Emman Atienza Death Exploited? Netizens Slam New Bill Named After Influencer For Political Reasons - 'This is Useless'

A new Senate proposal meant to combat online hate has triggered controversy after being linked to the death of Emman Atienza, sparking accusations that her name is being used for political gain. The Anti-Online Hate and Harassment Bill, filed by Senate Deputy Majority Leader JV Ejercito, aims to address cyberbullying, fake news, and online defamation; but public reaction has been anything but supportive.

The measure, which carries Emman's name, has been met with criticism from citizens who believe it is being used to suppress dissent rather than protect the vulnerable.

The Emman Atienza Bill

PH Senator JV Ejercito introduced Senate Bill No. 1474, also known as the Emman Atienza Bill, in an effort to expand protections against digital abuse. He said the law seeks to fill gaps in the existing Cybercrime Prevention Act and Anti-Bullying Act, which he described as limited in scope. The bill is intended to safeguard young people and other vulnerable groups from online harassment, hate speech, and the non-consensual sharing of private information.

Ejercito explained that the proposed law penalises cyberlibel, online hate speech, harassment, cyberstalking, and acts inciting discrimination based on gender or sexuality. It will also hold digital platforms accountable for removing or blocking harmful content within 24 hours of verified complaints or court orders. Companies that fail to comply could face penalties or risk losing their authority to operate in the Philippines.

The senator said that Emman Atienza, the late daughter of television presenter Kim Atienza, had inspired the bill's name. He stated that it was created to honour her memory and promote her message of kindness online. He described the bill as a way to prevent other young people from becoming victims of online cruelty.

Measures And Penalties

Under the bill, digital platforms are required to establish clear systems for reporting and removing abusive material. They must also suspend or permanently ban offending users, preserve digital evidence, and offer accessible support channels to complainants. Failure to meet these requirements may lead to administrative sanctions or restrictions on operations.

Victims of online hate would be entitled to psychosocial and legal support through a Victim Support and Protection Programme. The Department of Social Welfare and Development and the Department of Health would provide counselling, while the Department of Justice would assist with protection orders and legal action. All related expenses would be covered by the perpetrators found guilty of committing online abuse.

Sanctions for offenders could include imprisonment and fines ranging from £710 to £2,830 (Approximately $900 to $3,500), depending on the seriousness and frequency of the offence. Ejercito emphasised that freedom of expression, satire, and legitimate criticism of public officials would remain protected unless they involved false or defamatory statements.

Public Reaction And Backlash

The proposal has faced heavy criticism from citizens and online communities. Many have accused Ejercito of exploiting Emman Atienza's death to push for legislation that could silence critics. The backlash has spread across social media platforms, with users claiming the timing and intent behind the bill are politically motivated.

On social media, one user wrote that the initiative was 'useless' and would only serve to shield politicians from scrutiny. Another commented, 'I feel like these politicians will only use this for their advantage.' Others called the move 'absolutely disgusting', noting that the bill was filed before Emman's wake had even concluded.

Many questioned whether the legislation was truly meant to protect citizens or simply to expand the government's power over online speech. Accusations of opportunism have spread, with several users demanding that lawmakers show sensitivity and transparency in handling such cases.

Continuing Debate

Ejercito has yet to directly respond to the accusations of exploitation, though he has maintained that the bill's purpose is to protect citizens from online abuse. He said the measure aims to create a safer digital environment and provide clear consequences for those who engage in cyberbullying and defamation. However, critics argue that without safeguards against political misuse, the bill could be easily weaponised.