Loose Bombs

Media reported today that actor Jay Manalo was arrested and will be prosecuted for violating PD 1727, which many now refer to as the “bomb joke law”. A few months back, John Estrada was in a similar situation, but he got out with a slap on the wrist.

I have to admit I felt a weird sense of happiness when I saw these airheads confess to their ignorance in public. But my self-satisfaction aside, I must say that I am quite concerned with the way the law is being implemented.

PD 1727 was promulgated during the Martial Law years “in the wake of recent bombings, arsons, and other terroristic acts committed by radicals and other lawless elements in the country” where “such radical and lawless elements, and "pranksters"” would convey, propagate or otherwise disseminate false information or willfully make threats regarding the alleged presence of bombs, explosives, incendiary devices, or any similar device or means of destruction” “for the purpose of causing or creating public confusion and disorder”.

However, section 1 of the said law which actually defined the punishable act says “any person who, by word of mouth xxx … willfully makes any threat or maliciously conveys, communicates, transmits, imparts, passes on, or otherwise disseminates false information, knowing the same to be false, concerning an attempt or alleged attempt being made to kill, injure, or intimidate any individual or unlawfully to damage or destroy any building, vehicle, or other real or personal property, by means of explosives, incendiary devices, and other destructive forces of similar nature or characteristics."

This means that for the act to be punishable, the person must:
1. willfully make a threat or
2. maliciously convey a known false information
3. the information must be concerning an attempt or alleged attempt to kill, injure or intimidate an individual or damage property by means of explosives.

Now let’s do the requisite legal exercise kuno:

When Jay Manalo said “O, may bomba yan ha” while handing his bag to the stewardess:
1. What act violative of the law did he do? Answer: Conveying false information, because he did not really have a bomb.
2. What was the information about? Answer: The existence of a bomb.
3. Is it the type of information covered by the law? Hmm. Let us see. Was it about any attempt to kill, injure or intimidate with the use of the bomb?

You decide. From my side of the fence, all I could sense is Jay hitting on the stewardess.

I have no beef with our security forces strictly enforcing laws to ensure that no life, limb or property is injured while we travel, but I have some reservation when the law is applied without any consideration for cultural nuances. We are a country of jokers and we always find something hilarious with all kinds of situations. While we submit ourselves to rigorous security procedures, there is always that urge to act funny so as to lighten the atmosphere.

I’m not saying we should not punish jokers – all I’m saying is that the law does not seem to cover the context with which many arrests have so far been made. If the intention is to be truly rigid, considering the times, then an amendment must be in order. Otherwise, loosen up guys! :-)