Jurisprudence Shaping Digital Rights in Southeast Asia applied in restricting free speech, that of the three-part test, legality, necessity and legitimacy. The test normally requires judicial intervention to determine the validity of the restriction, and to consider established jurisprudential guidelines. The absence of any judicial intervention as well as the three-part test requirement in restricting the speech as contained in Art 19 made the DoJ ‘judge, jury, and executioner’ all rolled into one. Thus, the court was compelled to strike down the constitutionality of Art 19 of the Cybercrime Law. of the Cybercrime Law. In its decision in the case of Disini et.al., v. Sec of Justice et. Al,28 the court struck down the Article on two grounds. Firstly, the court opined that it is indisputable that computer data created by writers or authors may constitute personal property and therefore is protected from unreasonable search and seizure both while stored in their personal computer or in the service provider system. Secondly, the court stated that computer data can constitute speech. Although not all speech is protected from restriction, any restriction should be in compliance with the general standards 28 See Disini et al. v. Sec. Justice et. al, https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/feb2014/gr_203335_2014.html 14