Drawing the line

IN the wake of continued harassment from government officials, members of the media are turning to the courts to protect their rights and freedom.

Journalists are set to file a class suit and ask for other legal remedies against the Philippine National Police, Department of Justice, and other officials who, they say, have made a series of threats against them after the November 29 siege of the Manila Peninsula. Around 30 media personnel were arrested during the siege.

“A threat a day keeps the press away,” quipped columnist and media critic Vergel Santos during a gathering of some 40 media workers who discussed their response to the arrests. His comment draw laughs, but it was also a reminder that the media landscape had changed since the Pen siege.

Then, members of the media were quickly released, but they say that the threats continue. Maria Ressa, head of ABS-CBN’s news and current affairs said that ABS-CBN was prompted to file a writ of amparo on Monday due to the increasing frequency of pronouncements from high-level government officials. Filed on behalf of 11 ABS-CBN media workers who were arrested, the petition named government officials who were responsible for the threats and arrests as respondents. These include local government secretary Ronaldo Puno, justice secretary Raul Gonzalez, police chief Avelino Razon, Jr., National Capital Region director Geary Barias, and Chief Superintendent Asher Dolina, an officer of the PNP’s Criminal Investigation and Detection Group.

On January 11, Gonzalez issued a chilling media advisory to news organizations: “Please be reminded that your respective companies, networks or organizations may incur criminal liabilities under the law, if anyone of your field reporters, news gatherers, photographers, cameramen and other media practitioners will disobey lawful orders from duly authorized government officers and personnel during emergencies which may lead to collateral damage to properties and civilian casualties in case of authorized police or military operations.”

According to the Inquirer, Gonzalez likened his advisory to a police line surrounding a crime scene, an indicator that only the proper authorities could cross.

Since then, Ressa said that there had been a daily threat.

“I think if we allow the threats to continue, then we’ve allowed the line to be moved. and that’s really the main reason (we filed the writ of amparo). It’s like, where really is the line, when someone does something wrong and you don’t call their attention to it, then you’re party to that.”

The petitioners asked the Supreme Court to issue a writ of amparo or prohibition that would declare their arrest illegal and issue a permanent protective order to prevent the respondents from pressing charges and making future arrests, threats, or acts of harassment.

Read the 35-page ABS-CBN petition for a writ of amparo.

The SC, however, did not issue the writ. Instead, it gave the respondents ten days to respond. “”No writ was issued because the court would like to be clarified on certain matters,” SC spokesperson Jose Midas Marquez told reporters.

The basis of any case filed questioning the arrests and threats are the cases of UP professor Randy David vs. President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and Tribune publisher Ninez Cacho-Olivares vs. Executive Secretary Eduardo according to Jose Manuel Diokno, the national chair of the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG). In its decision, the SC declared the “arrogant warning of government officials to media” as “plain censorship.”

“Despite these pronouncements of the court, we have these new incident where again, threats have been made,” said Diokno. “By the way, you may be surprised at the range of threats you’ve been getting. (Y)ou have threats of criminal constitution, you have threats of arrest, you have threats of public denunciation associating you with the military rebels. And in fact lately, even threats of rebellion to that reporter who’s supposed to have helped (fugitive Marine Capt. Nicanor) Faeldon escape.”

Although police have not yet revealed the name of the woman reporter, a source told the Inquirer identified her as Dana Batnag of the Tokyo-based Jiji Press. In a statement sent via text message, Batnag told the authorities to file the proper charges in court. “I am honored to be one of the victims in the government’s witch hunt against the media but my conscience is clear, for I have done nothing wrong.”

Diokno said that government officials were “exercising their authority, in my mind, in a way that is totally vindictive and arbitrary to the press. And they will not stop.”

He says that media must bring the fight to the courts in order to get the government authorities to desist from issuing threats.

Just yesterday, the SC approved the administration of the writ of habeas data. This writ allows for access to intelligence information in order to correct erroneous or misleading entries. It is set to take effect on February 2.

During the discussion, lawyer Harry Roque pointed out that should media organizations decide to go to court, getting a favorable verdict, while desirable, was not of tantamount importance. “It’s the fact that you’re doing it, you’re standing up for something, you’re promoting discussion.”

Journalists themselves pointed out that the court was only one arena in a continuing fight to uphold press freedom.

“What we want is a victory at every battle, every battleground, every grievance,” said Santos. “Tingin natin di lang kaso, laban. Laban araw-araw (We don’t see it just as a case, we see it as a battle, a daily battle).”