with their
investigation?

HELD:
No, the Supreme Court mentioned the following:

The Senate cannot be allowed to continue with the conduct of the questioned legislative inquiry without duly
published rules of procedure, in clear derogation of the constitutional requirement.
Section 21, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution explicitly provides that "the Senate or the House of
Representatives, or any of its respective committees may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation in accordance
with its duly published rules of procedure." The requisite of publication of the rules is intended to satisfy the
basic requirements of due process.Publication is indeed imperative, for it will be the height of injustice to
punish or otherwise burden a citizen for the transgression of a law or rule of which he had no notice
whatsoever, not even a constructive one.What constitutes publication is set forth in Article 2 of the Civil Code,
which provides that "laws shall take effect after 15 days following the completion of their publication either in
the Official Gazette, or in a newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines."
Respondents justify their non-observance of the constitutionally mandated publication by arguing that the rules
have never been amended since 1995 and, despite that, they are published in booklet form available to
anyone for free, and accessible to the public at the Senate’s internet web page.

The Court does not agree. The absence of any amendment to the rules cannot justify the Senate’s defiance of
the clear and unambiguous language of Section 21, Article VI of the Constitution. The organic law instructs,
without more, that the Senate or its committees may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation only in accordance
with duly published rules of procedure, and does not make any distinction whether or not these rules have
undergone amendments or revision. The constitutional mandate to publish the said rules prevails over any
custom, practice or tradition followed by the Senate.

The invocation by the respondents of the provisions of R.A. No. 8792,otherwise known as the Electronic
Commerce Act of 2000, to support their claim of valid publication through the internet is all the more incorrect.
R.A. 8792 considers an electronic data message or an electronic document as the functional equivalent of a
written document only for evidentiary purposes.In other words, the law merely recognizes the admissibility in
evidence (for their being the original) of electronic data messages and/or electronic documents.It does not
make the internet a medium for publishing laws, rules and regulations.

Given this discussion, the respondent Senate Committees, therefore, could not, in violation of the Constitution,
use its unpublished rules in the legislative inquiry subject of these consolidated cases. The conduct of inquiries
in aid of legislation by the Senate has to be deferred until it shall have caused the publication of the rules,
because it can do so only "in accordance with its duly published rules of procedure."

Indeed the inquiry to be conducted by the senate in aid of legislation cannot proceed for the reason that the
rules that they will observe were not properly published as provided by the Fundamental Law of the land. Such
inquiry if allowed without observance of the required publication will put a person’s life, liberty and property at
stake without due process of law. Also, the further assertion of the senate that they already published such
rules through their web page, in observance of the RA 8792 or the Electronic Commerce Act was only viewed
by the court as matter of evidence and still does not conform with what the constitution propounded.

In this regard the high court granted the petition for injunction preventing the senate to conduct such inquiry in
aid of legislation.

SECTION 22(21). Time of Receipt of Electronic Data Messages or Electronic Documents. — Unless
otherwise agreed between the originator and the addressee, the time of receipt of an electronic data message
or electronic document is as follows:

(a.) If the addressee has designated an information system for the purpose of receiving electronic data
messages or electronic documents, receipt occurs at the time when the electronic data message or electronic
document enters the designated information system: Provided, however, That if the originator and the
addressee are both participants in the designated information system, receipt occurs at the time when the
electronic data message or electronic document is retrieved by the addressee.
  May given information system, designated by addressee, ‘yung receipt nangyayari kapag natransmit na
sa IS ‘yung e-docu.
 Kapag both addressee and originator are participants sa IS, nangyayari ang receipt kapag
nareceive/retrieved na ni addresse ‘yung e-docu.

(b.) If the electronic data message or electronic document is sent to an information system of the addressee
that is not the designated information system, receipt occurs at the time when the electronic data message or
electronic document is retrieved by the addressee;

 May designated IS pero hindi dun na send ‘yung e-docu, nangyayari ‘yung receipt kapag na retrieve ni
addressee ‘yung e-docu.

(c.) If the addressee has not designated an information system, receipt occurs when the electronic data
message or electronic document enters an information system of the addressee.

 Walang designated IS, nangyayari ‘yung receipt kapag natrasmit na ‘yung e-docu sa IS ni addressee.

These rules apply notwithstanding that the place where the information system is located may be different from
the place where the electronic data message or electronic document is deemed to be received.

 This statement emphasizes that the rules regarding the dispatch of electronic data messages or
documents remain applicable regardless of the location of the information system involved in the
transmission.

SECTION 23(22). Place of Dispatch and Receipt of Electronic Data Message or Electronic Documents.
— Unless otherwise agreed between the originator and the addressee, an electronic data message or
electronic document is deemed to be dispatched at the place where the originator has its place of business
and received at the place where the addressee has its place of business. This rule shall apply even if the
originator or addressee had used a laptop other portable device to transmit or receive his electronic data
message or electronic document. This rule shall also apply to determine the tax situs of such transaction.

 tax situs (the place where a transaction is subject to taxation)

 This rule provides a default framework for determining the location of dispatch and receipt, ensuring
clarity and predictability in electronic communication. It simplifies the process by establishing a
standard reference point for identifying the origin and destination of electronic transactions.
 The rule explicitly states that it applies even if the originator or addressee uses a laptop or other
portable device to transmit or receive the electronic data message or document. This ensures
consistency in determining the location of dispatch and receipt regardless of the specific device used
for communication.

For the purpose hereof —

a. If the originator or the addressee has more than one place of business, the place of business is that which
has the closest relationship to the underlying transaction or, where there is no underlying transaction, the
principal place of business.
b. If the originator or the addressee does not have a place of business, reference is to be made to its habitual
residence; or
c. The “usual place of residence” in relation to a body corporate, means the place where it is incorporated or
otherwise legally constituted.

SECTION 24(23). Choice of Security Methods. — Subject to applicable laws and/or rules and guidelines
promulgated by the Department of Trade and Industry with other appropriate government agencies, parties to
any electronic transaction shall be free to determine the type and level of electronic data message or electronic
document security needed, and to select and use or implement appropriate technological methods that suit
their needs.

 This statement outlines the freedom granted to parties involved in electronic transactions to determine
the security measures for electronic data messages or documents, subject to relevant laws and
regulations established by government agencies such as the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI)
and other appropriate bodies.
 The statement emphasizes that parties engaging in electronic transactions have the autonomy to
decide on the type and level of security needed for their electronic data messages or documents. This
includes measures to safeguard the integrity, confidentiality, and authenticity of the information being
transmitted.
 Parties are also free to select and utilize technological methods that best meet their security
requirements. This could involve encryption techniques, digital signatures, access controls, or any other
relevant security mechanisms available for electronic communication. But are subject to compliance
with applicable laws, rules, and guidelines established by government agencies such as the
Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and other relevant authorities. These regulations may outline
minimum security standards, data protection requirements, or other legal obligations that parties must
adhere to in electronic transactions.

E-COMMERCE IN CARRIAGE OF GOODS

(SECTION 25-26)
Electronic commerce in the carriage of goods, often referred to as e-commerce logistics or e-commerce
supply chain management, involves the use of digital technologies to facilitate the buying, selling, and
transportation of goods. It encompasses various processes, including online ordering, payment processing,
inventory management, order fulfilment, and delivery.

(a) Carriage Of Goods

With reference to electronic commerce in carriage of goods, the new law provides in Section 26 thereof that
"where the law requires that any action (in connection with a contract of carriage of goods) be carried out in
writing or by using a paper document, that requirement is met if the action is carried out by using one or more
electronic data or electronic documents." Thus, electronic messages or electronic documents may be used as
"functional equivalents" of written or paper documents in connection with the following instances:
a)

i) furnishing the marks, number, quantity or weight of goods;

ii) stating or declaring the nature or value of goods;
iii) issuing a receipt for goods;
iii) issuing a receipt for goods;
 iv) confirming that goods have been loaded;

b)

i) notifying a person of terms and conditions of the contract

ii) giving instructions to a carrier;

c)

i) claiming delivery of goods;

ii) authorizing release of goods;
iii) giving notice of loss, or damage to goods;

d) giving any other notice or statement in connection with the performance of the contract;
e) undertaking to deliver goods to a named person or a person authorized to claim delivery;
f) granting, acquiring, renouncing surrendering, transferring or negotiating rights in goods;
g) acquiring or transferring rights and obligations under the contract.

SECTION 26(25). Transport Documents. —

. In the transport of the goods to the buyer or recipient, RA 8792 provides:

1. Where the law requires that any action referred to contract of carriage of goods be carried out in writing
or by using a paper document, that requirement is met if the action is carried out by using one or more
data messages or electronic documents.

 This statement addresses the legal recognition of electronic data messages or documents as
equivalent to traditional paper-based documents when fulfilling legal requirements that mandate
actions to be conducted in writing.
 the law may stipulate that actions must be performed in writing or by using physical paper
documents. This requirement ensures that there is a tangible record of the action or agreement.
 asserts that if the law mandates actions to be carried out in writing or by using paper
documents, this requirement can be satisfied by using one or more electronic data messages or
electronic documents instead. In other words, electronic communication is recognized as being
legally equivalent to traditional written or paper-based methods.
 Recognizing electronic communication as equivalent to traditional paper-based methods
promotes efficiency and accessibility in conducting legal transactions. It eliminates the need for
physical paperwork, reduces administrative burdens, and facilitates faster and more convenient
communication, particularly in today's digital age.


2. The preceding paragraph applies whether the requirement therein is in the form of an obligation or
whether the law simply provides consequences for failing either to carry out the action in writing or to
use a paper document.
3. If a right is to be granted to, or an obligation is to be acquired by, one person and no person, and if the
law requires that, in order to effect this, the right or obligation must be conveyed to that person by the
 transfer, or use of, a paper document, that requirement is met if the right or obligation is conveyed by
using one or more electronic data messages or electronic documents unique;

 In certain legal scenarios, a right or obligation may be intended for a particular individual, with no
involvement of any other party. This could include rights such as ownership of property or the
acquisition of a contractual obligation.
 The law may specify that to effect the granting of such a right or the acquisition of such an obligation, it
must be conveyed through the use of a paper document. This requirement traditionally ensures the
validity and authenticity of the transaction, providing a tangible record of the legal action.
 to satisfy this requirement, it's essential that a reliable method is employed to render the electronic data
messages or documents unique. This ensures that the electronic records can be accurately identified
and authenticated, similar to the uniqueness provided by physical paper documents.
 Employing a reliable method for uniqueness is crucial for maintaining legal compliance and security in
electronic transactions. It helps prevent fraud, tampering, or unauthorized alterations of electronic
records, ensuring the integrity and authenticity of the conveyed rights or obligations.

4. For the purposes of paragraph (3), the standard of reliability required shall be assessed in the light of
the purpose for which the right or obligation was conveyed and in the light of all the circumstances,
including any relevant agreement.
5. Where one or more data messages are used to effect any action in undertaking to deliver goods to a
named person or a person authorized to claim delivery or in granting, acquiring, renouncing,
surrendering, transferring or negotiating rights in goods, no paper document used to effect any such
action is valid unless the use of electronic data message or electronic document has been terminated
and replaced by the used of paper documents. A paper document issued in these circumstances shall
contain a statement of such termination. The replacement of the electronic data messages or electronic
documents by paper documents shall not affect the rights or obligation of the parties involved.
6. If a rule of laws is compulsorily applicable to a contract of carriage of goods which is in, or is evidenced
by, a paper document, that rule shall not be inapplicable to such a contract of carriage of goods which
is evidenced by one or more electronic data messages or electronic documents by reason of the fact
that the contract is evidenced by such electronic data messages or electronic documents instead of by
a paper document.

 In the context of contracts of carriage of goods, certain legal rules may be compulsory, meaning they
must be followed and applied regardless of the form or medium through which the contract is
documented. These rules could include regulations governing the transportation of goods, liability for
damages, insurance requirements, etc.
 the transition from paper documentation to electronic documentation does not exempt the contract from
complying with the applicable legal rules.
 By maintaining the applicability of legal rules regardless of the form of documentation, this provision
ensures legal certainty and consistency in the regulation of contracts of carriage of goods. It prevents
 potential loopholes or discrepancies that could arise if different rules applied based on the medium of
documentation.

Electronic Transactions In Government

The new law mandates in Section 27 thereof that Government, within two (2) years from the date of
effectivity of the Act, must accept/use electronic data messages, electronic documents and electronic
signatures. Thus:
SEC. 27. Government Use of Electronic Data Messages, Electronic Documents and Electronic
Signatures. – Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, within two (2) years from the date of the
effectivity of this Act, all departments, bureaus, offices and agencies of the government, as well as all
government-owned and controlled corporations, that pursuant to law require or accept the filing of
documents, require that documents be created, or retained and/or submitted, issue permits, licenses or
certificates or registration or approval, or provide for the method and manner of payment or settlement
of fees and other obligations to the government, shall-
a) accept the creation, filing or retention of such documents in the form of electronic data messages or
electronic documents;
b) issue permits, licenses, or approval in the form of electronic data messages or electronic documents;
c) require and/or accept payments, and issue receipts acknowledging such payments, through systems
using electronic data messages or electronic documents; or
d) transact the government business and/or perform governmental functions using electronic data
messages or electronic documents, and for the purpose, are authorized to adopt and promulgate, after
appropriate public hearing and with due publication in newspapers of general circulation, the
appropriate rules, regulations, or guidelines, to among others, specify-

 the manner and format in which such electronic data messages or electronic documents shall be filed,
created, retained or issued;
 where and when such electronic data messages or electronic documents have to be signed, the use of
an electronic signature, the type of electronic signature required;
 the format or an electronic data message or electronic document and the manner the electronic
signature shall be affixed to the electronic data message or electronic document;
 the control processes and procedures as appropriate to ensure adequate integrity, security and
confidentiality of electronic data messages or electronic documents or records or payments;
 other attributes requires of electronic data messages or electronic documents or payment; and
 the full or limited use of the documents and papers for compliance with the government requirements:
Provided, That this Act shall by itself mandate any department of the government, organ of state or
statutory corporation to accept or issue any document in the form of electronic data messages or
electronic documents upon the adoption, promulgation and publication of the appropriate rules,
regulations, or guidelines.

SECTION 28(27). RPWEB to Promote the Use of Electronic Documents or Electronic Data Messages in
Government and to the General Public. — Within two (2) years from the effectivity of this Act, there shall be
installed an electronic online network in accordance with Administrative Order 332 and House of
Representatives Resolution 890, otherwise known as RPWEB, to implement Part IV of this Act to facilitate the
open, speedy and efficient electronic online transmission, conveyance and use of electronic data messages or
electronic documents amongst all government departments, agencies, bureaus, offices down to the division
level and to the regional and provincial offices as practicable as possible, government-owned and controlled
corporations, local government units, other public instrumentalities, universities, colleges and other schools,
and universal access to the general public.
The RPWEB network shall serve as initial platform of the government information infrastructure (GII) to
facilitate the electronic online transmission and conveyance of government services to evolve and improve by
better technologies or kinds of electronic online wide area networks utilizing, but not limited to, fiber optic,
satellite, wireless and other broadband telecommunication mediums or modes.
To facilitate the rapid development of the GII, the Department of Transportation and Communications, National
Telecommunications Commission and the National Computer Center are hereby directed to aggressively
promote and implement a policy environment and regulatory or non-regulatory framework that shall lead to the
substantial reduction of costs of including, but not limited to, lease lines, land, satellite and dial-up telephone
access, cheap broadband and wireless accessibility by government departments, agencies, bureaus, offices,
government-owned and controlled corporations, local government units, other public instrumentalities and the
general public, to include the establishment of a government website portal and a domestic internet exchange
system to facilitate strategic access to government and amongst agencies thereof and the general public and
for the speedier flow of locally generated internet traffic within the Philippines.
The physical infrastructure of cable and wireless system for cable TV and broadcast excluding programming
and content and the management thereof shall be considered as within the activity of telecommunications for
the purpose of electronic commerce and to maximize the convergence of ICT in the installation of the GII.
SECTION 29(28). Authority of the Department of Trade and Industry and Participating Entities. — The
Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) shall direct and supervise the promotion and development of
electronic commerce in the country with relevant government agencies, without prejudice to the provisions of
Republic Act 7653 (Charter of Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas) and Republic Act No. 337, (General Banking Act)
as amended.
Among others, the DTI is empowered to promulgate rules and regulations, as well as provide quality standards
or issue certifications, as the case may be, and perform such other functions as may be necessary for the
implementation of this Act in the area of electronic commerce to include, but not limited to, the installation of an
online public information and quality and price monitoring system for goods and services aimed in protecting
the interests of the consuming public availing of the advantages of this Act.

Confidentiality

Section 32 of the new law underscores the obligation for confidentiality. Thus:
Section 32. Obligation of Confidentiality. – Except for the purposes authorized under this Act, any
person who obtained access to any electronic key, electronic data message or electronic document,
book, register, correspondence, information, or other material pursuant to any powers conferred under
this Act, shall not convey to or share the same with any other person.

Illegal Activities / Penalties

To protect internet users, consumers and owners of computer systems / servers and copyright owners,
the new law defines what constitutes illegal activities and provides penalties thereof. Thus:
SEC. 33. Penalties. – The following Acts shall be penalized by fine and/or imprisonment, as follows:

1. Hacking or cracking which 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 shall be punished by a minimum fine of One Hundred Thousand Pesos
(P100,000.00) and a maximum commensurate to the damage incurred and a mandatory
imprisonment of six (6) months to three (3) years;
2. Piracy or the unauthorized copying, reproduction, dissemination, distribution, importation, use,
removal, alteration, substitution, modification, storage, uploading, downloading, communication,
making available to the public, or broadcasting of protected material, electronic signature or
copyrighted works including legally protected sound recording or phonograms or information
material on protected works, through the use of telecommunication networks, such as, but not
limited to, the internet, in a manner that infringes intellectual property rights shall be punished by
a minimum fine of One Hundred Thousand Pesos (P100,000.00) and a maximum
commensurate to the damage incurred and a mandatory imprisonment of six (6) months to
three (3) years;
3. Violation of the Consumer Act or Republic Act No. 7394 and other relevant or pertinent laws
through transactions covered by or using electronic data messages or electronic documents,
shall be penalized with the same penalties as provided in those laws;
4. Other violations of the provisions of this Act, shall be penalized with a maximum penalty of One
Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00) or six (6) years imprisonment.

Bagumbayan-VNP Movement, Inc. v. Commission on Elections (G.R. Nos. 206719, 206784 & 207755,
April 10, 2019)

Parties Involved and Claims Made

 Bagumbayan-VNP Movement, Inc. and Senator Richard J. Gordon filed a Special Civil Action for
Mandamus against the Commission on Elections (COMELEC).
 Tanggulang Demokrasya (Tan Dem), Inc. and other individuals also filed a Special Civil Action for
Mandamus against the COMELEC.
 The petitioners claim that the COMELEC failed to comply with the provisions of Republic Act No. 8436,
as amended by Republic Act No. 9369, regarding the examination and testing of equipment or devices,
the use of digital signatures, and security safeguards in the electronic election returns

Main Issue

 The main issue in the case is whether the petitioners have the legal standing to file the petition and
whether they are entitled to the writ of mandamus to compel the COMELEC to open up the source code
review for the elections and to implement digital signatures, vote verification, and randomness in the
manual audit.
 The petitioners argue that the COMELEC failed to comply with the requirements of the law and that
their rights as citizens and voters were violated.
 The COMELEC argues that it has complied with the law and that the petitioners' claims are without
merit.

Legal Standing of the Petitioners - After reviewing the pleadings, the Supreme Court finds that the
petitioners have the legal standing to file the petition.
In simpler terms, the passage talks about electronic signatures and how they're used, particularly in the context
of Philippine laws about voting. An electronic signature is basically a unique mark, sound, or characteristic in
digital form that shows who a person is and is linked to an electronic message or document. It's like signing
your name on a piece of paper, but it's done electronically.
In the case mentioned, some people were questioning the use of electronic systems for voting in the Philippines.
They argued that the election commission broke the rules by not requiring digital signatures on certain
documents. However, the Supreme Court said that digital signatures can be more flexible than just a person's
handwritten signature. For example, the signature produced by a voting machine could count as a digital
signature because it still shows who's responsible for inputting the information.

Conclusion

· The web may not be an overnight substitute for our shopping malls, which still shall remain in the
near term as the favorite air conditioned recreation park of Filipinos young and old alike. "Malling" is,
and shall for a long time, still be a favorite "bonding" activity. Yet, as traditional companies shift to
Internet related activities in their strategy and business plans, on-line malling for Filipino consumers
may become more accepted, sooner than expected.
· It is hoped that by then, our laws would be sufficient enough and adopt fast enough to protect
consumers who shop on the web.

FINAL PROVISIONS
(SECTION 30-42)
Section 30. Extent of Liability of a Service Provider. - Except as otherwise provided in this Section, no
person or party shall be subject to any civil or criminal liability in respect of the electronic data message or
electronic document for which the person or party acting as a service provider as defined in Section 5 merely
provides access if such liability is founded on -

(a) The obligations and liabilities of the parties under the electronic data message or electronic
document;

(b) The making, publication, dissemination or distribution of such material or any statement made in
such material, including possible infringement of any right subsisting in or in relation to such material.
Provided, That:

i. The service provider does not have actual knowledge, or is not aware of the facts or circumstances from
which it is apparent, that the making, publication, dissemination or distribution of such material is unlawful or
infringes any rights subsisting in or in relation to such material;

ii The service provider does not knowingly receive a financial benefit directly attributable to the unlawful or
infringing activity; and

iii. The service provider does not directly commit any infringement or other unlawful act and does not induce or
cause another person or party to commit any infringement or other unlawful act and/or does not benefit
financially from the infringing activity or unlawful act or another person or party; Provider, further, That nothing
in this Section shall affect -
(a) Any obligation founded on contract;

(b) The obligation of a service provider as such under a licensing or other regulatory regime established under
written law; or

(c) Any obligation imposed under any written law;

(d) The civil liability of any party to the extent that such liability forms the basis for injunctive relief issued by a
court under any law requiring that the service provider take or refrain from actions necessary to remove, block
or deny access to any material, or to preserve evidence of a violation of law.

- This section provides a framework for limiting the liability of service providers in relation to electronic data
messages or documents they provide access to, with specific exceptions and conditions outlined to ensure
accountability in certain circumstances.

Section 31. Lawful Access. - Access to an electronic file, or an electronic signature of an electronic data
message or electronic document shall only be authorized and enforced in favor of the individual or entity
having a legal right to the possession or the use of plaintext, electronic signature or file or solely for the
authorized purposes. The electronic key for identity or integrity shall not be made available to any person or
party without the consent of the individual or entity in lawful possession of that electronic key;
- Section 31 establishes strict guidelines for lawful access to electronic files, signatures, and data
messages/documents. It emphasizes the need for authorization based on legal rights and purposes, as well as
the protection of electronic keys to prevent unauthorized access or misuse of electronic information.
Compliance with these regulations helps ensure the security, integrity, and confidentiality of electronic data and
transactions.
Section 32. Obligation of Confidentiality. - Except for the purposes authorized under this Act, any person
who obtained access to any electronic key, electronic data message or electronic document, book, register,
correspondence, information, or other material pursuant to any powers conferred under this Act, shall not
convey to or share the same with any other person.
- Section 32 establishes a strict obligation of confidentiality for individuals who gain access to certain electronic
materials under the Act. It prohibits the sharing or conveying of such materials with any other person, except
for purposes explicitly authorized under the Act. Compliance with this obligation helps safeguard the
confidentiality and security of electronic information and ensures adherence to legal and regulatory
requirements.
Section 35. Oversight Committee. - There shall be Congressional Oversight Committee composed of the
Committees and Trade and Industry/Commerce, Science and Technology, Finance and Appropriations of both
the Senate and House of Representatives, which shall meet at least every quarter of the first two years and
every semester for the third year after the approval of this Act to oversee its implementation. The DTI, DBM,
Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, and other government agencies as may be determined by the Congressional
Committee shall provide a quarterly performance report of their actions taking in the implementation of this Act
for the first three (3) years.
- Section 35 establishes a Congressional Oversight Committee responsible for monitoring and overseeing the
implementation of the Act. Through regular meetings and performance reporting from relevant government
agencies, the Oversight Committee ensures accountability, transparency, and effective implementation of the
Act's provisions over the specified duration.
Section 36. Appropriations. - The amount necessary to carry out the provisions of Sections 27 and 28 of this
Act shall be charged against any available funds and/or savings under the General Appropriations Act of 2000
in the first year of effectivity of this Act. Thereafter, the funds needed for the continued implementation shall be
included in the annual General Appropriations Act.
- Section 36 outlines the funding mechanism for implementing specific provisions of the Act, ensuring that the
necessary financial resources are allocated from available funds or savings in the first year and included in the
annual General Appropriations Act for subsequent years. This ensures sustained support for the
implementation of the Act's objectives through appropriate budgetary allocations.
Section 37. Statutory Interpretation. - Unless otherwise expressly provided for, the interpretation of this Act
shall give due regard to its international origin and the need to promote uniformity in its application and the
observance of good faith in international trade relations. The generally accepted principles of international law
and convention on electronic commerce shall likewise be considered.
- Section 37 provides guidance for the statutory interpretation of the Act, emphasizing the international context
of its origin, the promotion of uniformity in application, the observance of good faith in international trade
relations, and the consideration of generally accepted principles of international law and conventions on
electronic commerce. These principles ensure that the Act is interpreted in a manner that aligns with
international standards and promotes consistency and fairness in electronic commerce activities across
different jurisdictions.
Section 38. Variation by Agreement. - As between parties involved in generating, sending, receiving, storing
or otherwise processing electronic data message or electronic document, any provision of this Act may be
varied by agreement between and among them.

- Section 38 grants parties involved in electronic transactions the authority to vary or modify provisions of the
Act through mutual agreement. This provision reflects the Act's recognition of the need for flexibility in
electronic transactions and the ability of parties to customize their arrangements to better meet their specific
requirements and preferences.

Section 39. Reciprocity. - All benefits, privileges, advantages or statutory rules established under this Act,
including those involving practice of profession, shall be enjoyed only by parties whose country origin grants
the same benefits and privileges or advantages to Filipino citizens.
- Section 39 underscores the principle of reciprocity in the enjoyment of benefits, privileges, advantages, or
statutory rules established under the Act. It ensures that such benefits and privileges are extended only to
parties whose countries of origin reciprocally grant similar treatment to Filipino citizens, thereby promoting
fairness and mutual respect in international electronic transactions.
Section 40. Separability Clause. - The provisions of this Act are hereby declared separable and in the event
of any such provision is declared unconstitutional, the other provisions, which are not affected, shall remain in
force and effect.
- Section 40, the separability clause, ensures that the Act remains functional and effective by declaring its
provisions separable. It safeguards the Act from being invalidated in its entirety if any provision is declared
unconstitutional, allowing the remaining provisions to remain in force and effect.
Section 41. Repealing Clause. - All other laws, decrees, rules and regulations or parts thereof which are
inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed, amended or modified accordingly.
- Section 41, the repealing clause, is included in the Act to ensure consistency and coherence in the legal
framework related to electronic transactions by repealing, amending, or modifying existing laws, decrees, rules,
and regulations that are inconsistent with the provisions of the Act. This promotes legal harmonization, clarity,
and certainty in the regulation of electronic transactions.
Section 42. Effectivity. - This Act shall take effect immediately after its publication in the Official Gazette or in
at least two (2) national newspapers of general circulation.
- Section 42 establishes the effectivity provisions of the Act, stipulating that it shall take effect immediately
upon publication in the Official Gazette or in at least two national newspapers of general circulation. This
ensures prompt implementation of the Act and widespread awareness of its provisions among stakeholders.

A.M. No. CA-05-18-P April 12, 2005

ZALDY NUEZ, Complainant,
vs.
ELVIRA CRUZ-APAO, respondent.

Facts:
Zaldy Nuez, filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against PAGCOR when the latter accused him of using
illegal drugs. The lower acceded with the prayer and contention of Zaldy but eventually the appellate court
reversed the initial favourable decision of the court a quo. In this regard, Zaldy was in desperate need of help
that could speed up his case before the CA. He contacted Elvira Cruz-Apao, an Executive Assistant II of the
acting Division Clerk of Court of CA, whom he learned from his sister-in-law. Elvira texted Zaldy, that a
favourable decision can be made provided P1 Million be given to her. Zaldy bargained for a lower amount but
Elvira refused, mentioning that it is the flat rate the person who will make the favourable decision. Elvira texted
Zaldy that they have to meet at times Plaza Un Avenue. Zaldy and Elvira met and negotiated for a lower price,
but to no avail. They arranged for another meeting, but now, Zaldy coordinated matters with GMA 7
Imbestigador, where assistance from PAOCTF was sought for an entrapment operation. During the meeting,
marked money was prepared. Agents of PAOCTF were in position to execute the entrapment. When Elvira
arrived, she was anxious that an entrapment would be made. Eventually the PAOCTF operators executed the
entrapment and investigated the respondent.

Issue:
Whether or not ephemeral communications can be used as evidence before the court?

Held:
Yes, the Supreme Court mentioned the following:
Complainant was able to prove by his testimony in conjunction with the text messages from respondent duly
presented before the Committee that the latter asked for One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00) in exchange for a
favourable decision of the former’s pending case with the CA. The text messages were properly admitted by
the Committee since the same are now covered by Section 1(k), Rule 2 of the Rules on Electronic Evidence
which provides:

"Ephemeral electronic communication" refers to telephone conversations, text messages . . . and other
electronic forms of communication the evidence of which is not recorded or retained."

Under Section 2, Rule 11 of the Rules on Electronic Evidence, "Ephemeral electronic communications shall be
proven by the testimony of a person who was a party to the same or who has personal knowledge
thereof . . . ." In this case, complainant who was the recipient of said messages and therefore had personal
knowledge thereof testified on their contents and import. Respondent herself admitted that the cellphone
number reflected in complainant’s cellphone from which the messages originated was hers. Moreover, any
doubt respondent may have had as to the admissibility of the text messages had been laid to rest when she
and her counsel signed and attested to the veracity of the text messages between her and complainant. It is
also well to remember that in administrative cases, technical rules of procedure and evidence are not strictly
applied. We have no doubt as to the probative value of the text messages as evidence in determining the guilt
or lack thereof of respondent in this case.

Indeed the text messages of Elvira can be used as an evidence before court proceeding and even in
administrative proceedings as in the case at hand. Zaldy is one of the recipient of th txt messages, to which he
has personal knowledge of the communication.
Moreover, the person to whom the respondent confessed made a written report before Justice Villarama as to
the actuations made by Elvira. The high court reiterated that being an employee, she has a burden of
presenting before the public, honesty and probity as en employee of the department that confer judgment and
justice. The high court dismissed the employee for grave abuse of discretion.