Rappler CEO and journalist Maria Ressa was found guilty of violating Republic Act 10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act by the Manila Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 46 on Monday, June 15, over a high-profile cyber libel case.
Along with Ressa, convicted of “cyber libel” was former researcher-writer Reynaldo Santos, Jr. and was sentenced to six months and one day to up to six years in jail.
“After a careful evaluation of the evidence presented by both the prosecution and the defense, the Court finds the prosecution’s evidence sufficient in establishing the guilt of both Accused Reynaldo Santos Jr. and Maria Ressa beyond reasonable doubt for violation of Section 4 (c)(4) of Republic Act 10175,” read the court ruling handed down by Judge Rainelda Estacio-Montesa.
Both Ressa and Santos are the first journalists to be convicted of cyber libel in the Philippines.
Ressa and Santos remain free as they were allowed to post bail and the court ordered them to pay P200,000 in moral damages and another P200,000 in exemplary damages to businessman Wilfredo Keng who filed the complaint.
Keng, in 2017, filed a case with the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) cybercrime division claiming that an article published by Rappler linked him with illegal drugs and trafficking and that Rappler did not observe “the ethical standards of journalism”.
The article was published in 2011 and was “republished” in 2017, according to the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) resolution. In 2017, the Republic Act No. 10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act was also signed into law.
Meanwhile, the court also said in the ruling that Rappler as a company has no liability over the case.
A blow to press freedom
Outrage from journalists and various press freedom groups were posted all over the social media as the libel case has been described as a politically motivated prosecution by the current government.
The National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP) said that the conviction of Ressa and Santos today will be remembered as a dark day not just for the independent Philippine media, but for all Filipinos.
“The decision basically affirms the State’s manipulation and weaponization of the law to stifle criticism and dissent, allowing the retroactive application of the law for a supposed offense committed before it existed by the simple expedience of declaring a typographical correction a “republication”, and recalibrating the prescription period for the offense,” said NUJP in a statement on Twitter.
[Statement] ON THE CYBER LIBEL VERDICT VS RAPPLER:
Freedom, justice and truth will prevailJune 15, 2020 will ever be remembered as a dark day, not only for independent Philippine media, but for all Filipinos.
— NUJP (@nujp) June 15, 2020
“The verdict basically kills freedom of speech and of the press. But we will not be cowed. We will continue to stand our ground against all attempts to suppress our freedoms,” they added in a separate tweet.
This is a dark day not only for independent Philippine media but for all Filipinos. The verdict basically kills freedom of speech and of the press. But we will not be cowed. We will continue to stand our ground against all attempts to suppress our freedoms.
— NUJP (@nujp) June 15, 2020
In a press release, Senator Risa Hontiveros said that the attacks on the free press and journalists endanger the democracy of the Filipino people.
“Today’s conviction sends a chilling message to all: kung kritiko ka, pwede kang ipasara at pwede kang patahimikin (Today’s conviction sends a chilling message to all: if you are a critic, they will shut you down and you will be silenced),” said the senator in a statement.
“I urge everyone to speak out. Dumarami tayo. We are complicit if we are silent. Takot sila, kaya nila tayo pinapatahimik (I urge everyone to speak out. We are growing in numbers. We are complicit if we are silent. They are afraid of us, which is why we’re being silenced),” she added.
“First, they came for the journalists. We don’t know what happened after that.”
The attacks on the free press & journalists are a danger to our democracy & to us Filipinos. #DefendPressFreedom #HoldTheLine
— risa hontiveros (@risahontiveros) June 15, 2020
The Akbayan Youth Group said in a statement that they are alarmed by the guilty verdict of the Rappler CEO and the former researcher-writer on the cyber libel charge and accused the Duterte government of being guilty of the attacks against press freedom.
“This verdict shows Duterte is guilty of attacks against press freedom. No matter his denial, this is part of President Duterte’s plan to muzzle the free press,” said the youth group. “With the recent shutdown of ABSCBN and harassment against student journalists, the President is making suppression of the press part of the new normal and he must be stopped.”
The youth group also said that the “retroactivity clause” vested in the verdict of the Cybercrime law can be weaponized against an ordinary citizen as any post published online before the law was signed in 2012 can become a basis of a libel case.
“We stand with Maria Ressa, Rey Santos Jr, and all journalists who face ever increasing attacks against press freedom. This government should convict more plunderers and murderers NOT journalists whose jobs are to expose the truth,” concluded the statement of the youth group.
Final note
Judge Montesa said in a final note on the court ruling that “there is no curtailment of the right to freedom of speech and of the press.”
“Each person, journalist or not has that constitutionally guaranteed right to freely express, write and make known his opinion. But with the highest ideals in mind what society expects is a responsible free press. It is in acting responsibly that freedom is given its true meaning,” she added.
The judge also said that if a private individual can be held accountable for any defamatory posts or comments on the social media, the accountability and journalistic responsibility should also be sustained by online news organizations as their influence reaches far beyond the limitations of print publications.
The judge also maintained that the case does not involve the government or any officials as complainants, but simply a case filed by a private individual against a news organization for the defamatory accusations.