Five technology professionals and digital rights advocates have asked the Supreme Court (SC) to invalidate the government’s nationwide blocking of Discord and prohibit similar restrictions on websites and social networking platforms, arguing that the agencies involved acted beyond their authority.
The petition for certiorari and prohibition, filed on October 1 and supported by the civic technology movement BetterGov.PH, challenges the Sept. blocking of Discord and the government’s threat to impose a similar restriction on Reddit.
The petitioners are entrepreneur and content creator Carlo Ople, businessman and technologist Eliezer “Eli” Rabadon, startup founder and law student Francis Plaza, BetterGov.PH co-convenor Christopher Star, and technology and intellectual property lawyer Arjel P. de Guzman.
Named as respondents are Department of Information and Communications Technology (DICT) secretary Henry Rhoel Aguda, Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center (CICC) executive director Renato Paraiso, and National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) commissioner Ella Blanca Lopez.
“The State’s noble crusade against cybercrime cannot be used as a blunt instrument to demolish the digital public square,” the petition states.
The petitioners are asking the court to annul the CICC’s Sept. 22 directive and the NTC’s Sept. 23 memorandum that ordered Internet service providers to block Discord for 15 days.
They also seek a declaration that the officials committed grave abuse of discretion and a writ of prohibition permanently restraining them, and persons acting under their authority, from implementing unilateral, wholesale, nationwide blocking through geofencing or equivalent methods.
According to the petition, the CICC sent letters to Reddit and Discord on Sept. 21, giving the platforms 24 hours to designate a resident agent or establish a local representative in the Philippines. Paraiso warned that failure to comply could result in nationwide blocking.
On Sept. 22, Aguda and Paraiso requested a 15-day suspension of Discord, citing the absence of a Philippine legal representative who could receive and act on lawful processes from local authorities.
The NTC issued its blocking memorandum the following day. The petition cites reports that Discord became inaccessible on Globe, GOMO, and PLDT that evening, while the platform reported no global outage.
The DICT and CICC lifted the restriction on Sept. 24 following a meeting with Discord executives. The release accompanying the petition said Paraiso publicly apologized to “those who were affected and inconvenienced by the hours-long ban.”
The petitioners argue that neither the NTC’s charter nor the Cybercrime Prevention Act gives the respondent officials authority to block entire online platforms.
They cite the SC’s ruling in Disini v. Secretary of Justice, which struck down a provision of the Cybercrime Prevention Act allowing the restriction or blocking of computer data without judicial authorization.
The petition also argues that the Discord restriction constituted unconstitutional prior restraint, violated due process and equal protection, and indiscriminately affected lawful users alongside those allegedly engaged in illegal activity.
The petitioners contend that the government could have pursued narrower measures, including targeted content takedowns, account suspensions, preservation and disclosure orders, or restrictions on specific URLs.
The filing cites estimates of six million to 7.8 million monthly active Discord users in the Philippines and more than 15 million Reddit users. It describes the platforms as “the primary virtual office and communications backbone” for freelancers, virtual assistants, business process outsourcing workers, developers, students, and digital creators.
Although access to Discord has been restored, the petitioners argue that the dispute remains “capable of repetition yet evading review,” because restrictions can be imposed and withdrawn before courts have an opportunity to act.
They also point to earlier CICC threats against Roblox and argue that the officials have not relinquished their claimed authority to block platforms.
“While we recognize and fully support the government’s mandate to protect minors and combat cybercrime, the methods employed to realize such a mandate must not trample on the people’s fundamental rights,” the petitioners said in a statement.
“The internet is the modern public square. Digital liberties are not secondary privileges — they are extensions of our fundamental human rights. The state’s noble goal of pursuing criminals must not be used as a Trojan horse to normalize mass censorship.”
