privacy in the public eye

Section 1. It shall be unlawful for any person, not being authorized by all the parties to any private communication or spoken word, to tap any wire or cable, or by using any other device or arrangement, to secretly overhear, intercept, or record such communication or spoken word by using a device commonly known as a dictaphone or dictagraph or detectaphone or walkie-talkie or tape recorder, or however otherwise described xxx (Sec.1, RA 4200)

A few days ago, I saw on the news that there was a message recording of an alleged conversation between Jun Lozada & Joey de Venecia uploaded on the youtube. The video utilized cartoons to act out the conversation between the two regarding the ZTE broadband deal. The voices were identified to be Lozada'z and Joey de Venecia's. It was an alleged wire-tapped conversation between the two. I had a glimpse of the video on tv, but when i tried to search the youtube for it, i only found a 5-second presentation entitled "raw wire-tapped conversation between joey de venecia & jun lozada" that only showed a slide stating "wire-tapped audio of jun lozada and joey de venecia". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kp1tiQMgrMk&feature=related

Aside from the fact that the said video of the alleged conversation has apparently been pulled out and replaced by this misleading video, it kinda bothers how the "wire-tapped video" came into being. RA 4200, the Anti-wiretapping Law, states that it is illegal for any unauthorized person to tap, intercept, secretly overhear, or record any private communication. The only exception to wiretapping according to the law is only upon a written order from the Court in crimes of treason, espionage, provoking war and disloyalty in case of war, piracy, mutiny in the high seas, rebellion, conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion, inciting to rebellion, sedition, conspiracy to commit sedition, inciting to sedition, kidnapping(RPC) and violations of CA 616, punishing espionage and other offenses against national security. ( Sec. 3, RA 4200). The reason for the enactment of the Anti-Wire tapping Law was to protect the right to privacy of the people and the privacy of their communications.

With the emergence of this controversial "wire tapped audio", this only shows that phone conversations are already being recorded without the knowledge of the parties. Couple this up with the texting incident of Lozada, when his escorts informed him that he shouldn't text anymore coz they can intercept (well im not sure if they can see the message or if the message will just end up with them... still, interception & interference with a private communication). The privacy safeguards in Lozada's case are nil. And the invasion of such are not upon any written orders from the court, nor is the interception for the purpose of intervening with any offense against national security. In this case, Lozada is a key witness against several high ranking public officials. So would that warrant the violation of his private communications? I mean, is there already an existing structure that records all our conversations that the government can use and tamper with when they want to?