Massacre trial to be reality show live on TV
The trial of the suspected perpetrators of the 2009 Maguindanao massacre will soon be viewed in living rooms nationwide courtesy of the Supreme Court.
In a landmark ruling, 12 of the 15 justices of the high court on Tuesday voted in favor of the petition of the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP) and other media groups seeking live coverage of the trial.
Midas Marquez, Supreme Court spokesperson and administrator, described the resolution written by Senior Associate Justice Conchita Carpio-Morales as a pro hac vice, or a ruling that applies only to a particular case or occasion and cannot be used as precedent of future cases.
Marquez said the ruling could also be the “valedictory decision” of Morales, who is to retire on June 19.
“It is about time to craft a win-win situation that shall not compromise rights in the administration of criminal justice, sacrifice freedom of media rights and interfere in the integrity and solemnity of judicial processes,” Marquez said at a news briefing, quoting a portion of the ruling.
As many as 197 persons have been charged with the massacre of 57 people, including 32 media workers, on Nov. 23, 2009. (The remains of a reported 58th victim have yet to be found.)
Eight members of the influential Ampatuan clan and 80 other people have been arrested.
The massacre is believed to be the worst election-related violence in Philippine history and the single deadliest attack on the media.
Former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, an ally of the Ampatuans, may be summoned to testify at the trial.
Aquino thanks SC
Marquez said that apart from the NUJP petition, the court also took note of the letter of President Aquino to Chief Justice Renato Corona and the petition filed by the National Press Club seeking live coverage of the trial.
“The court took into consideration advancements in information technology. The court, of course, had to weigh the rights of the accused together with press freedom and the right of the public to information. All these rights were weighed; that’s why the court has come up with this compromise,” Marquez said.
“We thank the Supreme Court for granting our request and those of our other countrymen to allow full and live coverage of this trial,” Mr. Aquino said in a news briefing yesterday afternoon.
“Let us laud the Supreme Court. They listened,” he added.
Trial hearings are being held twice a week. The high court did not say when the live broadcasts would start.
Marquez said three justices did not participate in yesterday’s voting—the Chief Justice (on official leave), Associate Justice Arturo Brion (on sick leave), and former Associate Justice Antonio Eduardo Nachura (who retired on Monday).
The tribunal had twice ruled to ban live coverage of the trial, which began nine months ago, on grounds it could deprive the defendants of their right to a fair hearing in the politically charged case.
Only 1 camera
But the Supreme Court only partially granted the NUJP petition and laid down specific rules and guidelines for broadcast networks, Marquez said.
He said that instead of allowing all TV stations to set up their own cameras, only one camera would be allowed inside the courtroom “under the court’s control.”
“The court took into consideration the impossibility of accommodating all parties inside the courtroom, including the victims, families, witnesses and complainants,” he said.
According to Marquez, media entities, including foreign broadcast firms, are obliged to seek accreditation from the presiding judge, Jocelyn Solis-Reyes of the Quezon City Regional Trial Court, to get a live feed of the hearing.
“We foresee media establishments applying. After the court’s approval, [the media] establishments can air live proceedings of the case,” he said.
And while the media will be allowed to annotate the hearings, the opinions aired during the telecast will still be covered by the sub judice rule, Marquez said.
“The court will reserve its right to hold anybody in contempt for violating any of the rules enumerated in the decision,” he warned.
Guidelines
Marquez said the accreditation of radio and TV firms could be revoked should they fail to comply with these guidelines set by the high court:
An audio-visual recording may be made both for documentary purposes and for transmitting to live radio and TV broadcast.
Media entities must file a letter of application expressing intent to air the proceedings and present a “technological plan” stating that they will follow rules and cover the entire process until the promulgation.
No media entity may air the proceedings without Judge Reyes’ approval.
Only one camera will be allowed in the courtroom.
The broadcast on any given day will be continuous except for portions barred by the court.
There will be no commercial breaks until proceedings are adjourned, except for a period of recess called by the court and where the public is excluded.
Hearings will be aired without voiceover except for annotation of scenes to explain elements at the start and close of the proceedings.
Replays will not be allowed until after final judgment is made, except for brief footage derived from recordings only for news purposes.
Public watching
Lawmakers welcomed the Supreme Court’s ruling.
“For the sake of transparency, I don’t mind that [the trial] is televised,” Zambales Rep. Milagros Magsaysay, an Arroyo ally, said.
“What are important are the issues and evidence raised and the rebuttal of the defense, plus how the court will [rule on the case],” Magsaysay added.
Rep. Neri Colmenares of the militant party-list group Bayan Muna said the live coverage would speed up the trial because the public would be watching.
“The Maguindanao massacre is a public concern which the public has the right to be informed and updated on,” he said.
Nueva Ecija Rep. Rodolfo Antonino in a text message said: “Now that the [trial] will be televised, the public will be able to discern for [itself]. But what does GMA (Arroyo) have to do with the massacre?”
Arroyo’s camp has declined comment on the matter even after the Ampatuan defense panel led by lawyer Gregorio Narvasa listed her among those to be called to testify.
Narvasa has refused to say what Arroyo would testify on. With reports from Norman Bordadora and Gil C. Cabacungan Jr.
