Category: News

constitutional law, Criminal law, media law, News

Uplifting Ads: Here’s the YouTube version, discussion on libel prescriptive period, Public Figure Doctrine, etc. (inspiring video sponsors of Karen Davila ’s show on YouTube: Ads showing productive, working people 😊 )

Uplifting Ads: Here’s the YouTube version, libel prescriptive period, etc. on Headstart by Karen Davila on ABS-CBN News Channel; the June 15 episode one hour BEFORE  the promulgation of the libel case against journalists Rappler CEO Maria Ressa and reporter Rey Santos Jr. . Headstart airs weekdays 8am on Channel 27 with replays at middays.
      


      Legal Discussion in the show:
      In Philippine jurisdiction, there are  two paradigms of law that are involved in libel law and jurisprudence:   The Revised Penal Code (RPC) of Spanish medieval origin, and the defenses in libel (privileged communication, the Public Figure Doctrine, etc)  of American constitutional law origin. “Good faith” as a defense is mentioned in the libel law provision of the RPC but not defined; its definition and exposition can be found in constitutional law jurisprudence, i.e., cases in constitutional law, e.g., the Public Figure Doctrine. 

       Generally, every defamatory imputation is presumed malicious and generally truth is not a defense, i.e., defamation automatically carries with it the element of malice (malice presumed, no necessity to prove malice), since most people are private persons; HOWEVER, there is good faith when the Public Figure Doctrine is involved, i.e, when the news organization can show that the report involves public officials or public figures, and the report is substantially true, and it is based on sources (no “reckless disregard for the truth”), then there is absence of malice; there is no liability. This is privileged communication in libel law, it is a defense in libel, and no liability will attach for libel.
       Who are public figures? For the different categories of who public figures are: See Borjal vs. Court of Appeals with annotation by Justice Coquia , and many other cases. A public figure is anyone who gains prominence by reason of  any of the following : crime, or because of their profession (actors, athletes, etc) , or accomplishment, or being a prodigy (talent), or heroism, or advocacy, etc etc.,  or being in the catch-all category “involvement in a newsworthy event.” Newsworthy events include the following :

       Traditional Elements of News : crime, tragedies, street accidents, calamities, wars, epidemics, oddity, scientific inventions, social conflicts, etc., etc….

     In such a case, as stated, you’ll need to show that your report is substantially true and that it is based on sources.

     Here’s a  quick, fast summary  in the 17-minute excerpt of Headstart ably anchored by Karen Davila (video below)

credits: as stated in the video

constitutional law, media law, News

ABS-CBN Headstart anchor Karen Davila provided analytical questions: One hour before cyberlibel promulgation against journalists, possible 7-year prison, bail on appeal discretionary; 15 mins before promulgation while watching the courthouse scene was gut-wrenching for the resource person, apologies po

ABS-CBN Headstart anchor Karen Davila provided analytical questions: One hour before cyberlibel promulgation against journalists, possible 7-year prison, bail on appeal discretionary; 15 mins before promulgation while watching the courthouse scene was gut-wrenching for the resource person, apologies po

       This is the full length interview in Headstart, ABS-CBN, by Karen Davila one hour before promulgation in the cyberlibel case against Rappler CEO Maria Ressa and reporter Reynaldo Santos Jr. Said journalists faced a possible prison term of seven years with bail on appeal that day being discretionary on the court.
      In discussing the “Public Figure Doctrine”, elements of libel, penalties made harsher by cyberlibel, implications on all who use the internet throughout the interview, reference was made to the sources relied upon by the reporter and editors.
       It was also mentioned in the interview that the Shield Law was invoked in not disclosing the author of the intelligence report : resource person said “reporter” there… Clarification:  it was one of the editors who invoked the Shield Law on cross-examination.
(Postscript: the judge however opined that the complainant was a private person, thus, the Public Figure Doctrine, in the judge’s opinion, supposedly did not set in  —  for the judge)

      ABS-CBN covered the promulgation real-time simultaneously with insets and live cut-to-cuts at the Manila courthouse.
       After viewing this a week later: Upon seeing the courthouse corridor, live, teeming with camera crew and while watching ABS-CBN reporter Mike Navallo describe the scene 15 minutes before the promulgation — or in the last two minutes of the interview — there was a figurative wrenching in the gut – a manifestation of “i-have-a-bad-feeling-about-this…”
(di maiiwasan na tuluyan na rin pong gumulo ang buhok ko nuong “i-have-a-bad-feeling-about-this”  at  the close of the interview, sorry powz — because the judge had ignored all law when the prescriptive period was done away with from the very beginning …) 

      The discussion starts at 8:00 of the June 15 vid. (second video of five videos to be posted in the next few days)
2024 UPDATE c/o handling faculty: In the most recent (uploaded by the Supreme Court on Jan. 19, 2024) Supreme Court decision on libel, the Supreme Court clarified that libel prescribes in one year (handling faculty’s note: This thereby paves the way for the dismissal of the libel case against Rappler) : Causing vs. People, GR No. 258524, Oct. 11, 2023 at: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/258524-berteni-cataluna-causing-vs-people-of-the-philippines-regional-trial-court-of-quezon-city-branch-93-office-of-the-city-prosecutor-of-quezon-city-and-representative-ferdinand-ledesma-hernan/

 

 

     Credits: as stated in the video