Cebu media group says no to jail term for libel
Cebu journalists yesterday pressed for the removal of jail terms in the crime of libel.
They said that slapping a fine and encouraging self-regulation was a better way to uphold press freedom and accountability.
An international movement to decriminalize libel was discussed in a forum in Cebu City yesterday to commemorate World Press Freedom Day.
Justice Gabriel Ingles of the Court of Appeals, the forum’s main speaker, proposed that a distinction be made between political and private libel.
Political libel applies in complaints involving public officials and celebrities.
Private libel refers to complaints of private citizens.
“For political libel, I believe, as long as self-regulation by media is not as effective as it ought to be, it should remain a crime. But the penalty should be limited to fine and at an amount which is reasonable,” Ingles said, echoing the position of Associate Justice Mendoza of the Supreme Court.
Ingles said that in political libel, the prosecution has the burden of proof and must show that a publication or broadcast is malicious.
Media groups around the country are pressing for legal reforms in line with the United Nations Human Rights Committee declaration of October 2011 that the criminal sanction of libel is excessive and violates the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, of which the Philippines is a signatory.
Cebu journalists, however, don’t want the crime of libel scrapped altogether, just the jail sanction.
“We want libel to still be considered a public crime. We just want the jail term to be removed as main or subsidiary penalty,” said lawyer Rose Versoza of the Cebu Media Legal Aid (Cemla).
Cemla provides legal advice to the Cebu Citizens-Press Council (CCPC) which favors retaining libel as a crime, but opposes jail terms as a penalty.
“The jail term sanction has been used to terrorize and oppress journalists, silencing with the threat of detention press criticism of government and reporting of matters of public interest,” said the CCPC statement.
“Taking out the prison term will end the use of libel law as means to suppress press freedom and yet won’t deprive the complainant of means of redress in case press freedom is abused.”
Under the Revised Penal Code, a person convicted of libel can be sent to jail for six months to four years on top of a fine and damages that can be awarded in a civil suit.
Libel is defined as a defamatory imputation made in public against a person.
Justice Ingles said political libel is directed at public officials or figures and is made “while discussing matters of public concern including criticisms of official conduct.”
Ingles said the law on private libel and its full sanctions should be preserved out of regard for a private citizen’s values, reputation, and privacy.
The CCPC, which took a position as early as 2008, has yet to discuss whether to adopt Ingles’ suggestions. The council has as members editors of Cebu’s three dailies, Cebu Daily News, The Freeman and Sun.Star, and the KBP, with representatives from the academe, business and the clergy.
Justice Ingles said that decriminalizing libel presents both a challenge as well as an opportunity. It will require the media “to raise their capacity for self-regulation beyond its current level of deficiency.”
Aside from scrapping the jail penalty for libel, Pachico Seares, CCPC executive director, said members want the law amended so that jurisdiction of libel cases is limited to the main business address of media firms.
“In the present setup, journalists travel to far away places just to answer the libel charges filed against them,” he said.
Eileen Mangubat, publisher of Cebu Daily News, said that libel isn’t just the concern of journalists because ordinary citizens can get charged with libel for what they blog or post on line.
To avoid getting sued for libel, Mangubat said journalists should exercise “fairness and accuracy” in their reports and comments.
Although most libel cases in Cebu are dismissed for lack of merit, Mangubat said the experience of getting sued, having to evade an arrest warrant and spend for a legal defense is very costly.
“It is a waste of time,” she said, when journalists have to leave their work to attend hearings and prepare pleadings.
Choy Torralba, a veteran broadcaster of radio dyRF, said he got sued for libel 23 times, with 18 cases reaching the court.
He was convicted by the Supreme Court in one case but was just ordered to pay a P3, 000 fine.
He said he didn’t get financial support from his media outfit and had to pay for his defense on his own.He advised journalists to be careful.
Karlon Rama, a former SunStar reporter, said he got two libel suits, which were both dismissed.He said there was nothing to be proud of getting sued for libel.
Capitol consultant Rory Jon Sepulveda, who was asked to comment on “why officials sue for libel”, said Gov. Gwendolyn Garcia filed only two libel cases in her nine-year term. Both were directed at TV-radio broadcaster and columnist Leo Lastimosa.
“My client (Garcia) has her share of criticism. But you don’t file just because of criticisms. Filing of a libel suit is our last priority,” he said.
Lastimosa was sued for his columns in The Freeman. One case was dismissed, the other is still pending.
“We will leave it to our courts to decide whether or not there is a wrong committed,” Sepulveda said.
Several pending bills in Congress propose amendments to the law on libel to scrap it as a crime. They were filed by Sen. Jinggoy Estrada, Sen. Edgardo Angara, Sen. Francis Escudero; and others.
The CCPC took a position on the issue as early as March 24, 2008.
Print and broadcast media outlets in the council supported proposals to remove imprisonment from the crime of libel. /Reporter Ador Vincent Mayol
