SENATOR Panfilo Lacson downplayed on Sunday the warning raised by some groups that the passage of the national identification system bill would pose a threat to security and people’s privacy, saying that only enemies of the government and those who uses “aliases” will be affected by the measure.
Lacson said the bill, which seeks to establish the Philippine Identification System (PhilSys), would be beneficial to billions of Filipinos because they could use the national ID in all transactions.
He said people would not need to carry all their government issued IDs when opening a bank account, applying for a loan, renewing their passport or driver’s license and other processes that would need proof of identification because their PhilSys would be enough.
Lacson said he found the claim of those saying that a national ID would infringe on people’s right to privacy inconsistent, noting that personal information are contained in passports, drivers’ licenses and other government issued IDs.
“To those criticizing the measure, don’t they have driver’s license, or voter’s ID because the information stated on those IDs, including biometrics, are the same information that will be included in the national ID so why are they complaining when they already underwent the process,” Lacson said.
The senator said that those who would be negatively affected by the implementation of the PhilSys would be those using aliases and enemies of the government intentionally hiding their real identities to carry out their activities.
“So this concern of the leftists, members [of the]Abu Sayyaf group and other enemies of government . . . because with the ID system it would be easy to identify who is who,” added Lacson, the sponsor and one of the authors of the bill.
The bicameral conference committee last week approved the reconciled version of the bill and both the Senate and the House of Representatives were expected to ratify this on Monday so President Rodrigo Duterte could sign it into law.
“This [national ID] will a be a landmark legislation because it is only under the Duterte administration that it would be enacted,” the Senator said, adding that the proposal has gone through four different administrations. JEFFERSON ANTIPORDA
Lacson said the bill, which seeks to establish the Philippine Identification System (PhilSys), would be beneficial to billions of Filipinos because they could use the national ID in all transactions.
He said people would not need to carry all their government issued IDs when opening a bank account, applying for a loan, renewing their passport or driver’s license and other processes that would need proof of identification because their PhilSys would be enough.
Lacson said he found the claim of those saying that a national ID would infringe on people’s right to privacy inconsistent, noting that personal information are contained in passports, drivers’ licenses and other government issued IDs.
“To those criticizing the measure, don’t they have driver’s license, or voter’s ID because the information stated on those IDs, including biometrics, are the same information that will be included in the national ID so why are they complaining when they already underwent the process,” Lacson said.
The senator said that those who would be negatively affected by the implementation of the PhilSys would be those using aliases and enemies of the government intentionally hiding their real identities to carry out their activities.
“So this concern of the leftists, members [of the]Abu Sayyaf group and other enemies of government . . . because with the ID system it would be easy to identify who is who,” added Lacson, the sponsor and one of the authors of the bill.
The bicameral conference committee last week approved the reconciled version of the bill and both the Senate and the House of Representatives were expected to ratify this on Monday so President Rodrigo Duterte could sign it into law.
“This [national ID] will a be a landmark legislation because it is only under the Duterte administration that it would be enacted,” the Senator said, adding that the proposal has gone through four different administrations. JEFFERSON ANTIPORDA
No comments:
Post a Comment