Why questioning (or even opposing) RA 11055?

Why questioning (or even opposing) RA 11055?

(Or why this person like others concerned
is questioning, even opposing the government's
 "National Identification System")

At first, this person, like others concerned, is questioning in regards to serious privacy and security concerns amidst the signing into law of Republic Act 11055 or the "Philippine Identification System Act" by the Duterte administration.

Initially, that plan seems to be optimistic, especially to those who are "sick and tired" of multiple identification cards from different government agencies, the need for stronger and efficient law enforcement and public safety, addressing financial inclusion challenges, efficient delivery and access to government agencies, as well as stronger law enforcement and public safety.

However, despite its intents, concerns are being raised especially against the inclusion of a ‘record history’ that details when and where the ID has been used, both in public and private transactions. Information to be collected also includes demographic data such as full name, gender, date and place of birth, blood type, address, and citizenship. Marital status, mobile numbers, and email addresses are optional. Other "improved features" such as Biometrics are also included, which involves front-facing photograph, full set of fingerprints, and iris scan. Other identifiable features may be collected if necessary.
With that procedure both in collecting one's profile as well as data history, this as enough to act as a "virtual tracker" for its holders, as well as a "treasure trove" for data-hungry individuals and entities such as data and mortgage brokers, credit agencies, direct mailers, civil litigants, employers, hackers, and even the government seeking for intelligence data. And its misuse, abuse, and leakage coming from these actions will have grave impacts on one's personal privacy and security.

While the need to streamline service and improve security as well as safety might be reasonable cause for its imposition, this system, as any other move taketh by the government, should not be at the expense of one's rights, particularly those of privacy, freedom of movement, and non-discrimination. These rights are of course, enshrined in the constitution as well as in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in which the Philippines itself is it's signatory. As said before in regards to "Digital Transformation" and its impact in the society, while the law and its system intends to ensure one's convenience and easy access for every transactions, it can also become a convenient pretense for broader state surveillance and police powers over citizens- an attempt to silence possible dissent.

Actually, this kind of scenario becomes relevant knowing the prevailing environment of state-condoned impunity and violence against its people, and persecution of perceived enemies of the ruling order. Using digital means and with the active support by those adhereing to it, having personal data in the hands of an oppressive system will be another weapon that they can use enough to interfere with one's right to privacy, and even freedom of one's movement, expression, press, speech, and assembly.

Sounds opposing as it emphasises the problems surrounding this identification system. In fact last 2016, a "treasure trove" of data with biometrics and personal information has been released in an incident involving the Commission on Elections. That incident compromised the data of 55 million voters, thus exposed the inherent weaknesses of government systems to manage and secure personal data. 

And to think that there is an agency supposed to protect one's privacy and to help in managing government systems, will it also prevent those such as with the COMELEC data to use it for possible identity theft and fraud? Much more endangering is a possible distortion by the government itself- Especially when potential dissent may find one's self imprisoned or killed not because of an opposing belief but also having authorities likely to distort one's data till enough to justify an unlikely action- just like what happened in Kamuning months ago when a cultural activity end surrounded by the police with the latter pretending "they are enforcing curfew and other similar laws". This may get worse with  may also find the same fate so long as the authority does the same action "all in the name of order and stability." 

Anyway, aside from state matters, as the law repeatedly states that the identification system shall only be used as a proof of identity, it is not far fetched that in the future such data will be used for purposes other than stated in the law - especially as data, through digital means, is becoming a very lucrative venture that earns billions for the private sector. Entities like Ayala and Aboitiz hath submitted bids aiming to design, develop infrastructure needed for the system, despite the recent incident involving Facebook and Cambridge Analytica- which incidentally underlined how little that the government can do to penalize and strictly enforce protecting data privacy of its citizens and how willing political actors are having their hands itchy yearning to utilise or distort one's personal data to further their goals.

From these, perhaps there will be more reasons why people dare to question after the government is willing to spend 30 billion pesos to create a complicated system despite the latter talking about its importance and benefits. Admittingly speaking, that billions of pesos would be far better served by modernizing, cleaning, and standardizing systems and databases that are already in use; or bluntly speaking, that same amount should hath been spent on the delivery of basic social services, setting forth important and necessary programs, or to lessen existing debts.

https://web.archive.org/web/20010301190133/http://www.i-next.net:80/