Produce your own bio-pic, make it a melodrama

       In one of those mornings that I 

attended  the plunder case of Erap at the Sandigan, after the lunch break, I saw Manila envelopes  lying on all the rows of benches behind us, arranged horizontally and neatly on the seats after the second row (the first two rows were reserved for prosecutors and their volunteers.), apparently they were for members of the media. Anyway, I picked up one and saw that they were materials from the Erap camp on their version of events and a VCD with imprints of his photos on the VCD as packaging.  i kept it because it was being distributed to the public and it was free, and showed it to one of the prosecutors who said he’d seen it. In other words, the prosecutors ignored it. It didn’t really matter in the evaluation of the evidence because it was opinion, not fact;  (of course, this entire piece is an opinion, it is inadmissible in evidence; and i can always invoke “attorney-work-product”: that is inadmissible too.); the Sandigan allowed the showing of some film clips in open court, by LCD projector, in one of the mornings prior to the distribution of the Manila envelopes,  and it was  that morning where I fell asleep in open court.     

                  The bio-pic is an expanded version, but built on the same thesis/ premise.  The appeals committee of the Office of the President, which reviewed the triple-X rating given to the bio-pic of Erap by the MTRCB,  said the bio-pic could be shown only after the plunder case had been decided with finality, or, it should be revised to include interviews of the other side.                   

            [And on one hand the leading senatorial candidate of GMA, Mike Defensor, said he was running on a platform of reconciliation with Erap, that Erap should be released on recognizance. “Release on recognizance” is allowed in the MTC (Metropolitan Trial Court) for small crimes. If you want to expand that, amend the laws and the rules of court. Do it legally, don’t people follow the laws anymore)         

          There is a sure-fire way to balance the bio-pic of Erap, and that is:  produce your own bio-pic, your own documentary, your own epic drama, melodrama, music video, telenovela; you can get Brian de Palma, Joey Reyes, Joel Schumacher, Maria Montelibano, Jerry Bruckheimer; you can put it in HD-DVD format, post it in YouTube, put it in your website, require all elementary schools to show it to children. His bio-pic is entitled “Ang Mabuhay para sa Masa”; you can entitle yours “Ang Magpa-Cute para sa Masa”. You can have dance routines there.                

         That’s how the free market works. Haven’t you heard, that’s how the Supreme Court justices have ruled in the last 100 years; unless you can show “a clear and present danger.” That’s the magic phrase, guys, “clear and present danger”; well, it’s not a magic phrase, you have to show by evidence and have to convince the Court of the “proximity”  or likelihood that the evil sought to be prevented, will occur. But that’s not what the appeals committee said. It said “balancing feature”, not “clear and present danger”. And that’s why: they would fail. You can exercise prior restraint only when the material poses a clear and present danger.                

             “Every system of prior restraint comes to this Court bearing a heavy presumption against its constitutionality”. (that was what I typed in the monitor one Monday morning, we have this high-tech room where I don’t use the white glass anymore, I type on a key board on my left, whatever occurs to me,  and it appears on a TV monitor; another story. I’m just illustrating how trite and common this concept is, I hate repeating it.)               

              It was being distributed in the Sandiganbayan court itself. In front of the sheriff, the Sandigan security, the prosecutors. That was how clear and present it was. Not that I liked the film clips, I didn’t;  and don’t watch it if you don’t like it; that’s how our system works. But I probably will not give a legal opinion on this because I have conflict of interest. Gee, I seem to have lots of conflicts of interest nowadays,  all of us have conflicts of interest, we have work, friends, colleagues, organizations, activities, etc. and you’re not supposed to cover, or report, or comment, on a subject that involves any of those enumerated (work, friends, colleagues, organizations, activities, etc.)