Far Eastern University De La Salle University

Juris Doctor Masters in Business Administration Dual Degree Program

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements in Information and Communications

Technology Law Course

How Does ICT Affects Constitutional Rights to Privacy Including Data Security In
Adopting A National Identification System?

Submitted by:
Karen G. Supapo

Submitted to:
Atty. John Roy Robert G. Real, Jr.

January 17, 2016

How does ICT affects constitutional right to privacy including data security in adopting a
national identification number?
I.

Importance of a national identification system

Currently, the Philippines have no unified identification system implemented applicable

to all its citizens. The Government issues several identification cards through its agencies. To
name a few, the Bureau of Internal Revenue issues Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) card,
the Commission on Election issues Voters ID, the Professional Regulation Commission has a
PRC ID and every barangay has its own barangay ID. These are all considered valid
identification. And it is a must-have for business and government transactions. However, not all
government-issued ID can be availed by an individual. PRC ID for example is not available to
all. One must be a board-passer of a particular field such as accountancy, nursing or engineering
before he/she can avail the ID. Simply stated, PRC IDs are only for professionals. Likewise, a
voters ID is only for individuals ages eighteen and above. Although a passport is a valid
identification, this kind of identification is only for individuals who have an intention to travel
abroad. And usually, the masses dont normally avail a passport except if it is a work abroad.
Under these circumstances, only a postal ID and a barangay ID can be a valid ID for an
individual who does not qualify to have other government-issued IDs stated above.
On one end, proving an identity seems to be an easy task for those holders of several
identification cards. However, on the other end, those who have no identification card to prove
his/her identity will encounter a dilemma. This is clearly manifested when transacting with the
government or for business. An individual needs to have at least two government-issued
identification card. This business practice is normally done mainly because presenting a single
ID card is insufficient to convince another person, as these cards are susceptible to fraudulent
schemes. Transactions like bank transactions require identification of the individual by
presenting an ID card. Since not all government-issued ID can be availed by an individual due to
restrictions, such person tends to resort to using his/her Birth Certificate just to prove his/her
identity.

Having several identification cards has advantages and disadvantages. But its drawbacks
outweigh its benefits. Comparing these identification cards, all are the same. Each identification
card carries the name of the holder, address, birthdate, birthplace and other relevant personal
information. Clearly, there is redundancy of data being kept by different government agencies.
The government is spending more money to maintain these IDs when the only purpose of having
these identification cards is to identify and determine the identity of a person.
Likewise, on governments perspective, voluminous amount of documents are being kept
by different agencies. And this amount continues to grow everyday and every year and in
perpetuity. You can just imagine a pile of documents stored in the archives of every government
agencies. And these documents are almost similar to what other agencies are keeping in its
archives. Clearly, it is a waste of resources as the government can just have one archive for all of
its citizens and a backup for emergency purposes.
II.

Background on the Attempt to Have National Identification System in the

Philippines
A.

Presidential Decree 278

Although other countries had already their national identity cards implemented1, it was
only in 1973 when the Philippines accepted the concept of a national identification. Former
President Ferdinand Marcos initiated the institution of a national reference card system and the
creation of a national registration coordinating committee. In said decree, all citizens of the
Philippines shall be assigned a Reference Number and be issued a National Reference Card. It
will serve as the official identification of the person to whom it is issued.2 Unfortunately, it was
never implemented.

Jerzak, C.T. A Brief History of National ID Cards. Available at: http://fxb.harvard.edu/a-brief-history-of-

Presidential decree no. 278 available at: http://www.gov.ph/1973/08/24/presidential-decree-no-278-s-1973/

B.

1996 Administrative order no. 308 adopting the national computerized

identification reference system by then President Ramos.

The Administrative Order issued by Former President Ramos was the second attempt to
have a national identification system in the Philippines. Under A.O. no. 308, the government will
have a computerized database system about personal information of its citizens including
biometrics.3 As promising as it may seem, A.O. no. 308 was struck down by the Supreme Court
mainly because it needs appropriate legislation.4 The Court was not unanimous in saying that
said order violated citizens right to privacy.
C.

Former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo issued executive order no. 420

requiring all government agencies and GOCCs to harmonize its ID systems

After learning the flaws of the precursor of a national ID system, Former President
Arroyo tested the waters by issuing an executive order requiring all government agencies and
GOCCs to harmonize its ID systems. Under Section 1 of said order, all government agencies
including GOCCs are directed to adopt a unified multipurpose identification system with the
objectives of reducing costs both for the government and the business in maintaining redundant
database; ensuring greater convenience for business and government transactions; and enhance
the reliability and integrity of government issued IDs. Data as to the name, address, sex, picture,
date and place of birth, marital status, name of parents, height, weight, tax identification number,
two index fingers and two thumb marks, and distinguishing features of the persons are collected
and recorded. As security measures, the order These are safeguarded by the Director-General of
the National Economic Development Authority and pertinent agencies to ensure right to privacy
of an individual.5

3

Executive order no. 308 available at: http://www.gov.ph/1996/12/12/administrative-order-no-308-s-1996/

Ople v. Torres, G.R. 127685, July 23, 1998

Executive Order no. 420. Requiring All Government Agencies and Government-Owned and Controlled
Corporations to Streamline and Harmonize their Identification (ID) Systems, and Authorizing for Such Purpose
the Director-General, National Economic and Development Authority to Implement the Same, And For Other
Purposes, April 13, 2005

D.

The introduction of the Unified Multi-purpose Identification (UMID)

In compliance with E.O. no 420, GSIS, SSS, Pag-IBIG and Philhealth streamlined and
harmonized its ID system and adopted a Unified Multi-purpose ID card in 2010.6 The card
features information such as the surname, given name, middle name, sex, birthdate, address and
a picture of the holder including an SSS number. Although the UMID may be considered as a
milestone for attaining a national identification system, the movement to have a single
identification system for the Filipinos continues.
E.

House Bill 5060 or the proposed Filipino Identification System Act

House Bill 5060 or the proposed Filipino Identification System Act is the latest battle cry
of the advocates for the national identification system.7 Under the proposal, the government will
gradually concert and consolidate all existing government-issued ID into one-integrated and
efficient identification system.8 It will institutionalize a national information card for all Filipinos
that would ensure facilitation and streamline government transactions, and help promote a
progressive society through an efficient delivery of basic services. It mandated every Filipino to
register personal information required by the ID system and a Filipino ID card with an ID
number shall be issued and be valid for life.9
III.

Analysis
A.

How does ICT affect business and government transactions?

GSIS website (2010). UMID eCard available at: http://www.gsis.gov.ph/umid/

H.B. 5060, 16th Cong. 2 (2014)

Tulad, V. Militant solon sounds alarm as House quietly passes National ID System Bill, available at:
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/491790/news/nation/militant-solon-sounds-alarm-as-house-quietlypasses-national-id-system-bill

Tubianosa, D.P. (2014) Filipino Identification Card for all Pinoys Taking Shape. Available at:
http://www.congress.gov.ph/press/details.php?pressid=8208

Technology is there to improve our lives. It makes our work easier and makes our lives
better. And it goes along with our day-to-day living. Technology innovations especially
information technology and communications technology is no longer a want but a need that
everybody must embrace and live with it.
Gone are the days when one is doing everything by hand. Gathering information is very
difficult as the sources of these information are limited and restricted due to many factors such as
geographic. Likewise, communications back then are restricted to telephone lines and personal
interactions. Today, almost everything is digital. Information is readily available and
communications are instantaneous.10 Technology innovations greatly improved operations of all
businesses. From Productions to Marketing to the Support Group such as Accounting, the
business substantially benefited from these innovations. It made the businesses closer to its
customers and made globalization possible. And this is no longer a trend but a reality. As such,
businesses must be at paced with the present technology.
This goes the same with the government. The government must use technology
innovations especially in information and communications technology in delivering government
services to its citizens. The government must not be blind-sided with the fact that the government
must change as the technology changes. As cited by Kittner in her article published in
Washington Post website, the way people are going to expect government to deliver services is
changing and we have to change with it.11 As such, as its economy progresses and innovates,
the government must also innovate and progress. It cannot be left behind. Accordingly, the
government must exploit technological advancements, which will help improve its services and
have better governance.

10

Kooser,

A.C.

How

does

Technology

Improve

Business?

Available

at:

http://smallbusiness.chron.com/technology-improve-business-2188.html
11

Kittner, S. (2013) Using Technology to improve Governments Interaction with the Public. Available at:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/federal_government/using-technology-to-improve-governmentsinteraction-with-the-public/2013/08/26/4e977b0e-0ea2-11e3-8cdd-bcdc09410972_story.html

B.

How can the government protect its citizens data privacy in the advent of
implementing the national identification system?

In the advent of the creation of a digital world, the government must saw the possibility
of e-governance.12 And a good startup for this is being efficient in delivering its services. To
attain this, government information and communication must be well organized. And this is
where national identification system comes in. With the help of a national identification system,
the government saves huge amount of money as only one database is maintained and accurate
information is available such as the population count for appropriating annual budget. Moreover,
government transactions will no longer be a pain in the neck. Aside from serving as an
identification purpose, the government can use the national ID system as a tool to control illegal
migration, tax evasion and welfare fraud and even as a tool to fight terrorism.
For critics, the advent of biometrics and microchips technology has profound
implications, as it is prone to identity fraud, abuse and even cyber attacks. They allege that it is a
violation of their right to privacy. This is intertwined with the governments power to be abused
by corrupt officials and the governments capability to protect the database. Having a national ID
system is a double-edged sword.13 And it boils down on how ethical the administration is and
whether the government is a good governing body or not for its citizens. As such, the
government must not solely rely on investing on technology to protect its information gathered.
But at the same time, revamp the government as an ethical one.
IV.

Validity of a unified identification under the Constitution and Jurisprudence

12

Senate Economic Planning Office. (2005). National Identification System: Do We Need One? Available at:
https://www.senate.gov.ph/publications/PI%202005-12%20-%20National%20Identification%20System%20%20Do%20We%20Need%20One.pdf

13

Ibid.

A.

Governing Laws protecting ones right of privacy

1.

1987 Philippine Constitution

The right of privacy is recognized and enshrined in various provisions of the Bill of Rights. It has
its roots in Sections 1, 2, 3 (1), 6, 8, and 17.14 It protects the life, liberty and property of a
person.15 It also protects an individual from the abuses of the government.16 It keeps every
conversation private between individuals.17 It gives us the opportunity to see the world.18 It also
gives us the freedom to be identified and classified as a group.19 And it does not hinder us to
defend ourselves as our mechanism of self-preservation.20 As such, the right of privacy is
encompassing.

2.

Civil Code of the Philippines

The Civil Code also recognized the right to privacy of an individual. Article 26
exemplifies such recognition. It mandated every person to respect the dignity, personality,
privacy and peace of mind of his neighbors and other persons. And punishes those who will
meddle and pry the privacy of an individual.21
3.

Revised Penal Code

Privacy has many forms. As such several provisions in the Revised Penal Code pertains
to criminalizing some acts violating ones right to privacy. Article 229 pertains to the revelation
of secrets by an officer. Chapter 3 regarding discovery and revelation of secrets covering Articles

14

Supra note 4

15

Phil. Const. Article III, 1

16

Supra note 15, 2

17

Supra note 15, 3(1)

18

Supra note 15, 6

19

Supra note 15, 8

20

Supra note 15, 17

21

Civil Code, Chap. II, Art. 26

290-292 are all pertaining to the right of privacy of an individual. There are also special laws,
which protects individuals right to privacy such as the Intellectual Property Code and the Secrecy
of Bank Deposit Act.22

4.

RA 10173 or Data Privacy Act of 2012

The Sate recognizes that the human right of privacy is being exploited in many forms and
must be protected. As such, a law protecting all types of personal information was enacted in
2012 and was known as the Data Privacy Act of 2012. Under this Act, the State shall penalize
the unauthorized processing accessing due to negligence; improper disposal, processing,
unauthorized access or intentional breach, concealment of security breaches involving sensitive
personal information, malicious and unauthorized disclosure of information and sensitive
information.
B.

Jurisprudence

1. Ople v. Torres GR. 127685 July 23, 1998

Blas Ople assailed the constitutionality of Administrative Order no. 308 issued by Former
President Fidel V. Ramos. He alleges that the order establishing a system of identification that is
all-encompassing in scope, affects the life and liberty of every Filipino citizen and foreign
resident, and more particularly, violates their right to privacy.23 The Supreme Court ruled against
the administrative order and declared it null and void as it violates the right to privacy and hence,
unconstitutional. The Court upheld that the vagueness, over breadth of the order if implemented
would put our people right to privacy in clear and present danger.

22

Supra note 4

23

Supra note 4

The heart of A.O. No. 308 lies in its Section 4, which provides for a population reference
number (PRN) as a common reference number to establish a linkage among concerned agencies
through the use of biometrics technology and computer application designs. The Court, pointing
out another flaw of the order, stated that the order does not mention whether encoding of data is
limited to biological information alone for identification purposes. The Courts concern was the
usage of this information other than identification as it might be misused for generation of other
data with remote relation to the avowed purposes. Indeed, the Court explained that the
indefiniteness of the order could give the government the roving authority to store and retrieve
the information for a purpose other than the identification of the individual through his/her PRN.
Moreover, the Court questioned the order as to how the information gathered shall be handled as
it does not provide who shall control and access the data, under what circumstances and for what
purpose. The Court emphasized that the ability of a sophisticated data center to generate a
comprehensive cradle-to-grave dossier on an individual and transmit it over a national network is
one of the most graphic threats of the computer revolution.
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. The use of biometrics and computer
technology in A.O. 308 does not assure the individual of a reasonable expectation of privacy. As
technology advances, the level of reasonably expected privacy decreases. The measure of
protection granted by the reasonable expectation diminishes as relevant technology becomes
more widely accepted.
2. Kilusang Mayo Uno v Director-General, NEDA GR. 167798 and 167930
April 19, 2006

The Petitioners assailed the adoption of a unified multi-purpose identification system for
government under Executive Order no. 420 on the ground that it infringes the citizens right to
privacy. However, the Supreme Court upheld the legality of E.O. no. 420 as the identification
cards are limited to only 14 specific information that are considered usual data required for
personal identification by the government entities, and even by the private sector. The Court
explained that E.O. no. 420 would help reduce the data required to be collected and recorded in
the ID databases of the government entities. The Court further explained that at present, the data
collected and recorded by government entities are disparate, and the IDs they issue are
dissimilar. The Court emphasized that E.O. no. 420 does not establish a national ID system but
makes the existing sectoral card systems of government entities less costly, more efficient,
reliable and user-friendly to the public. It is designed to reduce costs, increase efficiency, and in
general, improve public service. Thus, in issuing E.O. no. 420, the President is simply
performing the constitutional duty to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed.
It laid down three qualifications when legislation is required, First, when the
implementation of an ID card system requires a special appropriation. Second, when the ID card
system is compulsory on all branches of government, including the independent constitutional
commissions, as well as compulsory on all citizens whether they have a use for the ID card or
not. Third, when the ID card system requires the collection and recording of personal data
beyond what is routinely or usually required for such purpose, such that the citizens right to
privacy is infringed.
The Court pointed out that while the petitioners alleges E.O no 420 as a violation of their
right to privacy, it did not claim that the ID systems of government entities prior to E.O. no 420
also violated their right to privacy. Further, no complaints of abuse has ever been raised in the
collection and recording of personal identification data.
The Court did recognized that some hundred countries have compulsory national ID
systems, including democracies such as Spain, France, Germany, Belgium, Greece, Luxembourg
and Portugal.

V.

Other References
Palabrica,

R.J.

National

ID

System.

available

at

http://business.inquirer.net/192804/national-id-system
SBN 2738 16th Congress An Act Establishing the Filipino Identification System
Okuyama, E., January 31, 2015, Japans National ID system poses risks and advantages
available at: http://kipis.sfc.keio.ac.jp/japans-national-id-system-poses-risks-advantages/
Executive Order no. 700 available at: http://www.gov.ph/2008/01/16/executive-order-no700-s-2008/