Libel – a Sword of Damocles

HERE ARE more excerpts from of the Q&A’s I’ve been having with students doing papers and theses on the news practice:

 

Q. How do you think libel is abused in the country?

A. It is used by news subjects actively, for harassment and intimidation, if not actually as a court case, as a sort of hanging sword of Damocles over journalists’ heads.

 

What’s your stand on the proposed decriminalization of libel in the country?

In fact I want libel scrapped altogether.

 

Have you ever been threatened or sued with libel? Can you relate the experience?

Yes, twice, but both times uneventfully: the accusations were judged unjustified at the pre-trial stage.

 

What do you think are the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed decriminalization of libel?

A critical step toward leveling of the playing field for the news-media practitioners.

 

How will the practice of journalism improve with the decriminalization of libel? Do you think there is a tendency for journalists to abuse libel once it is decriminalized? Why? How do you think the government and other public officials will respond if libel is decriminalized?

I don’t know that it will improve the practice. Indeed, I don’t know that the situation will be exploited in any way or by either side—news subjects or journalists. All I know is that it will advance the cause of democratic freedom.

 

What can you say about United Nations Human Rights Committee declaring libel law in Philippines as “excessive“? Why do you think it takes long to pass libel decriminalization bill as a law?

I don’t know what is meant by “excessive”. But I can see the self-serving logic in the legislators’ reluctance to pass the law: they, along with other people in wealth and power, official or unofficial, are, after all, the subjects—or targets, if you like—of the news-media, as they only deserve to be, if any balance of social power is to be struck.

 

How important is the FOI (Freedom of Information) Bill in achieving a true free press in the country?

It’s less about free press than about openness, transparency, indeed, the people’s right to know. The basic question surrounding the bill is, in fact, a superfluous, indeed ridiculous, one: Should public information be revealed in public so that the public may know?

 

What do you think is prolonging the FOI Bill to be passed in Congress?

Similarly self-serving as the reason for its reluctance to decriminalize libel: Congress people are among the very ones, the first ones—indeed, the powers that be themselves—to have to reveal themselves under an FOI law.

 

Have you experienced public officials or government offices who deny information you need for a story? Can you tell us briefly about it?

It happens all the time, but I somehow find a way to get them revealed.

 

What is your objection to the Aquino version of the FOI Bill vs. the Tañada version?

Too many exceptions.

 

How do you think the FOI Bill will affect society in general?

Society will know more about things they ought to know about.

 

Do you think there is a tendency for journalists to abuse the FOI Bill once it becomes a law? Why?

I see no tendency toward significant abuse. (See answer to how important I think the law is).