PRACTICABILITY

Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948, states that:
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes
freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart
information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
According to Prof. Dr. Lyombe Eko, Different countries regulate media in different
ways. This is because each country can interpret the principles of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights in different ways. The fundamental principles of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights include Freedom of opinion, Freedom of
thought, Freedom of expression and Freedom of media added that there is no single
universal definition of Freedom of Expression which leaves room for interpretation by
each country.
Ordinary citizens and activists demanding that their voices be heard -- voices that, in
this new age of smartphones and social media, are harder than ever to silence, even as
technology puts new implements of censorship into the hands of autocrats.

The very essence of modern life is the opportunity for people everywhere to speak,
hear, persuade, change their minds, know what others are thinking, and think for
themselves. Our great institutions of higher education, bear a special social
responsibility for educating people to possess a nimble cast of mind, able to grasp
multiple perspectives and the full complexity of a subject. And for centuries, great
societies of all types have understood that this kind of intellectual capacity is essential to
progress.

If you believe that progress of human civilization depends on individual expression of

new ideas, especially unpopular ideas, then the principle of freedom of speech is the
most important value society can uphold. The more experience someone has with the
Internet the more strongly they generally believe in the importance of freedom of
speech, usually because their personal experience has convinced them of the benefits
of open expression. The Internet not only provides universal access to free speech, it
also promotes the basic concept of freedom of speech. If you believe that there is an
inherent value in truth, that human beings on average and over time recognize and
value truth, and that truth is best decided in a free marketplace of ideas, then the ability
of the Internet to promote freedom of speech is very important indeed.

Our legal tools for safeguarding free speech need to evolve to protect this way of life.
The practical demands of the commercial marketplace and the prerogatives of
economic integration suggest this can happen. Casting the need for sharing knowledge
in this light, and then moving beyond the economic agenda to concerns about human
rights and civil society, is likely to be more productive than a frontal campaign put solely
in terms of values.

Clamor for censorship of the freedom of speech, whether in broadcast or print media, in
television or motion picture, in culture or arts, or in the electronic medium of the Web or
the Net, are mostly based on moral and ethical considerations which can be highly
subjective depending on the individuals beliefs, culture, principles, and many other
factors. Censorship is not a solution to the atmosphere of violence, obscenity and other
social concerns pervading the society today. Censorship may even be harmful as it
gives a temporary feeling of false security. Freedom of speech is just among the many
rights guaranteed under the Constitution. The risk, however, is allowing our other rights
to be diminished in the end. This is in contravention to the fundamentals of democracy
and right to dignity which have been specifically enshrined in our Constitution for us to
exercise our liberty and live without fear and prejudice.

Netizens will now have to be careful with what they post online. Because anti-cyber
bullying laws are the greatest threat to anyones free speech, they seek to censor it
everywhere and anytime it occurs.

By penalizing acts of cyber-bullying, people are encouraged to become responsible

netizens and make them accountable for their cyber-actions. But how about the citizens
freedom of speech? It can potentially affect not only school-aged children, but also any
individual who has access to a mobile phone or the internet. This also means that they
cant express their feelings and opinions without thinking that they can be sued or
penalized and most of all, the deprivation of their freedom of speech.

Specially in the cases of us being students, mostly teenagers, that even in the privacy of
their home, cant write about controversial topics of concern to them with worrying that it
may be "disruptive" or cause a "hostile environment" at school or even in the place
theyre comfortable with.

As from international view:

A new Philippine House Bill No. 5718 Cyberbullying drastically increases punishments
for criminal libel and gives authorities excessive and unchecked powers to shut down
websites and monitor online information.

The laws criminal penalties for online libel and other restrictions are a serious threat to
free expression in the Philippines. Several legal cases have been filed in the Philippines
Supreme Court, including for the law to be declared unconstitutional because it violates
guarantees to free expression contained in the Philippines constitution and human
rights treaties ratified by the Philippines.