Anti-Planking Law
Philippines’ anti-planking law aptly named Anti-Planking Act of 2011.
NZ Prime Minister John Key's son Max planking in front of his father, dubbed as the National plank of NZ
As stupid as it may sound, it is real. A lawmaker wants planking banned, of all things. But as far as I know, it has not been passed into law yet.
Planking (or the lying down game as Wikipedia used to call it) is an activity where one lies face down in an unusual location, with straight body, the feet together and the hands touching the sides of the body. The goal is to have the act photographed and seen by as many people as possible on the internet.
People do it for the sake of fun and giggles and of course bragging rights. But it gets problematic when people try to plank in dangerous places or when the activity breaks the law. Apparently, a congressman feels the need to write a law disallowing the particular act.
The Anti-Planking Act of 2011 is authored by Quezon City Representative Winston “Winnie” Castelo:
AN ACT PRESCRIBING A UNIVERSAL CODE OF STUDENT CONDUCT WHEREBY PLANKING BY A STUDENT OR GROUP OF STUDENTS DURING STREET RALLIES OR SIMILAR PROTEST ACTIONS AS A FORM OF REDRESS OF GRIEVANCE BE STRICTLY PROHIBITED AND APPLYING APPROPRIATE SANCTIONS THEREOF
September 20th, 2011
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled:
SECTION 1. This Act shall be known as the “Anti-Planking Act of 2011”.
SEC. 2. A universal Code of Student Conduct is hereby prescribed where planking as a form of redress of grievance be strictly prohibited and appropriate sanctions be applied for violations thereof.
SEC. 3. Under this Act, planking is when a student or group of students lies face down in unusual locations especially in streets or other public places, keeping the hands along the body and the feet outstretched and especially where such act is meant as a form of redress of grievance against government.
SEC. 4 Every bonafide student from any school, college or university shall conduct himself with high degree of discipline and propriety.
SEC. 5. The Department of Education in the case of elementary and high school students and the Commission on Higher Education in the case of college students shall draft a universal Code of Student Conduct to carry out the provisions of this Act.
Further, DepEd and CHED, respectively shall issue appropriate rules and regulations to effectively carry out intent and purpose of this Act.
SEC. 6. This Act shall take effect ninety (90) days after its publication in the Official Gazette and in at least three (3) newspapers of general circulation.
This anti-planking law was not born out of thin air. It is the result of an incident on September 19 where students “planked” on streets in support of PISTON’s transport strike opposing the increasing oil prices, causing heavy traffic.
Sounds reasonable to me but maybe, they could have just arrested those students for causing public disorder or doing an activity that is against public interest (for lack of a better legal term). I’m pretty sure the existing laws are enough to get those planking rallyists off the streets.
I am not an expert of law but here are what I can surmise:
- The bill prohibits planking done as a form of redress or grievance only, not those made for fun. This comes from author Castelo himself in an interview. That means planking in dangerous or prohibited places wouldn’t be considered illegal, as long as it was made for fun. Now, if those same students planked again on busy streets purely for fun, then this law still wouldn’t apply to them.
- This anti-planking law bans planking for students only. It is explicitly written on the text of the bill, even mentioning Dept. of Education, Commission on Higher Education and Code of Student Conduct. This is unfair for students because they are being singled out. If the plankers aren’t students, then this bill wouldn’t apply to them.
- Section 3 of the bill clearly defines planking. Now, if a planker changes his style a bit so that it no longer fits the description defined on this anti-planking law, would it still apply?
- What’s next, anti-owling law?
Continue reading...
- Add snow to your blog
- 10.10.10 Fun Run for Pasig River marathon
- Motivation Alphabet
- Happy Chinese New Year!
- Pacman University
Primer Pagunuran says:
September 25th, 2011 at 11:39 pm
It better pays off to read the other companion documents, namely, the Explanatory Note and the Press Statement.
The interviews already made are of course very instructive as wello.
Primer Pagunuran says:
September 25th, 2011 at 11:41 pm
Anti-planking?
by Primer C. Pagunuran on Friday, September 23, 2011 at 10:23am
This billl sets in motion agencies of government concerned with education, namely, the Dep Ed and the CHED to be now taken to task.
Dep Ed on the one hand and CHED on the other, will then draft a Code of Student Conduct which will prescribe what should be the universal rules and regulations that could be applied in both private and public schools, colleges or universities.
There will be positive externalities and perhaps even negative ones when either Dep Ed or CHED turns out to be overzealous over the affairs of students outside of the confines of the schools. It is like asking, begging if you may, the school to exercise their 'extra parental' authority over its students especially on matters such as street rallies or similar protest actions that tend to veer away from the real purpose why they are in school.
We might tell of changing attitudes as though attitudes like planking are a fad or a craze. For instance, it used to be that UP is 'turbulent'. Today, it has seemed to have ceased to be one. Perhaps, most street rallies or demonstrations are no longer UP-led, much less, UP-composed.
The point therefore is that, this bill plants the seed of a new consciousness, a culture you might say toward a more disciplined studentry, a more disciplined society writ large.
That it sent shark-attacks-effect on our political beach (as some are quick to say that it violates the freedom of expression, coming out as it did on the anniversary day of martial law in this country) is beyond the intent of the author.
That it was thought to ban planking of any form and under any circumstances is clearly and at bottom, not the true intent and purpose of the measure.
Neither is the bill intended to be understood by plankers who are in the first place quite violently against any move, especially by legislative feat, to make it 'unlawful'.
But just how many are parents who approve of their sons and daughters going into planking? Ordinarily, one can say that any parent in his right mind will discourage his son or daughter to plank. And planking on a dirty road associated as it did with a massive transport strike is just out of tract.
Well, perhaps, we can call for sobriety than throw ad hominems. Let us take time to sit down and debate, if need be than place anyone in disrespect that he does not deserve.
Just because the twitting world was against it doesn't mean the bill is anything of the stereotypes or labels that have been tagged into it.
If the bill were an exercise in futility, it still is part of the territory.
StarMars says:
September 26th, 2011 at 4:16 pm
Thanks for your input Primer.