 |
|||
 |
|||
 |
|||
 |
|||
 |
|||
 |
 |
||
 |
 |
||
 |
|||
  |
Criminal libel is one of the most abused means to suppress free expression and press freedom in the Philippines. The fear of possible imprisonment and the imposition of hefty fines has on many occasions silenced press criticism of government officials and even the reporting of matters of public interest. Journalists and media advocacy groups like the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility (CMFR) and the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP) have called for the decriminalization of libel for decades. They have asked Congress to amend the provisions on libel of the 82-year-old Revised Penal Code. By far the most significant development in the Philippine campaign to decriminalize libel is the United Nations Human Rights Committee’s (UNHRC) October 2011 declaration that the criminal sanction for libel in the Philippines is “excessive” and in violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in which the Philippines is a signatory. Despite the UNHRC declaration that it is incompatible with human rights law, libel suits are still being filed against journalists, in many cases to limit criticism of public officials and other powerful individuals. |
Related Links:
|
|
[…] Melinda Quintos de Jesus | Posted on 03-10-2012 TweetToday, the resistance to the Cybercrime Prevention Act gains ground with the “Petition for Certiorari, Prohibition, and Injunction…” […]
[…] the petitioning groups (including the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines, the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility, the Philippine Press Institute, among others), write: In this case of first impression, this Court […]
[…] the petitioning groups (including the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines, the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility, the Philippine Press Institute, among others), write: In this case of first impression, this Court […]
[…] Luis V. Teodoro | Posted on 08-10-2012 TweetTHE CYBERCRIME Prevention Act of 2012 (RA 10175) has not only united those who have a Facebook or Twitter account, who have a blog or […]
[…] to news-media practice are up for consideration in the Senate: one advances the practice by decriminalizing libel, the other suppresses it by abridging the very freedom on which it is founded—an abridgment the […]
[…] the media can go to court for satisfaction, which may come in a public apology or fines or, until libel is finally—and only properly—decriminalized, imprisonment or in all three ways. If he does not […]
[…] for a right of reply (ROR) bill. He also very quickly signed into law the Data Privacy Act and the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, both of which have a bearing on the press’ access to information and to free expression. […]
[…] killings and the harassment of journalists including through such legislative initiatives as the Cybercrime Prevention Act continue because journalists, of all writers, have apparently been the most effective in providing […]
[…] 1httpss://www.cmfr-phil.org/cmfr-on-the-cybercrime-prevention-act-of-2012/ […]
[…] some time to listen in on the presentation of the oral arguments in the Supreme Court against the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012. It is not easy listening. Not all of it is riveting or compelling. But the opportunity to listen […]
[…] to free expression, access to information and press freedom, but who nevertheless passed the Cybercrime Prevention Act and refused to act on the Freedom Of Information […]