|
The Supreme Court granted last March 18 a petition by the Freedom Fund for Filipino Journalists (FFFJ) and the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP) to transfer the venue of the trials of suspects in the killings of two Aklan-based journalists to another branch of the Regional Trial Court (RTC).
The High Court approved the petition for change of venue and ordered the Kalibo RTC clerk of court to send all records on the cases of the suspects in the Rolando Ureta and Herson Hinolan killings to the executive judge of the Cebu City RTC. The Court also asked the Cebu City RTC to immediately raffle off the cases upon receipt of the records.
Two assailants on a motorcycle killed Ureta on Jan. 3, 2001 in Lezo town, Aklan. A lone unknown gunman shot Hinolan on Nov. 13, 2004 outside a carnival in Kalibo, Aklan and died two days after at a local hospital.
In its Feb. 5 letter, the FFFJ and the NUJP asked the High Court to transfer the venue of the trials of the suspects in the Ureta and Hinolan killings from the RTC of Kalibo, Aklan to any branch of the Cebu City or Makati City RTC “to avoid a miscarriage of justice and to dispel the impression that a culture of impunity encouraged by government inaction makes the Philippines ‘the most murderous place for journalists’.”
The FFFJ is a coalition of six media organizations formed in 2003 in response to the high number of journalist killings in the country. Its members are the Center for Community Journalism and Development, Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility, Kapisanan ng mga Brodkaster ng Pilipinas, Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism, Philippine Press Institute, and the US-based newspaper Philippine News.
FFFJ said that “(b)ecause of the clout and influence of the accused in the area as shown by their ability to unduly influence the investigation of the case, witnesses have been reluctant to break their silence and testify for fear of retaliation. To date the masterminds of the crime remain free as none of the law enforcement agencies dare to enforce the warrant of arrest against them and/or conduct further investigation to shore up the pro-secution’s evidence.”
The Ureta and Hinolan families said they were grateful for the approval of the petition.
“I’m really happy that the case was transferred…because it would be hard to achieve justice if [the suspect] is tried here in Kalibo,” Aphrodite Hinolan, wife of Herson Hinolan, said.
“I feel more encouraged (that justice will be achieved) now that the case has been transferred to another venue,” Rolando Ureta’s widow Emely, said.
The Cebu City Court of Appeals issued a 60-day temporary restraining order (TRO) on March 25 in the trial of the suspected masterminds in the killing of a journalist.
A three-page resolution penned by Associate Justice Francisco Acosta and co-signed by Associate Justices Pampio Abarintos and Amy Lazario Javier granted the Feb. 4, 2008 petition filed by Osmeña Montañer and Estrella Sabay, accused of ordering the March 24, 2005 killing of journalist Marlene Esperat, asking for the issuance of a TRO to prevent Cebu Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 7 Judge Simeon Dumdum from hearing the case.
The Cebu Court of Appeals has yet to issue a resolution on the petition for certiorari also filed by Sabay and Montañer on Feb. 4, 2008. A certiorari is a writ which could be issued by a superior court to a lower court to annul or modify ongoing proceedings if the latter judge acted on a case outside his jurisdiction.
Sabay and Montañer argued that Dumdum has no jurisdiction over the case since the Nov. 23, 2005 Supreme Court resolution approving the transfer of the case from Tacurong City, Sultan Kudarat to Cebu City, Cebu only applied to then accused Esta-nislao Bismanos, Rowie Barua, Gerry Cabayag, and Randy Grecia.
Cebu City RTC Judge Eric Menchavez had earlier sentenced Bismanos, Cabayag, and Grecia—the gunman, lookout, and co-conspirator—to life imprisonment on Oct. 6, 2006. Barua, who turned state witness, was discharged.
The Freedom Fund for Filipino Journalists (FFFJ) petitioned the Supreme Court on July 4, 2005 for the transfer of the Bismanos et.al. case to Cebu. The Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility is a founding member of FFFJ and serves as its secretariat.
FFFJ asked for the transfer in response to the safety concerns of the witnesses and the need for a more neutral court and environment, the accused being allegedly influential in Tacurong.
Esperat, who had written exposés accusing Montañer and Sabay of corrupt practices, was gunned down in full view of her children while the family was having dinner in their Tacurong City, Sultan Kudarat residence.
Sabay and Montañer were not included in the Supreme Court resolution granting the transfer of venue because Tacurong City Judge Francis Palmones, then presiding judge of the case, had dismissed the case against Sabay and Montañer even before the prosecution had presented evidence.
Private prosecutor Nena Santos said that the Montañer and Sabay petition for certiorari and TRO is “another scheme to get away with murder through technicalities.”
“I’m discouraged and saddened (by the issuance of the TRO), but I’m not giving up,” Santos said. She filed a letter to the Supreme Court on March 24, 2008 asking for a “declaratory resolution” on the case’s change of venue. In her letter, Santos asked for the Supreme Court to state “that only the Supreme Court has sole authority to act on matters affecting the change of venue of trial in criminal cases and that (the Nov. 23, 2005 Supreme Court resolution ordering the transfer of venue) clearly subsumes and encompasses the trial” of Sabay and Montañer.
Santos also asked for the Supreme Court to require the accused to explain why they should not be cited for contempt since the issue of transfer of venue has already been resolved by the Supreme Court, to direct the Cebu Court of Appeals to dismiss Sabay and Montañer’s petition for certiorari, and to direct the Cebu RTC branch 7 to proceed with the case.
“Considering the absurdity of the position the accused have now taken, i.e., that the case should be returned to Tacurong City, or refiled in Cotabato City, we feel that it behooves the Supreme Court as a court of law and equity to use its plenary power to assist the People of the Philippines, private complainants and the media group in obtaining a speedy, just and inexpensive determination of this only media murder case where the masterminds have long been identified, investigated, re-investigated, charged and re-charged but never arrested and brought to trial,” Santos said in her letter.
Dumdum issued arrest warrants for Sabay and Montañer on Feb. 4, 2008, but the two were never arrested.
The Supreme Court granted the first writ of amparo for a journalist last March 11.
Journalist Nilo Baculo filed an application for the writ when he learned of a plan to kill him, allegedly by people whose wrong doing he had exposed.
In a four-page resolution, the Supreme Court, sitting en banc, issued a writ of amparo in behalf of Nilo Baculo Sr., publisher of the community newsletter Traveler’s News in Calapan city, Oriental Mindoro.
Baculo asked the High Court on Feb. 4 to issue him a “temporary protection order” under Section 14 of the Rule on the writ of amparo after an alleged hired killer told him he had been hired to kill the journalist by a local businessman and two local officials of Calapan City. All had been the subject of Baculo’s exposés, and were named respondents in Baculo’s petition.
Baculo was elated that the High Court had approved his petition. “I am inspired…because there is still justice in the country,” he said in Filipino.
Baculo also said that he will carry on his fight against corruption and anomalies in his community. Baculo, with the help of his children, continues to publish his weekly newsletter Traveller’s News.
The writ of amparo is “a remedy available to any person whose right to life, liberty and security is violated or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private individual or entity.”
The implementing guidelines for the writ were issued by the Supreme Court on Sept. 25, 2007, in light of the rampant extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances in the Philippines. The writ took effect on Oct. 24, 2007.
The suspect in the 2004 killing of radio broadcaster Herson Hinolan surrendered on March 5 to the Kalibo Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 7 in Aklan, after a key witness retracted his earlier testimony against the suspect.
Alfredo Arcenio, former mayor of Lezo town in Aklan, surrendered to Kalibo RTC Branch 7 Judge Virgilio Paman at around 3:10 p.m., said Aklan regional police director Supt. Benigno Durana Jr. Durana said Paman informed the police of Arcenio’s surrender and has asked for additional security personnel. Arcenio was immediately turned over to the Aklan Rehabilitation Center, the local penal facility.
Hinolan was shot on Nov. 13, 2004 outside a local carnival. Witnesses allege Arcenio was the one who shot Hinolan and fled on board a motorcycle driven by another man. Two days later, Hinolan died at a local hospital due to multiple gunshot wounds. Hinolan was the station manager of dyIN Bombo Radyo in Kalibo where he hosted a program called “Bombohanay”.
Durana said the police have been receiving unconfirmed reports that Arcenio would turn himself in a few days before the surrender. Arcenio had been free despite an arrest warrant issued by the local court against him on Sept. 7, 2006. Arcenio, who was a former intelligence officer of the Army, had supposedly disguised himself as a woman. The Philippine National Police offered a reward of P100,000 for his arrest while the Department of Justice (DoJ) issued a hold departure order against him to prevent him from leaving the country.
Arcenio, accompanied by his lawyer Lou Tirol, immediately filed a petition for bail before the local court. Though Arcenio is charged with a capital offense, bail could be granted if evidence against him is weak.
Arcenio’s surrender was preceded by the retraction of witness Peter Melgar, who submitted an affidavit of desistance on February, withdrawing the statement he gave in 2004 identifying Arcenio as the gunman.
Bombo Radyo Kalibo station manager Jan Allen Ascaño said that Melgar stated in his retraction that he was not sure that it was Arcenio who shot Hinolan. After almost four years, Melgar claims that it was a case of mistaken identity.
“Masama ang loob ko sa nangyayari sa kaso (I feel bad with what’s happening to case),” Aphrodite Hinolan, wife of Herson Hinolan, said. She said Arcenio could have paid off Melgar to retract his statement. Melgar has left the DoJ Witness Protection Program, Hinolan said.
Senior state prosecutor Leo Dacera of the DoJ’s WPP said the DoJ lost contact with Melgar this February. The last time the DoJ had any contact with Melgar was when he claimed his subsistence allowance from the DoJ’s WPP.
Lawyer Napoleon Oducado, private counsel in the Hinolan case, said in an interview with Bombo Radyo Kalibo that the case against Arcenio remains strong despite Melgar’s retraction because there is another eyewitness who had identified Arcenio as the shooter.
The Supreme Court has recently approved the petition for change of venue filed by the Freedom Fund for Filipino Journalists and the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines in February 2008 for the case of Hinolan and another Aklan-based reporter Rolando Ureta (see related story “High Court grants petition for transfer of venue of the trials in the killing of two journalists”).
The Air Transport Office (ATO) prevented aerial news coverage by a local TV news network of the largest protest rally against President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo since a scandal over a national broadband network deal broke out. ATO declared the air space above Makati City where the Feb. 29 rally was held a “no fly zone”.
The news helicopter of ABS-CBN 2 could not take off as a result, thus preventing reports and photographs from the air that could have given the public an idea of how large the rally was.
The ATO directive was issued upon the request of the Philippine National Police (PNP) on Feb. 27. The PNP website said that the ATO directive was “another precautionary measure” to ensure the safety of those attending the rally. But ATO Executive Director Daniel Dimagiba was quoted as saying that the directive was aimed at stopping speculations that protestors were under surveillance by government forces during the event.
According to ABS-CBN 2 newsgathering head Charie Villa, the network received a copy of the directive just hours before the protest rally was about to begin.
The ban lasted from 5 p.m. to 8 p.m., or about the same time the rally started and ended. The PNP estimated the crowd at around 10,000 to 15,000, while organizers estimated attendance at 75,000.
The protest rally, which called for the resignation of Mrs. Arroyo, was one of many provoked by allegations of gross corruption in a government project to build a national broadband network allegedly involving millions of dollars in kickbacks for high-ranking government officials. Both Mrs. Arroyo and husband Jose Miguel “Mike” Arroyo have been implicated by three insider witnesses.
Villa said they were fortunate that the network had set up a back-up camera at the Ayala tower, a commercial building located near the rally site. But Villa said ABS-CBN 2 coverage was hampered anyway.
ATO is the government agency responsible for commercial licensing of pilots, registration of aircraft, and recording of various aeronautical activities connected with commercial aviation.
The Court of Appeals of Northern Ireland overturned on March 10 an unprecedented jury verdict directing local newspaper The Irish News to pay libel damages amounting to £25,000 to a restaurant for a critical food review.
Northern Ireland Lord Chief Justice Brian Kerr with two other Appeals court judges approved the appeal of the Belfast-based newspaper to overturn the jury’s verdict on the libel case against The Irish News filed by the owner of Goodfellas Pizzeria, Ciarnan Convery.
The Irish News appealed the jury’s verdict on the libel case which ordered it to pay £25,000 to Convery for damages. The newspaper said that the review written by Caroline Workman consisted of fair and honest comments.
Convery sued The Irish News for libel for the August 2000 review of his restaurant saying that the pizzeria has lousy service and cheap food ingredients.
Chief Justice Kerr also ordered a retrial of the case saying that the jury was misdirected during the trial. According to the London-based newspaper The Times, Kerr also said that “the question of malice has not been decided by the jury and this therefore remains an issue that requires to be determined, if it is concluded that the defense of fair comment is otherwise available.”
The Associated Press (AP) reported Kerr as saying that the outcome of the previous trial could have been in favor of the newspaper if the jury was properly guided by the trial judge on what to do.
Workman was delighted by the court decision. “I am very relieved. I think it is a good day for restaurant trade of Northern Ireland,” she told the The Times.
The Irish News editor Noel Doran told the The Times that “It is a great victory for The Irish News. We came here to prove a point of principle and we have been vindicated.”
Convery plans to file another lawsuit against The Irish News, according to the AP report.
Rights activists protesting the Chinese crackdown in Tibet, including three members of Reporters Without Borders (RSF), were arrested on March 24 for disrupting the Olympic flame-lighting ceremony in Olympia, Greece.
RSF secretary general Robert Ménard and two other RSF members unfurled a banner of the Olympic rings transformed into handcuffs and called for a boycott of the opening ceremonies of the Beijing Games in August.
The incident occurred as Liu Qi, president of the Beijing Organizing Committee, was addressing thousands of dignitaries, Olympics officials and spectators, minutes before the flame was lit at the ancient Greek temple of Olympia amid a security detail of 1,000 police officers and commandos. The March 24 ceremony marks the official countdown to the Games.
According to RSF, Chinese state television cut to a pre-recorded scene during the disruption, and Greek national television broke off its broadcast.
Moments later, about 10 Tibetan activists marched out of a hotel in Olympia and shouted slogans against Chinese rule in Tibet. One woman doused in red paint lay down in the town’s main street in front of a torch runner.
Police detained the three RSF members and some of the Tibetan activists. The RSF members were accused of showing “contempt for national symbols” and will go on trial on May 29.
“We cannot let the Chinese government seize the Olympic flame, a symbol of peace, without denouncing the dramatic situation of human rights in the country,” RSF said in a statement.
RSF, along with other International Freedom of Expression Exchange (IFEX) members, has condemned China’s human rights violations and the crackdown on press freedom in the face of rising civil unrest in Tibet.
Founded in 1992, IFEX is a global network of non-government organizations that seeks to promote and defend freedom of expression. The Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility is an IFEX member.
Human Rights Watch says the Olympics officials’ resolve to run the Olympic torch through Tibet’s capital Lhasa on June 20-21 could invite new protests and provoke further repression. “Either Tibet is open or it’s not. If it is, let independent monitors and the media go there. If it’s not, the torch shouldn’t go there either,” says Human Rights Watch.
China has faced a public relations disaster since protests erupted in Lhasa on March 10, the 49th commemoration of a failed uprising against Chinese rule, and spread through Tibet and neighboring provinces. The Chinese authorities responded by dispersing the protests, in some cases violently. The government says 22 people have died in the clashes but the toll has been impossible to confirm because of a news blackout imposed by China in the country’s interior. Tibetan exile groups say at least 80 people have been killed.
According to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), state media have not reported the spread of violence into western China. The government censors have access to overseas reports and online discussion, leaving many in China uninformed about the extent of the turmoil. Meanwhile, the state press is relaying one-sided statements by officials raging against the “Dalai Lama’s clique”, “rioters”, and foreign news media, says RSF.
The Chinese government continues to ban and expel foreign journalists from Tibet and the neighboring provinces of Gansu, Qinghai, and Sichuan, as well as the capital, Beijing, say RSF and CPJ. Journalists have been temporarily detained and followed. RSF has recorded more than 40 serious violations of the rights of foreign journalists since the protests erupted on March 10.
Meanwhile, lines of communication have been cut or heavily restricted. International radio stations have been jammed in Tibet and Internet café owners are being forced to increase the surveillance of clients to prevent photos and videos from being sent abroad, reports RSF. At the same time, telephone services are still subject to extensive disruptions.
Nor is the crackdown contained within China’s borders. Police in Nepal broke up a protest near the UN offices in Kathmandu by hundreds of Tibetan refugees and monks on Monday. The protesters, who were demanding a UN investigation into the crackdown, were beaten with bamboo sticks and at least 40 were arrested, say news reports.
Human Rights Watch has urged Nepal to stop doing “Beijing’s bidding” and end its crackdown on Tibetan exiles protesting against China. Nepal, home to thousands of Tibetan refugees, has said it will not allow protests against any “friendly nation,” including China.
IFEX members RSF, CPJ, Human Rights Watch, as well as ARTICLE 19 and the World Association of Newspapers (WAN) are demanding that the Chinese government lift its lockdown of all Tibetan areas and give media and independent observers full access.
Human Rights Watch and RSF are also calling for an independent investigation, ideally headed by the United Nations, into recent events in Tibet. – IFEX
An Egyptian misdemeanor court has sentenced Ibrahim Eissa, editor in chief of the independent daily Al-Dustour, to six months in prison for “publishing false information and rumors” about President Hosni Mubarak’s health. The court said the articles were likely to disturb public security and harm the country’s economy.
Eissa was forced to post 200 Egyptian pounds (Php 1,500) as bail to halt implementation of the court’s ruling until appeal. Eissa’s lawyers told the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) that they would appeal the “politically- motivated verdict”.
Eissa, who has been dogged for several years by criminal prosecutions, was charged under the Penal Code in September for publishing reports about Mubarak’s health that were “liable to disturb public security and damage public interest.” The case was first hastily submitted to the Emergency State Security Court, a special tribunal that does not allow for appeals and rarely issues acquittals. But it was examined later by a misdemeanor court following a local and international outcry.
Eissa’s prosecution occurred after First Lady Suzanne Mubarak told the satellite television station Al-Arabiya that her husband’s health was “excellent” and that “there must be punishment either for a journalist, a television program, and newspapers that publish the rumors (saying the contrary).”
Al-Dustour was neither the only nor the first Egyptian paper to speculate about Mubarak’s health. But Eissa’s critical and sarcastic articles, particularly one published at the end of August in which he said the president in Egypt “is a god and the gods don’t get sick,” prompted anger in official circles and was used later to prosecute him.
“The verdict is a strong message from the regime to warn every journalist against the danger of getting close to the president or criticizing him,” Ibrahim Mansour, Al-Dustour executive editor, told CPJ. “This is mere schizophrenia. Because they keep claiming that they are committed to freedom of expression at a time when they are issuing court decisions to jail journalists.”
Eissa told CPJ that he currently faces eight cases, most of them filed by members of the ruling National Democratic Party headed by Mubarak, who will turn 80 in May. They accuse the editor of tarnishing the image of the country and harming the reputation of its leaders, in reaction mainly to articles critical of Mubarak’s lengthy rule and of the rumor that his son, Gamal, is being groomed for power.
In May, CPJ designated Egypt as one of the worst backsliders on press freedom, citing an increase in the number of legal and physical attacks on the press.
Tesco Lotus, one of the biggest retailers in Thailand, has filed two staggering defamation cases against a Thai columnist and a former Parliament member, sending a strong message to civil society and the press to tread carefully before criticizing the retailing giant in Thailand, the Southeast Asian Press Alliance (SEAPA) reports.
Tesco Lotus sued columnist and academic Kamol Kamol-trakul and former Thai National Legislative Assembly (NLA) member Jit Siratranont for 100 million baht (approximately Php 132 million) and one billion baht (approximately Php 1.32 billion), respectively, after they criticized and questioned the aggressive expansion strategies of Tesco Lotus in Thailand.
The British newspaper The Observer quoted a Tesco spokesman as saying that they “have issued proceedings against two individuals in connection with a sustained campaign of false and misleading statements about Tesco Lotus in Thailand. The suggestion that profits from Tesco Lotus are not reinvested in Thailand is blatantly untrue. The reality is that we have invested well…. While we believe people are entitled to their opinions, it is our belief that in these cases Tesco Lotus was seriously defamed. Both cases are being dealt with by the Thai courts and we await the outcome. We regret that we have had to resort to this action and hope the matter can be resolved by agreement.”
Siratranont, currently the secretary general of the Thai Chamber of Commerce, was quoted by The Observer as saying in a speech to 150 activists: “The large-scale expansion of the big retailers must be exercised with great care —not too aggressively and too rapidly—to reduce the potential tension, which could lead to serious conflict. There is also the need for the small retail traders to adjust to changes. Tesco Lotus must take all of this into account.”
Kamol was sued for an article published in the Thai-language KrungThepTurakit (Bangkok-BizNews), which expressed generally the same concerns about Tesco Lotus’ aggressiveness, and also what the columnist suggested was the retailing giant’s weak social responsibility in Thailand.
Both Siratranont and Kamol acknowledged erroneously saying that Tesco Lotus’ Thailand operations accounted for as much as 37 percent of the UK-based Tesco’s global revenue, but stressed that this did not detract from the main message of their concerns—concerns which, in any case, were of legitimate public interest in Thailand.
The expansion of foreign retailing chains in Thailand has long been a major political issue as it undercuts tens of thousands of small retailers across the country, SEAPA says.
Established in Bangkok in November 1998, SEAPA is a coalition of five media advocacy organizations around Southeast Asia that aims to unite independent journalists’ and press-related organizations in the region into a force for advocacy and mutual protection. The Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility is a founding SEAPA member.
SEAPA sees the Tesco Lotus suits as harassment, pure and simple, not only of consumer advocates and Thai civil society actors, but of journalists and commentators in general.—SEAPA |
