MANILA, Philippines—The ascent to office of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo was legal and should be reflected in ousted President Joseph Estrada’s bio-documentary if it is to be shown on television, the Court of Appeals (CA) has ruled.

The CA’s Twelfth Division affirmed Malacañang’s decision of Jan. 5, 2007 requiring the producers of Estrada’s bio-pic, “Ang Mabuhay para sa Masa,” to recognize the Supreme Court decision on the legality of the transfer of power from Estrada to Ms Arroyo in January 2001.

In a 13-page decision penned by Justice Arcangelita Romilla-Lontok, the producer, Public Perception Management Asia Inc. (Publikasia), was also required to show in the film the legality of the power shift in EDSA 2 power revolt.

“Considering that the case against President Estrada before the Supreme Court has been resolved with finality and the latter was found guilty of the crime charged, the grant upon him of a presidential pardon for the same did not render the imposition of said conditions inutile,” the appellate court said.

“Petitioners are still mandated to recognize the legality of the transfer of power from former President Estrada to President Arroyo and reflect the same in the file,” it added.

The court also upheld Malacañang’s position to include in the film the side of persons who were allegedly “defamed” by the documentary that claims Estrada was illegally removed from office.

“Finding the subject film replete with defamatory remarks and scenes which are likely to impair faith in its government, imposition of limitation/condition on its exhibition appears in order,” the appellate court said.

“The balancing factor in the form of replies of personalities defamed should likewise be integrated in the film as a part thereof,” it added.

Publikasia brought its case to the Court of Appeals after a Malacañang review committee imposed conditions on the documentary before it could be shown on television.

Passed off as newsreel

The Movie and Television Review and Classification Board (MTRCB) had previously denied the producer’s bid to have the film exempted from review with Publikasia claiming it was a newsreel.

Later, the board twice found the documentary unfit for public exhibition on the grounds that it tended to undermine political stability, it was libelous and it pertained to matters which were sub judice at the time.

The Sandiganbayan had yet to find Estrada guilty for plunder when the documentary was reviewed.

Publikasia went to Malacañang to appeal the MTRCB’s decisions. The Malacañang review panel imposed conditions on the documentary.

Undermine and defame

Finally, the CA decided the documentary wasn’t a newsreel, that it tended to undermine the government, and that it defamed certain personalities.

“The portion ‘Power Grab,’ by its descriptive appellation, connotes the illegal seizure of power purportedly executed by the present president. It runs contrary to the Supreme Court ruling,” the court said.

The court also found objectionable the portion with “Conspiracy” emblazoned across pictures of Ms Arroyo, her husband Jose Miguel Arroyo, then Speaker Jose de Venecia, former President Fidel Ramos, former Chief Justice Hilario Davide, Energy Secretary Angelo Reyes, former Presidential Chief of Staff Michael Defensor, former Justice Secretary Hernando Perez, Deputy National Security Adviser Luis Singson, and businessmen Eugenio Lopez, Fernando Zobel de Ayala and Guillermo Luz.

“(It) insinuates their unified action to overthrow President Estrada. Integration of said portion into the film tends to undermine the faith and confidence of the people in the government,” the court said.

“Said film material might even qualify as libelous and defamatory,” it said.