Cyber Law Bar Exam Reviewer Philippines
A source-linked study guide to selected past Bar questions on cybercrime, data privacy, electronic transactions and electronic evidence. Use the historical questions for practice, then check the official syllabus and legal cutoff for your examination year.
Is there a “Cyber Law” bar subject?
Cyber-law issues appear within broader Bar subjects. This page combines a historical question sample, older syllabus references and a subject navigation map. These are different types of evidence: a past question does not establish current coverage, and a subject weight does not predict a topic’s chance of appearing.
What to know before you dive in
Freshness check, 3 October 2026: The official 2027 bulletin PDF could not be retrieved in this check, so no current cutoff or AI-specific syllabus inclusion is certified here. For current legal research, Supreme Court A.M. No. 25-11-28-SC (18 February 2026) is verified from the E-Library; its existence alone does not establish Bar coverage. Historical questions remain labelled by year.
Connect your review topics to Philippine AI and technology law.
- Cyber law is not a standalone bar subject. It is distributed across Commercial and Taxation Laws, Criminal Law, and Remedial Law — three subjects worth a combined 55% in the 2025 bulletin. Verify weights for your examination year.
- The sample includes cyberlibel liability under Disini v. Secretary of Justice. Distinguish merely receiving or reacting to an existing post from authoring a new allegedly defamatory statement; this sample does not establish the most-tested doctrine across all exams.
- The Data Privacy Act appeared in the 2019 Mercantile Law questionnaire but not in the 2022 or 2023 questionnaires we checked directly — treat it as recurring, not guaranteed every sitting.
- Newer cyber statutes — the SIM Registration Act (RA 11934) and the Access Devices Regulation Act (RA 8484) — sit inside the syllabus but have no confirmed bar appearance in the years we could sample.
- This page reports only what we could verify against an official questionnaire or syllabus. Where we could not confirm a claim, we say so rather than guess.
Core Bar Subjects and Weights
The weights below match the official 2025 Bar Bulletin No. 1 and are shown as a historical reference. They are not certified here as the current 2027 weights. Check the Supreme Court’s 2027 Bar page and its bulletin for current coverage, weights and legal cutoff before planning study.
Political and Public International Law
15% weight. Constitutional, administrative and public international law coverage.
Open subject category → Study judicial review practice question →Commercial and Taxation Laws
20% weight. Commercial and tax law, including applicable technology and data issues under the syllabus.
Open subject category →Civil Law, including Land Titles and Deeds
20% weight. Civil law and land titles and deeds in the current subject coverage.
Open subject category →Labor Law and Social Legislation
10% weight. Labor standards, relations and social legislation under the syllabus.
Open subject category →Criminal Law
10% weight. Crimes and criminal liability, including cybercrime where covered.
Open subject category →Remedial Law, Legal and Judicial Ethics, with Practical Exercises
25% weight. Procedure, evidence, ethics and practical exercises, including electronic evidence where covered.
Open subject category →The six subject categories are set up for the reviewed question bank. For CyberCode’s verified cyber-law questions and sources, continue with the reviewer below. Open a subject category to add and review its guides. The Bar Exams category archive groups the six collections.
Where Cyber Law Sits on the Bar
Under the six-subject structure the Supreme Court adopted starting with the 2023 Bar Examinations, cyber-law topics fall inside three subjects, not one. There is no “Technology Law” or “Cyber Law” line item on the questionnaire.
| Bar subject (post-2023 structure) | Weight | Cyber-law content confirmed or listed here |
|---|---|---|
| Commercial and Taxation Laws | 20% | Data Privacy Act (RA 10173); electronic-transaction fact patterns tied to the Electronic Commerce Act (RA 8792) |
| Criminal Law | 10% | Cybercrime Prevention Act (RA 10175); Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act (RA 9995); Anti-Child Pornography Act (RA 9775) |
| Remedial Law, Legal and Judicial Ethics with Practical Exercises | 25% | Rules on Electronic Evidence (A.M. No. 01-7-01-SC); Rule on Cybercrime Warrants (A.M. No. 17-11-03-SC) |
| Political and Public International Law | 15% | Not confirmed to carry cyber-law content in the years we sampled |
| Civil Law | 20% | Not confirmed to carry cyber-law content in the years we sampled — for this subject’s own bar coverage, see CivilLaw.ph’s Bar Exam Reviewer |
| Labor Law and Social Legislation | 10% | Not confirmed to carry cyber-law content in the years we sampled — for this subject’s own bar coverage, see LaborCode.ph’s Labor Law Bar Reviewer |
Before 2023, the bar ran eight separate subjects and Mercantile Law stood on its own; the Data Privacy Act and Electronic Commerce Act were tested there. From 2023 onward, Mercantile Law was folded into Commercial and Taxation Laws. If you are studying from a reviewer written before 2023, adjust for the merger — the substance carried over, the subject label did not.
What Actually Gets Asked
Every cyber-law-related bar question we could directly verify against an official questionnaire, plus one confirmed year in which none appeared. Not a complete history — it is what we could retrieve and read ourselves.
| Year | Subject | Item | Pts | What it tested |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | Mercantile Law | A.7 | 2% | Whether a Deed of Sale faxed between two parties is an “electronic document” under the Electronic Commerce Act |
| 2019 | Mercantile Law | B.13 | 2% | Enumerate at least two rights of a data subject under the Data Privacy Act |
| 2022 | Commercial Law | 12 | 5% | Whether a screenshot of a “Mine” comment on a Facebook livestream proves the perfection of a contract of sale |
| 2022 | Criminal Law | 10 | 5% | Cyberlibel — who among the original poster, a commenter, a “liker,” and a person who shared the post is criminally liable |
| 2022 | Remedial Law I | 12 | 5% | Enumerate and describe three warrants issuable under the Rule on Cybercrime Warrants |
| 2022 | Remedial Law I | 14 | 5% | Whether CCTV footage is admissible as electronic evidence |
| 2023 | Commercial and Taxation Laws | — | — | No question on the Data Privacy Act, the Electronic Commerce Act, or any other cyber-law topic — confirmed by reading the full 2023 questionnaire |
Method and limits
We read the official Supreme Court questionnaires for the 2022 Commercial Law, Criminal Law, and Remedial Law I examinations, and the 2023 Commercial and Taxation Laws examination, directly from sc.judiciary.gov.ph. For 2019 we used the Mercantile Law questionnaire archived by LawPhil. The historical sample below does not establish the current availability of 2024, 2025 or 2026 questionnaires. Check the Supreme Court’s official releases; no release-date forecast is made here. We also did not exhaustively re-read every subject for every year on record (for example, 2020, 2021, and years before 2019). Treat the pattern above as directional evidence of what examiners have tested, not a complete count, and verify against the primary sources linked in Sources before relying on it for exam strategy.
Doctrines That Keep Coming Back
The functional-equivalent rule has limits
The Electronic Commerce Act treats an electronic data message as the functional equivalent of a paper document, but a printed fax transmission is not itself an electronic document — it is paper-based, not a “paperless” communication.
Ephemeral evidence still needs authentication
A screenshot of a Facebook comment does not automatically prove a fact like contract perfection; it has to clear the authentication rules the Rules on Electronic Evidence set for ephemeral electronic communications.
CCTV footage: classification and authentication
When offered to prove its contents, CCTV footage is documentary evidence under amended Rule 130, Section 2. Authentication and other admissibility requirements still apply. Compare the two questions in the CCTV evidence guide and the electronic-evidence comparison.
Distinguish original authorship from merely reacting
In Disini, Jr. v. Secretary of Justice (G.R. No. 203335, February 11, 2014), the Supreme Court struck down Section 5 of the Cybercrime Prevention Act (aiding or abetting) as applied to Section 4(c)(4) cyberlibel, insofar as it would criminalize someone who merely receives a defamatory post and reacts to it — by liking or sharing it. The 2022 bar built an entire question around this exact fact pattern: an original poster, a friend who added her own comment, a friend who merely clicked “like,” and a stranger who shared the post.
Read Cybercode’s cyberlibel guide →The Rule on Cybercrime Warrants creates several warrants
A.M. No. 17-11-03-SC establishes the WDCD, WICD, WSSECD and WECD — each with its own procedure and validity period. Examiners have asked candidates to enumerate and describe three of them.
Data subject rights are a short-answer favorite
The right to be informed, to object, to access, to rectify, to erasure or blocking, to data portability, to damages, and to file a complaint with the NPC — the kind of list examiners ask candidates to enumerate rather than essay through.
Extraterritorial application is its own tested concept
The Data Privacy Act’s syllabus entry lists “extraterritorial application” as a distinct sub-topic, separate from ordinary scope and coverage.
Sensitive data needs a stricter lawful basis
The syllabus and the Act distinguish general principles for ordinary personal information from the additional conditions required for sensitive or privileged information.
The 2022 Syllabus Reference
Historical syllabus reference: the placements below reproduce the 2022 syllabus reviewed for this question sample. They are not the current 2027 syllabus. Subject labels and coverage can change; verify the bulletin for your examination year.
Commercial Law — Special Laws, Part VIII.F
Data Privacy Act of 2012
- Definitions and scope
- Extraterritorial application
- Processing of personal information — general principles; sensitive/privileged information; subcontracting; privileged communication
- Rights of the data subject; exceptions and non-applicability
- Duties of the personal information controller
Criminal Law — Part III
Special Penal Laws
- Item N: Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 (RA 10175)
- Item F: Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of 2009 (Secs. 3–4, RA 9995)
- Item A: Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009 (Secs. 3[a-c], 4–5, RA 9775)
Remedial Law and Legal Ethics
Evidence and Criminal Procedure
- Part 1, Sec. VII.J (Evidence): Rules on Electronic Evidence (A.M. No. 01-7-01-SC)
- Part 1, Sec. VI.P (Criminal Procedure): The Rule on Cybercrime Warrants (A.M. No. 17-11-03-SC)
Reference material cited in the 2022 syllabus: “Rep. Act No. 10173 and its Implementing Rules and Regulations.” The Electronic Commerce Act (RA 8792) does not appear as its own numbered item, consistent with how it has actually been tested — embedded inside a contracts or evidence fact pattern rather than as a freestanding topic. “Cyberlibel” likewise has no separate line item; it is examined as one of the specific offenses defined within RA 10175 itself, principally Section 4(c)(4) in relation to Article 355 of the Revised Penal Code. Both electronic-evidence items sit inside the heaviest-weighted subject on the 2025 weight reference (25% of the general average).
Statutes the Examiners Have Actually Used
Confirmed tested, with the year and subject we verified it in:
- ConfirmedRepublic Act No. 8792, Electronic Commerce Act of 2000 — 2019 Mercantile Law (electronic-document definition); 2022 Commercial Law (Facebook-livestream contract question)
- ConfirmedRepublic Act No. 10173, Data Privacy Act of 2012 — 2019 Mercantile Law (rights of a data subject)
- ConfirmedRepublic Act No. 10175, Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 — 2022 Criminal Law (cyberlibel liability)
- ConfirmedA.M. No. 01-7-01-SC, Rules on Electronic Evidence — 2022 Remedial Law I (CCTV footage admissibility)
- ConfirmedA.M. No. 17-11-03-SC, Rule on Cybercrime Warrants — 2022 Remedial Law I (enumerate three warrants)
Squarely within the syllabus but not confirmed tested in the years we sampled:
- Not confirmedRepublic Act No. 9995, Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of 2009
- Not confirmedRepublic Act No. 9775, Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009 (as it relates to online facilitation)
- Not confirmedRepublic Act No. 8484, Access Devices Regulation Act of 1998
- Not confirmedRepublic Act No. 11934, SIM Registration Act of 2022 — too recent to appear in the syllabi and questionnaires we could retrieve
The 2023 Commercial and Taxation Laws questionnaire is worth sitting with for a moment: it tested corporate law, banking, insurance, maritime law, intellectual property, and tax, and it did not touch the Data Privacy Act or the Electronic Commerce Act at all. A subject appearing on the syllabus every year does not mean it produces a question every year.
Why This List Will Change
Coverage, legal cutoffs and released questionnaires change independently. Check the Supreme Court’s official Bar page for your examination year. This historical question sample does not establish whether more recent questionnaires have been released, and this page does not predict result-release dates.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is there a bar subject called “Cyber Law” or “Technology Law”?
No. There is no subject with that name on the Philippine Bar Examination. Cyber-law statutes are tested inside Commercial and Taxation Laws, Criminal Law, and Remedial Law, Legal and Judicial Ethics with Practical Exercises.
Which bar subject tests the Cybercrime Prevention Act (RA 10175)?
Criminal Law, under Special Penal Laws. The 2022 Criminal Law syllabus lists it as item N. Cyberlibel, which falls under RA 10175 Section 4(c)(4), is the specific offense we found actually tested.
Which bar subject tests the Data Privacy Act?
Commercial Law before 2023, and Commercial and Taxation Laws from 2023 onward. It sits under Special Laws in the 2022 Commercial Law syllabus, with definitions and scope, extraterritorial application, processing of personal information, rights of the data subject, and duties of the personal information controller as its named sub-topics.
Which bar subject tests the Rules on Electronic Evidence?
Remedial Law, under Evidence. The related Rule on Cybercrime Warrants is tested under Criminal Procedure in the same combined subject, Remedial Law, Legal and Judicial Ethics with Practical Exercises.
Has the Data Privacy Act actually been asked in a past bar exam?
Yes — confirmed in the 2019 Mercantile Law questionnaire, which asked candidates to enumerate at least two rights of a data subject. We did not find a Data Privacy Act question in the 2022 Commercial Law or 2023 Commercial and Taxation Laws questionnaires we read directly, so it does not appear to be asked every year.
Has cyberlibel been asked?
Yes. The 2022 Criminal Law questionnaire built a full question around a Facebook post, a comment, a “like,” and a share, and asked which of the four people involved could be held liable for cyberlibel. The doctrine that answers it comes from Disini, Jr. v. Secretary of Justice (G.R. No. 203335, February 11, 2014).
Has the SIM Registration Act (RA 11934) been tested yet?
We found no confirmed appearance in the questionnaires we could read. The law took effect in October 2022, which puts it close to or after the coverage cut-off for several recent exams. Do not assume it is untestable going forward — only that it has not yet shown up in what we were able to verify.
What warrants do I need to know under the Rule on Cybercrime Warrants?
Four: the Warrant to Disclose Computer Data (WDCD), the Warrant to Intercept Computer Data (WICD), the Warrant to Search, Seize and Examine Computer Data (WSSECD), and the Warrant to Examine Computer Data (WECD). The 2022 bar asked candidates to enumerate and describe three of them.
Is the Electronic Commerce Act still tested?
It does not appear as its own numbered syllabus item in the 2022 Commercial Law syllabus we reviewed, but its concepts keep showing up embedded in fact patterns — a faxed document in 2019, a Facebook-livestream sale in 2022. Expect it as a supporting issue inside a contracts or evidence question.
Where can I read the actual questionnaires myself?
The Supreme Court publishes them at sc.judiciary.gov.ph after each exam, and LawPhil maintains an older archive of past questionnaires. Direct links to the specific documents we used are listed below in Sources.
Is this page legal advice or an official bar review product?
No. It is a study aid built from primary sources — official Supreme Court questionnaires and syllabi — and it is not affiliated with the Supreme Court, the Office of the Bar Chairperson, or any review center.
Sources
Every factual claim on this page traces to one of the following.
Continue Your Research
Bar Reviewers for the Network’s Other Subjects
Cybercode.ph is part of a small network of free, source-based Philippine bar reviewers. Each sister site classifies the Supreme Court’s own released questionnaires for a different subject, the same way this page does.
Labor Law Bar Reviewer
Termination, labor relations, labor standards, employment status and social legislation — 10% of the general average.
Read on LaborCode.ph →Family Law Bar Exam Reviewer
Marriage validity, psychological incapacity, foreign divorce, custody, support and adoption — the Family Relations part of Civil Law.
Read on FamilyCode.ph →Civil Law Bar Exam Reviewer
Property, succession, obligations and contracts, land titles and torts — 20% of the general average.
Read on CivilLaw.ph →Last materially reviewed: September 18, 2026.
Cybercode.ph provides general educational information about technology, cybersecurity, privacy, and related legal issues. It is not a substitute for legal, cybersecurity, or professional advice for a specific situation. This page is a study aid, not legal advice, and it is not affiliated with the Supreme Court, the Office of the Bar Chairperson, or any review center.