By Florin T. Hilbay
In September 2010, Carlos Celdran, outraged by the Church’s intervention in the debates over reproductive health rights, did the unthinkable. Sporting a dark suit a la Jose Rizal, he went to the Manila Cathedral where an assembly was then marking the anniversary of the “May They Be One” campaign and launching a project aimed at [...]
Posted: January 31st, 2013 in Columns,Editor's Pick,Inquirer Opinion | Read More »
By Florin T. Hilbay
With the passage of the Cybercrime Prevention Act (RA 10175), the government has entered the online thicket in a substantial way. Petitions have been filed questioning the validity of the Act, giving the Supreme Court the opportunity to define our rights in digital space. This is an important case because the Internet has become an important platform for individual and social activities that generate meaning and profits, produce identities and opportunities, or structure views and conversations. In my opinion, even a generous reading will not save RA 10175; it is unconstitutional because it is overbroad.
Posted: October 7th, 2012 in Columnists,Columns,Inquirer Opinion | Read More »
By Florin T. Hilbay
The application for accreditation of the party-list group Ang Prolife brings into focus the constitutional and statutory obligations of the Commission on Elections in the matter of registration of religious organizations.
Posted: June 6th, 2012 in Columnists,Columns,Inquirer Opinion | Read More »
By Florin T. Hilbay
There is a fundamental flaw in the way the impeachment proceedings against Chief Justice Renato Corona have so far been conducted, and it has nothing to do with the ability of Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile to manage the trial. He has proven himself impartial, authoritative, learned and credible. The problem lies with the assumption that these proceedings are akin to a criminal trial and must proceed as such.
Posted: January 23rd, 2012 in Columnists,Columns,Inquirer Opinion | Read More »
By Florin T. Hilbay
The test of a society’s commitment to freedom of expression lies in its defense of marginalized forms of speech. I say in class, free speech is for speech that you hate, not for speech that you like. The logic of the principle is simple: we don’t need to protect society’s treasured ideas and institutions—they pose [...]
Posted: August 15th, 2011 in Columnists,Columns,Inquirer Opinion | Read More »