a collections of case digests and laws that can help aspiring law students to become a lawyer
Jose Jesus M. Disini, Jr., et al. v. The Secretary of Justice, et al., G.R. No. 203335, Feb. 11, 2014
FACTS: Petitioners, as taxpayers, filed a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition before the Court. They seek to nullify the several sections of RA 10175, otherwise known as the "Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012". They claim that the means adopted by the cybercrime law for regulating undesirable cyberspace activities violate constitutional rights. The government in turn posits that the law merely seeks to put order into cyberspace activities, punish wrongdoings, and prevent attacks in the system.
ISSUE: Whether or not Congress validly delegated its legislative power when it gave the Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center (CICC) the power to formulate a national cybersecurity plan
DECISION: The following were declared void for being unconstitutional: Section 4(c)(3), 12 and 19 of RA 10175.
RATIO DECIDENDI: Yes, the delegation is valid. The Court referred to the two tests for valid delegation: the completeness test and sufficient standard test. The Cybercrime law was deemed to be complete in itself when it directed CICC to formulate and implement a national cybersecurity plan. Sufficient standards were also clear when the law provided for the definition of cybersecurity. The definition served as the parameters within which CICC should work in formulating the plan. The formulation of the cybersecurity plan is also consisted with the policy of the law; the policy was clearly adopted in the interest of law and order, which has been considered as sufficient standard.
Leave a Reply.