ANTI-PHOTO AND VIDEO VOYEURISM ACT OF 2009:

AN EFFECTIVE ACT?

Legal Research Paper

Presented to

the College of Law

Ateneo de Zamboanga University

by

Dwight Anthony P. Yu

2017
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION

Background of Study

Statement of Problem

Definition of Terms

II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Classification of Electronic Evidences

Issues on Privacy in Evidence Gathering

Decrease in the Reasonable Expectation of Privacy

On Search and Seizure

The Vivares v. St. Theresa's College Case

III. CONCLUSION

REFERENCES
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The Rise in the Number of Voyeurism Victims

The Philippine National Police-Anti Cybercrime Group (PNP-ACG) data reveals that

there were 56 victims complained about their nude photos being posted online in the year 2015.

In 2016, 192 victims filed complaints. For the first quarter of 2017, there are 50 victims rec-

orded. Most of the victims are female with age range of 15-35 years old. [1]

For many years, the Philippines has been regarded as a haven of crime committed online

while other countries have developed cyber-warfare. It was only in 2000 that a stand was real-

ized when the country was recognized as the source of the love bug virus. Back then, no case

was filed against the perpetrator for lack of legislation defining the act as a crime and imposing

penalty for such commission. The country was criticized for failing to prosecute him.[2]

Today, the country offers mechanisms and legal framework to facilitate the faster integra-

tion of electronic evidence in judicial proceedings. A range of privacy policies can be found in

the Constitution, Revised Penal Code, Rules of Court and Civil Code. [3]

The 1987 Constitution

The Constitution provides provisions with regards to right to privacy under the Bill of

Rights namely: (a) the right against unreasonable searches and seizures; and (b) the right to pri-

vacy of communication and correspondence. The two sections establishes that the right to pri-

vacy can be defined as the right to be left alone. It is the right of a person to be free from unde-

sired publicity or disclosure and as the right to live without unwarranted interference by the pub-

lic in matters with which the public is not necessarily concerned.

The Civil Code of the Philippines

In the Chapter Two of the Civil Code of the Philippines under Human Relations, Article

26 states that, Every person shall respect the dignity, personality, privacy and peace of mind of

his neighbors and other persons. Though not considered as criminal offense, it identified acts

that can produce a cause of action for damages and other relief, and in which social media can be

used as a medium and place of commission of the offense. These include meddling with or dis-

turbing the private life or family relations of another, intriguing to cause another to be alienated

from his friends, vexing or humiliating another on account of his religious beliefs, lowly station

in life, place of birth, physical defect, or other personal condition.

The Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of 2009

As a response to the proliferation of intimate/private photos and videos, most notably of

women, without their consent, the Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of 2009 was passed.

The law itself recognizes invasion of privacy as a criminal offense. The law penalizes those who

take photo or video coverage of a person or group of persons performing sexual act or any simi-

lar activity or of capturing an image of the private area of a person or persons without the latters

consent, under circumstances in which such person/s has/have a reasonable expectation of pri-

vacy. Likewise, the act of selling, copying, reproducing, broadcasting, sharing, showing or ex-

hibiting the photo or video coverage or recordings of such sexual act or similar activity through

VCD/DVD, internet, cellular phones and similar means or device without the written consent of

the person/s involved are punishable.

Data Privacy Act of 2012

The Data Privacy Act of 2012 is an act protecting individual personal information in in-

formation and communications systems in the government and the private sector. It mandates the

public and private institutions to protect and preserve the integrity and confidentiality of all per-

sonal data that they might gather including the processing of personal information and sensitive

personal information. It also sets the parameters on when and on what premise data processing of

personal information can be allowed with basic premise when a data subject has given direct

consent.

The Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012

The Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 was enacted to address crimes committed in

cyber space and use of ICT. The law is divided into 31 sections split across eight chapters, crimi-

nalizing several types of offense, including illegal access (hacking), data interference, device

misuse, cybersquatting, computer-related offenses such as computer fraud, content-related of-

fenses such as cybersex and spam, and other offenses. The law also reaffirms existing laws

against child pornography, an offense under Republic Act No. 9779 (the Anti-Child Pornography

Act of 2009), and libel, an offense under Section 355 of the Revised Penal Code of the Philip-

pines, also criminalizing them when committed using a computer system.

E-Commerce Act

Under RA 8792, the said acts may constitute hacking through unauthorized access pun-

ishable under the said law. Hacking may be in any of the following forms: (1) unauthorized ac-
cess into the computer; (2) interference in a computer system/server or information and commu-

nication system; (3) authorized access in order to corrupt, alter, steal, or destroy without the

knowledge and consent of the owner of the computer or information and communications sys-

tem; and, (4) the introduction of computer viruses and the like, resulting in the corruption, de-

struction, alteration, theft or loss of electronic data messages or electronic document. All types of

unauthorized access are considered as hacking. [4]

What is the extent of a persons privacy? As mentioned in the Katz case, whenever a per-

son has a reasonable expectation of privacy, his right to it should be protected by the Constitu-

tion. The reasonableness of a persons expectation of privacy depends on a two-part test: (1)

whether by his conduct, the individual has exhibited an expectation of privacy; and (2) whether

this expectation is one that society recognizes as reasonable. [5]

However, it is argued that as technology advances, the level of reasonably expected pri-

vacy decreases. [6]

Statement of the Problem

This paper aims to present the problems and issues faced in the prosecution of sex scan-

dals in the light of advancements in technology. To know its effectiveness, the study seeks to

identify the issues faced in uncovering the perpetrator and obtaining evidences. Discussions on

the right to privacy and unreasonable searches and seizures will be included. This is to know

how the rights of the involved are sufficiently protected by the laws of the Philippines.

Definition of Terms

Section 3. For purposes of this Act, the term: [7]

(a) "Broadcast" means to make public, by any means, a visual image with the intent that it be
viewed by a person or persons.

(b) "Capture" with respect to an image, means to videotape, photograph, film, record by any

means, or broadcast.

(c) "Female breast" means any portion of the female breast.

(d) "Photo or video voyeurism" means the act of taking photo or video coverage of a person

or group of persons performing sexual act or any similar activity or of capturing an image of

the private area of a person or persons without the latter's consent, under circumstances in

which such person/s has/have a reasonable expectation of privacy, or the act of selling,

copying, reproducing, broadcasting, sharing, showing or exhibiting the photo or video

coverage or recordings of such sexual act or similar activity through VCD/DVD, internet,

cellular phones and similar means or device without the written consent of the person/s

involved, notwithstanding that consent to record or take photo or video coverage of same

was given by such person's.

(e) "Private area of a person" means the naked or undergarment clad genitals, public area,

buttocks or female breast of an individual.

(f) "Under circumstances in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy" means

believe that he/she could disrobe in privacy, without being concerned that an image or a
private area of the person was being captured; or circumstances in which a reasonable

person would believe that a private area of the person would not be visible to the public,

regardless of whether that person is in a public or private place.

 CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Sex scandals are the highest form of invasion to the privacy of the offended party, most

of whom are women. There has been a proliferation of photographs and videos of many women

and children, as well as men, in compromising positions taken and posted on the internet with or

without their consent. The main actors of these offenses tend to suffer social stigma, to the ex-

tent that some resorted to take their own lives.[8]

Moreover, the penalties imposed upon the accused discourages the victim to come out

and claim that he or she was wronged with the creation of a sex scandal, at the risk of being pub-

licly ridiculed by society. Thus, sex scandals were not effectively prosecuted and offenders get

off.

The Philippines took on its first step when the Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act was

enacted as basis for prosecuting the offenders in sex scandals. However, a challenge still lies in

the uncovering of evidence to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.[9]

On Obtaining Evidences in the Digital Age

Electronic data plays a substantial part in the proliferation of sex scandals. As in the fa-

mous Hayden Kho and Katrina Halili sex scandal, Kho kept the video of his sexual encounters in

the hard drive of his laptop in electronic form. It leaked through the Internet and could easily be

viewed and downloaded from the Internet by any person interested. Technological advances fa-

cilitated and made it easier to copy and transfer files in the form of a video than it was before.

Electronic evidence, as may be implied from the Rules on Electronic Evidence, would

include electronic data message and electronic documents in general.[10] An electronic data
message refers to information generated, sent, received or stored by electronic, optical or similar

means.[11] This includes word processing and other computer files, electronic mail, SMS (short

message service) messages, and other documents which are created through electronic de-

vices.[12] The videos and photographs of sex scandals, created by connecting the video camera

recorder to the computer and saving the material as a file in the computer, are considered elec-

tronic data message.

The Philippines is deemed to be still in the infancy of dealing with computer-related

crimes. The law enforcement agencies and the judicial system are still ill-equipped to handle

high-tech cases, both in terms of experience and equipment.[13]

Some of the characteristics of electronic evidence which poses problems to the prosecu-

tions gathering of evidence include:

First characteristic is that electronic evidence can be stored and transferred easily.

Applying this in the Kho and Halili case: the video, taken using a digital video recorder,

would be uploaded to Khos computer in a matter of seconds. He may place the videos in a

folder named innocently as Fans file. A friend, on the other hand, after discovering that the

Fans file folder in fact contained videos of Kho with women in compromising situations, de-

cided to copy the said file. After copying the videos in a portable storage device, he decides to

copy the same to other data storage devices like his own computer, a laptop.[14]

And for example, that he is also the one who uploaded the video. The alleged website

which first uploaded the videos of Kho alleged that their website merely receives through email

videos from anonymous persons, and they in turn just upload the videos on their site.[15] With

this complicated file transfer, how would the NBI agents pin the videos source?
 These perfectly show that with digital data, law enforcers would have to spend plenty of

time and should have the technical know-how in locating where the file is since it may be stored

in several places, and it may be renamed and hidden so that its true contents would not be

known.

Second, electronic evidence could easily be altered using computer software. Take the

case of Irish Sagud.[16] The victim declined his boyfriends request to elope. He then revenged

by superimposing her face on a picture of a naked woman with legs spread wide. He sent the said

picture through Multimedia Message Service (MMS) and threatened Sagud that he could easily

post it on the Internet. Fortunately, the Court convicted him of violation of R.A. 9262.

If this be applied in cases of sex videos, there are photo and video-editing softwares that

could superimpose faces of people in videos.

The last characteristic of electronic evidence, in relation to criminal prosecution, is that

its meaning and interpretation needs technical expertise. In the United States, the procedure

adopted in most cases where digital evidence is involved is that the law enforcers would seize the

computer of the accused, and would then submit the computer to an independent technical expert

who would sort the files of the computer in accordance with the scope of the search warrant ob-

tained by the law enforcers. This is allowed under the rule that the search made by a private per-

son is within the purview of their Fourth Amendment.[17]

This practice, however, is not resorted to in the Philippines for the reasons that there are

not much persons who may expertly perform such task in the country and that their services and

equipment that may be used to perform such task are costly.

Issues on Privacy in Evidence Gathering

The law enforcers have different approaches in seizing electronic evidences.

a. Surveillance through unsecured websites

They use social networking sites and other public websites to monitor and trap their sus-

pects. Take the case of the Ivan Padilla Gang, police officers used social networking sites such as

Facebook and Twitter to track down the whereabouts of the gang and their leader. This led to the

shoot-out of the leader, Ivan Padilla, and the arrest of some of the gang members.[18]

b. Surveillance through Third Parties

In cases of sex scandals, it would be necessary for the law enforcers to discover the

source of the photographs or videos to determine who should be prosecuted for causing the pub-

lication of such materials on the Internet. The key in most cases will be recovering the computer

used to launch the attack. The records kept by most operating systems can allow forensics ex-

perts to reconstruct with surprising detail who did what and when.[19]

In the Kho and Halili case, the NBI was able to locate the owners of the website where

the sex scandal was first posted. The owners of the website admitted to the NBI that they were

maintaining the website, but claimed that the videos were only sent to them through e-mail, and

that it was sent anonymously.[20] It would thus be necessary to discover who sent the videos to

the website owners. However, it is apparent that the Philippines do not have the technological

means yet to do so as the true perpetrators.

The biggest investigative lead comes in the form of an originating Internet Protocol (IP)

address recorded by servers. An Internet Protocol address is the unique identification of the loca-

tion of an end-users computer which serves as a routing address for email and other data sent to

that computer over the Internet from other end-users. However, IP Addresses are not necessarily

assigned to a computer indefinitely and can be dynamically allocated by an Internet Service Pro-

vider (ISP), making identification of a user by her IP Address difficult.[21]

 It is thus necessary for the law enforcement officers to have access to the information

held by service providers in order to effectively pinpoint the real offenders in sex scandals.

Internet content hosts, on the other hand, who host or who propose to host internet con-

tent in the Philippines, have similar duties with ISPs, but with the addition that they should not

host any form of child pornography and the failure to remove any form of child pornography

within forty-eight (48) hours from receiving the notice that any form of child pornography is hit-

ting its server shall be conclusive evidence of willful and intentional violation of the law.

No such provision, however, was provided in the Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of 2009.

Neither is any mention of gathering information from third parties in the Rules on Electronic Ev-

idence.

However, the issue on the constitutional right of the accused to privacy has always sur-

faced no matter how the investigators were able to retrieve information on offenders in cyber-

crimes such as sex scandals.

Decrease in the Reasonable Expectation of Privacy

The court expanded the fourth amendment to protect modern contingencies not within the

purview of the old test in Katz vs. United States (389 U.S.347). In this case, police officers at-

tached a listening and recording device to the outside of the telephone booth in which the defend-

ant placed calls. The court held in this case that the fourth amendment protects people, not

places. It further said that because an individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy in a tele-

phone booth, the police officers violated the defendants fourth amendment right against unrea-

sonable searches and seizures.

Zones of privacy are likewise recognized and protected in our laws.[22]

 The Civil Code provides that [e]very person shall respect the dignity, personality, pri-

vacy and peace of mind of his neighbors and other persons and punishes as actionable torts sev-

eral acts by a person of meddling and prying into the privacy of another.[23] It also holds a pub-

lic officer or employee or any private individual liable for damages for any violation of the rights

and liberties of another person, [24] and recognizes the privacy of letters and other private com-

munications.[25] Because advances in surveillance technology have made these precautions

meaningless, the expectation of the privacy they offer is no longer justifiable and reasonable.[26]

Thus, investigators may argue that one who posts information about himself on the Inter-

net has no reasonable expectation of privacy since, using the Katz test, his conduct of posting in-

formation online negates any expectation of privacy, and second, the Internet is open for the pub-

lic to see, thus, it would be improbable to expect privacy in accordance with the societys stand-

ards.

There is yet no jurisprudence in the Philippines to rule on the issue. It is suggested that

the analysis should be based on whether a wire containing internet traffic should be deemed pri-

vate or public space for determining reasonable expectation of privacy. If courts view wires of

internet traffic as public spaces in which individuals cannot retain a reasonable expectation of

privacy, traditional rules will impose no constitutional limits on surveillance of law enforcers. If

courts construe them as private spaces that do support a reasonable expectation of privacy, sur-

veillance designed to target even non-private information will nonetheless require strong legal

justification. [27]

On Searches and Seizure

 For government agents to be able to access information kept by service providers and by

individuals to effectively prosecute cybercrimes such as sex scandals, it would need to procure a

search warrant. The E-Commerce Act provides that access to an electronic file, or an electronic

signature of an electronic data message or electronic document shall only be authorized and en-

forced in favor of the individual or entity having a legal right to the possession or the use of the

plaintext, electronic signature or file and solely for the authorized purposes. [28]

The Constitution provides that the right of the people to be secure in their persons,

houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for

any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except

upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge after examination under oath or

affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the

place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized. [29] Any evidence obtained in viola-

tion of this or the preceding section shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding.

Under the Rules of Court, a search warrant shall not issue except upon probable cause in

connection with one specific offense to be determined personally by the judge after examination

under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and particularly

describing the place to be searched and the things to be seized which may be anywhere in the

Philippines.[30] Thus, for a valid search warrant to issue, the following requisites should be pre-

sent: (1) It must be issued upon probable cause; (2) Such probable cause must be determined by

the issuing magistrate personally; (3) the issuing magistrate must have personally examined, in

the form of searching questions and answers, the applicant and his witnesses and taken down

their written depositions; (4) the search warrant must particularly describe or identify the prop-
erty to be seized as far as the circumstances will ordinarily allow; (5) It must particularly de-

scribe the place to be searched; (6) if shall issue for only one specific offense; and (7) It must not

have been issued more than ten days prior to the search pursuant thereto.[31]

Jurisprudence: The Vivares v. St. Theresa's College Case

In the 2014 case of Vivares v. St. Theresa's College, STC did not allow its students to

graduate for committing acts proscribed by the school's student handbook.[32] The said case

arose when one of the students uploaded digital photos which showing her female classmates

clad only in their undergarments. The photo was taken while they were changing into their swim-

suit for a beach party they were about to attend. Through STCs computers, these students

logged in to their respective personal Facebook accounts and showed to their teacher photos of

the identified students. The petitioners, parents of the students, alleged that the photos accessed

belong to the girls and, thus, cannot be used and reproduced without their consent and the teacher

violated their rights by saving digital copies of the photos and by subsequently showing them to

STCs officials. Thus, the Facebook accounts of petitioners children were intruded upon. Was

there really intrusion? Do the students really have the right to informational privacy in online so-

cial networking sites (OSNs)?

The court ruled that having an expectation of informational privacy is not necessarily in-

compatible with engaging in cyberspace activities, including those that occur in OSNs. The

Court recognized that Facebook is armed with different privacy tools designed to regulate the ac-

cessibility of a users profile as well as information uploaded by the user. This, however, does

not mean that any Facebook user automatically has a protected expectation of privacy in all of

his or her Facebook activities. Nevertheless these photos were admitted in evidence and the
Court ruled that STC did not violate the student's right to informational privacy. The Court ruled

that the students shared it to all their friends on Facebook and not to a selected few which would

have given rise to the expectation of privacy.

It was stressed that before one can have an expectation of privacy in his or her OSN ac-

tivity, it is first necessary that said user manifest the intention to keep certain posts private,

through the employment of measures to prevent access thereto or to limit its visibility. And this

intention can materialize in cyberspace through the utilization of the OSNs privacy tools. In

other words, utilization of these privacy tools is the manifestation, in cyber world, of the users

invocation of his or her right to informational privacy.

In cases of breach of right to privacy in life, liberty or security, one may avail the Writ of

Habeas Data.[33] This same writ was prayed for in the Vivares case. In that case, the respondent

argued that the remedy cannot be issued against them because they are neither a private individ-

ual nor an entity engaged in the gathering, collecting or storing of data or information regarding

the person, family, home and correspondence of the aggrieved party. However, the Court ruled

that while the contention is valid to a point, it is, nonetheless, erroneous. It is because such indi-

vidual or entity need not be in the business of collecting or storing data.

To agree with respondents above argument, would mean unduly limiting the reach of the

writ to a very small group, i.e., private persons and entities whose business is data gathering and

storage, and in the process decreasing the effectiveness of the writ as an instrument designed to

protect a right which is easily violated in view of rapid advancements in the information and

communications technologya right which a great majority of the users of technology them-

selves are not capable of protecting.[34]

 CHAPTER III

CONCLUSION

The trend in recent voyeurism cases shows the scheme of blackmailing executed by the

accused. From cases that involve prominent stars to ordinary citizens, the accused seem to

bravely resort to voyeurism as they can opt to hide behind the cloak of anonymity.

In the Kiefer Ravena scandalous photo case, the alleged, who pretended to be a woman

but was later identified to be man after thorough investigations, extorted money through text

from the victim in exchange of the identity of the suspect who spread his private photos.[35] In

another case where a certain David Garcia messaged the victim on facebook and told her that he

possesses some of her nude photos. He threatened to spread her nude photos to her friends id she

will ignore his messages that they have sex. The real identity of the perpetrator was revealed to

be Regino Echas, a 24-year-old graphic artist in Caloocan City. [36] In both cases, accused faced

charges of violation of the RA 9995 or the Anti-Photo and Voyeurism Act of 2009.

It is also interesting to note that the accused in these cases are prone to resorting to com-

mit this crime in incognito which adds to the challenges faced by the authorities in uncovering

their identity and obtaining evidences.

Granted that the Anti-Voyeurism Law in the Philippines provides a comprehensive law

that make punishable acts involved in the commission of sex scandals in forms of photos and

videos, the law, however, does not impose upon the service providers to participate in the inves-

tigation and retention of evidence that may be used to prosecute the offenders unlike the Anti-

Child Pornography Law which hosts positive duties to help mitigate the incident of sex scandals

as to children.
 On the expectation of privacy, the Supreme Court enunciated in Vivares case that engag-

ing in cyberspace activities does not necessarily mean that a person should no longer expect in-

formational privacy. The Constitution provides for the inviolability of privacy of communication

and correspondence and bring into being the zones of privacy. Legislative enactments protect

one's privacy to his personal information, data, computer system, communication and it even ex-

tend to photos and video coverage taken without his or her consent and under circumstances in

which he or she has reasonable expectation of privacy.

Moreover, there should be an increased awareness on the part of the legislature and the

judiciary as to the the effects of technological advances on criminal prosecution. When the judi-

ciary and the legislature are aware of the issues involved, they could address the underlying fac-

tors which affect the effectiveness of the act.

[1] Macapagal, M. (2017, May 10). Student arrested for posting ex-gf's nude photos online. Re-

trieved from http://news.abs-cbn.com/news/05/10/17/student-arrested-for-posting-ex-gfs-nude-

photos-online

[2] 2014-2015 Cybercrime Report The Rule of Law in Cyberspace. (2015, March 15).

[3] F. (2015, October 30). Social Media and Privacy: The Philippine Experience. Retrieved from

http://www.fma.ph/?p=261

[4] Disini, Jr. & Toral., supra note 30.

[5] Ople v. Torres, G.R. No. 127685, 293 SCRA 141 (1998), citing Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S.

128, 143-144 [1978]

[6] Ople v. Torres, G.R. No. 127685, 293 SCRA 141 (1998), citing Dennis Southard, Individual

Privacy and Governmental Efficiency: Technologys Effect on the Governments Ability to

Gather, Store, and Distribute Information, Computer/Law Journal, vol. IX, pp. 359, 369 (1989).

Retrieved from http://repository.jmls.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1443&context=jitpl

[7] RA 9995 Sec. 3

[8] Sandra Araneta, Kho, Belo summoned over Katrina sex video, Phil. Star, May 22 2009. Re-

trieved from http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=470134.

[9] Mendoza, C. (2012). Balancing of Interest in the Digital Age: Protection of Rights of Of-

fended Parties and the Constitutional Rights of the Accused in the Context of Sex Scandals. Phil-

ippine Law Journal, 86. Retrieved from http://plj.upd.edu.ph/balancing-of-interest-in-the-digital-

age-protection-of-the-rights-of-offended-parties-and-the-constitutional-rights-of-the-accused-in-

the-context-of-sex-scandals/

[10] A.M. No. 01-7-01-SC (2001).

[11] Supra note 29, Rule 2, 1; See also supra note 28, 6(e). As cited in Mendoza, C. (2012).

Balancing of Interest in the Digital Age: Protection of Rights of Offended Parties and the Consti-

tutional Rights of the Accused in the Context of Sex Scandals. Philippine Law Journal, 86.

[12] Disini, Jr. & Toral., supra note 30.

[13] Ailyn Cortez, Sex Scandals and Cyber Sex Informations (2007), available at

http://www.shvoong.com/law-and-politics/1683049-sex-scandals-cyber-sex-informations/

[14] Cortez et al., supra note 31.

[15] Sandy Araneta & Reinir Padua, 3 persons in sex video upload case invited for question-

ing, Phil. Star, July 04, 2009, Retrieved from http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?arti-

cleid=483582

[16] Rustan Ang vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 182835 April 20, 2010.

[17] United States v. Jacobsen, 466 U.S. 109, 113 (1984).

[18] Philippine police use Twitter, Facebook to nail gang. Retrieved from

http://news.ph.msn.com/regional/article.aspx?cp-documentid=4255989

[19] Orin S. Kerr, Digital Evidence and the New Criminal Procedure, 1 Columbia Law Review

279 (2005). Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=594101

[20] Araneta & Padua, supra note 83.

[21] Tara McGraw Swaminatha, The Fourth Amendment Unplugged: Electronic Evidence Issues

& Wireless Defenses, Yale Journal of Law & Technology (2004-2005).

[22] Blas Ople v. Ruben Torres Et al. G.R. No. 127685 July 23, 1998 293 SCRA 141 (1998).

[23] Article 26 of the Civil Code

[24] Civil Code, art. 32.

[25] Civil Code, art. 723.

[26] Dennis Southard, Individual Privacy and Governmental Efficiency: Technologys Effect on

the Governments Ability to Gather, Store, and Distribute Information, Computer/Law Journal,

vol. IX, pp. 359, 369 (1989).

[27] Kerr, supra note 88. As cited in Mendoza, C. (2012). Balancing of Interest in the Digital

Age: Protection of Rights of Offended Parties and the Constitutional Rights of the Accused in

the Context of Sex Scandals. Philippine Law Journal, 86.

[28] Supra note 28, 45 (2000). As cited in Mendoza, C. (2012). Balancing of Interest in the Dig-

ital Age: Protection of Rights of Offended Parties and the Constitutional Rights of the Accused

in the Context of Sex Scandals. Philippine Law Journal, 86.

[29] Supra note 101, art. III, 2. As cited in Mendoza, C. (2012). Balancing of Interest in the

Digital Age: Protection of Rights of Offended Parties and the Constitutional Rights of the Ac-

cused in the Context of Sex Scandals. Philippine Law Journal, 86.

[30] Supra note 113, Rule 126, 4. As cited in Mendoza, C. (2012). Balancing of Interest in the

Digital Age: Protection of Rights of Offended Parties and the Constitutional Rights of the Ac-

cused in the Context of Sex Scandals. Philippine Law Journal, 86.

[31] Florenz Regalado, Remedial Law Compendium Volume Two 643 (2004).

[32] G.R. No. 202666, September 29, 2014

[33] Section 1, A. M. No. 08-1-16-SC

[34] Vivares v. St. Theresa's College, G.R. No. 202666, September 29, 2014

[35] Suspek sa pangingikil kay Kiefer Ravena, nagpanggap na babae? (2017, March 31). Re-

trieved from http://news.abs-cbn.com/video/news/03/31/17/suspek-sa-pangingikil-kay-kiefer-

ravena-nagpanggap-na-babae
[36] Graphic artist nabbed for Facebook sextortion'. (2017, February 2). Retrieved from

http://news.abs-cbn.com/news/02/02/17/graphic-artist-nabbed-for-facebook-sextortion