For those who loves to take selfies in everyday of their lives and in everything they do, this may somehow serve as a bad news.
Bayan Muna Representative Carlos Zarate revealed that there is a bill prohibiting taking photos of people, private properties and many more without permission.
The House Bill 4807 or the Protection against Personal Intrusion Act, which was sponsored and endorsed by 1st District of Misamis Occidental Rep. Jorge T. Almonte is now on it 3rd reading in the plenary.
This defines “intrusion of personal privacy” as “any person who willfully intrudes into the personal privacy of another, without the consent of that person and with the intent to gain or profit therefrom, shall be civilly liable to the offended party.”
Zarate said if passed into law this bill will “punish with civil suit taking photos, video or even audio recording anything claimed as personal/family matter even of public officials and personalities.” He added that even taking pictures of self with “public figure at the background would be liable for ‘intrusion of privacy’.”
He called this absurd and called his colleague to reconsider the bill.
The bill considered the following as intrusion into personal privacy of another and shall be presumed to have been committed with intent of profit and claim:
- Capturing by camera or sound recording instrument of any type of visual image, sound recording or other physical impression of any person.
- Trespassing on private property in order to capture any type of visual image, sound recording or other physical impression of any person.
- Capturing any type of visual image, sound recording or other physical impression of a person or family activity through the use of a visual or auditory enhancement device even when no physical trespass has occurred, when the visual image, sound recording or other physical impression could not have been captured without a trespass if no enhancement device was used.
Victims of this “intrusion of privacy” may find relief, which includes compensation, punitive damages, and injunctive and declaratory relief.
The only exemption for this bill are the act of law enforcement activities.
Media Reacted
The Photojournalist Center of the Philippines (PCP) said the bill should clearly define what is “internet to gain or profit therefrom.”
“It would seem that people from media and journalists can be targets of the proposed measure,” said PCP board member Jose Torres Jr. “Worthy of being emphasized is the phrase ‘with intent to gain or profit therefrom.’ in case a complaint is filed in court against a photojournalist, can lack of intent to gain be used as defense.”
The PCP also wanted the bill to clearly define “private property.”
“Private property must be spelled out and defined. Pubic places, cars, public transport, public buildings, among others, and individuals, who by nature of their position or profession are classified as public figures, cannot claim violation of privacy. Does ‘personal privacy’ extend to public domain or public places in private spaces, for instance malls, shopping centers, events venues, a luxurious resorts, among others?”
The group also asked the media should also be exempted as well as those that fall under educating, warning, exposing incidents and other events that can benefit the majority.
The group expressed concerns that the freedom of expression may be suppressed.
Source: ABS-CBN News
Thank you so much for visting Chismobiz and reading our articles. If you find this post interesting, please do remember to share it on Facebook, Twitter or Google+. Adding a comment below will be much appreciated.
0 comments:
Post a Comment