Seeking Justice for Journalists
By Rachel E. Khan and Nathan Lee
In the past year, continued efforts by local and international media organizations had brought about significant developments in pursuing justice for the slain journalists.
Just last Oct. 6, three of Marlene Esperat’s killers were sentenced to reclusion perpetua by a Cebu City court, although the real masterminds behind her slay remain free.
On Nov. 29 of last year, the four-year-old murder case of Edgar Damalerio was brought to a close with the conviction of former policeman Guillermo Wapile. Meanwhile, the slow wheels of justice were eventually set in motion for at least three other cases of slain journalists.
But the pattern of impunity remains.
In fact, it can be noted that the situation has gradually worsened since the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility (CMFR) began monitoring the killings of journalists in 1991. According to the CMFR database, there have been 60 journalists killed in the line of duty since 1986. Of these, CMFR noted that 47 percent or 28 journalists had been killed during the Arroyo administration alone.
Main source of news
Because of the growing number of killings during the Arroyo administration, CMFR decided to update its September 2005 study on slain journalists and came out with “Journalist Killings under the Arroyo Administration (2001-2006): A Study by the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility.” The study is an update of the 2004 CMFR book, “Press Freedom in the Philippines: A study in contradictions.”
According to the study, slain broadcast practitioners outnumbered journalists from other media at 22 out of the total 28 journalists killed in the line of duty during the Arroyo administration. The numbers suggest that those in broadcasting are more vulnerable to attack. As noted in the previous study, a 2004 Pulse Asia survey showed that television and radio are Filipinos’ primary sources of news on campaigns and candidates in the last elections, meaning that more Filipinos favor the broadcast media in getting political information.
Of those slain, 25 percent worked both in print and radio or television. In these cases, it was their work in the latter that made them better known.
Most of those killed worked in the provinces. But even in the urbanized areas in the provinces, the cases are not likely to get the kind of national attention that will force the police to investigate cases. The highest death tolls were found in Calabarzon (six), Bicol (four), and Zamboanga Peninsula (four).
One victory
Contrary to the recent claims by the Philippine National Police (PNP) that it has solved majority of the killings, only the case of Damalerio resulted in a successful conviction of the gunman. At least half of the 28 cases remain under investigation or have been shelved or dismissed. Eleven of these cases involved government personnel, such as police officers, and local government officials.
While it can only be hoped that the promises made by the PNP and the Department of Justice (DoJ) will lead to speedier prosecution and conviction of journalists’ assassins and masterminds, other measures must be taken to reduce, if not turn around, the cycle of violence among media practitioners.
CMFR has consistently emphasized that press freedom should never be penalized, except through the course of libel, slander, or organizational sanctions imposed in line with self-regulation. But, as the study shows, there are certain factors that contribute to the individual and institutional vulnerability of the press that need to be addressed. These factors are: ethics training and Kapisanan ng mga Brodkaster ng Pilipinas (KBP) accreditation, strong legal defense, safety training, and the role of the citizen press councils.
Training and accreditation
On an institutional level, the study noted that there was a strong dependence of provincial broadcast stations on media practitioners who work freelance or as “block timers,” who have not been accredited by the KBP and lacked education and formal training in journalism. These are aspects that can be described as a lack of “professionalization” in the conduct of the press, affecting the quality of the news/commentary service.
The term “professionalization” as used in the CMFR study refers to the shared values and standards of practice and conduct, and not to the issue of government licensing. The history of radio in the Philippines has shown that “professionalization” can be achieved through on-the-job training. But even with the expansion of broadcasting in the country, many broadcast organizations do not provide such training, especially in the areas of news reporting and commentary.
The failure of owners to supervise their shows has also been noted. In fact, one of the hindrances to the prosecution of cases is the failure of stations to provide the courts with recordings of the radio programs of its members, which could be used as evidence in discovering the person who may have a motive for silencing the journalists.
Media establishments should strive for greater responsibility in its reportage and news programs. As asserted in the study by the CMFR executive director Melinda Quintos de Jesus, “CMFR has always seen freedom and responsibility as linked, as dual values that must go side by side if the press is to serve as a pillar of democracy.”
Since last year, the KBP has called on its members to review their practice of maintaining block timers and talents who have not passed accreditation. National media-based associations need to establish ethical templates that can guide employees and freelance workers, including “block timers.” KBP should insist that all those going on the air for news and commentary should have passed accreditation as a minimum requirement.
Filing cases in court requires legal service that costs money. In the past year, CMFR, together with the Freedom Fund for Filipino Journalists (FFFJ), raised funds for legal aid to assist journalists whose cases are already in the courts. International media organizations sent aid to help finance the cost of litigation in the Esperat case that began last February at the Cebu Regional Court.
The FFFJ, a network dedicated to raising funds for assistance to journalists under siege and the victims’ families and undertaking campaigns of advocacy, was established in January 2003 as a response to the continued killing of journalists. Apart from CMFR, the other FFFJ members are the the Center for Community Journalism and Development, the KBP, Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism , the Philippine Press Institute (PPI), and Philippine News (a newspaper in California). CMFR serves as its secretariat and research arm.
On Nov. 23, 2005, the FFFJ requested the Supreme Court to transfer the Esperat case from Tacurong, Sultan Kudarat, to Cebu City because of the fear of a mistrial due to the strong influence of the masterminds in Esperat’s home town. However, the move meant additional costs such as the transportation of witnesses from Sultan Kudarat to Cebu as well as their board and lodging in Cebu. To aid government prosecutors, CMFR also financially supported a private prosecutor.
Apart from Esperat, the FFFJ likewise supported the cases of Roger Mariano and Philip Agustin.
CMFR also hopes to promote a stronger interaction with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), membership of which is mandated for all lawyers. The IBP said the group is willing to provide pro bono service to deserving cases. It has signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the National Press Club so that its members can take up such cases as referred. The FFFJ and the IBP have also agreed to sign an MOA that the FFFJ can refer cases in the provinces to IBP chapters in the area.
Safety training
Safety training has not been undertaken by newsrooms, CMFR found out. Thus, FFFJ members on their own initiative had sponsored various safety and security training seminars for provincial journalists. In fact, CMFR organized an “Alerts Reporting and Safety Training Seminar” for provincial journalists all over the country in Davao City last September.
Since 2001, CMFR has endeavored to help citizen press councils (CPCs) in the country to promote press accountability by hearing out complaints against the press. The following year, CMFR helped in the establishment of three regional CPCs in Cebu, Baguio, and Palawan. A fourth CPC in Dumaguete was established soon after.
Aside from CPCs, PPI also has the Philippine Press Council, which is based in Manila.
The regional CPCs, which can provide a venue for hearing complaints and recourse for offended parties, include members not only from the local media but also from academe and civil society. The inclusion of non-journalist members was designed to open the grievance process to the public.
Comments are closed.