This story
was taken from Bulatlat, the Philippines's alternative weekly
newsmagazine (www.bulatlat.com, www.bulatlat.net, www.bulatlat.org).
Vol. VI, No. 6, March 12-18, 2006
Even after the lifting of
Presidential Proclamation 1017, the issue of media repression continues to hit
the headlines. However, while old-time journalists say that threats to a free
press are dangerously real today, they believe that the media has gathered
enough strength to be able to beat the odds. BY DABET CASTAÑEDA The threat to a free press is dangerously
real today as it was when Ferdinand Marcos imposed martial rule Sept. 21, 1972,
old-time journalist Vergel Santos said in an interview with Bulatlat. A
consultant of the daily business paper Business World and Executive Director of
the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility (CMFR), Santos was a junior
reporter for the Philippines Herald and The Chronicle in the late 1960s until
Martial Law was declared. During a Senate hearing investigating
Presidential Proclamation 1017 (PP1017) last March 9, Maria Ressa, Head of ABS-CBN
for News and Current Affairs, testified how Malacanang tried to gag their live
coverage of the standoff at the Marine headquarters in Fort Bonifacio in the
afternoon of February 26. Ressa said that a top Malacañang Palace official
called up their station in the middle of the coverage to ask them to stop the
broadcast. The Marine standoff came two days after
Armed Forces Chief of Staff Gen. Generoso Senga told the media that military
rebels planned to march and announce their collective withdrawal of support from
Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo last Feb. 24. The plan was supposed to coincide
with the commemoration of the 20th anniversary of the historic People
Power uprising that toppled the Marcos dictatorship in 1986. Thousands were
expected to rally calling for the ouster of President Arroyo during that day. It
was also the day when President Arroyo placed the country under a state of
national emergency through PP1017. The “chilling effect” of the proclamation on
media still holds true even after the lifting of PP 1017, Ressa said in her
testimony. But instead of being cowed, media groups, journalists and even rival
networks united against threats to press freedom. In a petition filed March 8 before the Court
of Appeals (CA), 36 print and broadcast journalists and nine media groups led by
the Philippine Press Institute (PPI), the National Union of Journalists of the
Philippines (NUJP) and the ABS-CBN News and Current Affairs division, asked the
court to prohibit executive-branch officials from censoring the media. In a statement, the PPI, a national
organization of newspaper publishers, said, “It is the first time since martial
law that a broad range of media organizations and journalists have banded
together to file a petition in court, questioning government efforts to restrain
media reporting and intimidate journalists.” In the petition, media groups asserted that,
"only a court, with its accompanying due process safeguards, may impose
content-based prior restraints." In his testimony at the same Senate hearing,
Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG) lawyer Manuel Jose Diokno said, "The NTC does
not have any lawful power, authority or jurisdiction to prohibit these things,
much less judge what is subversive (when the crime of subversion has long been
repealed), what merely ‘tends’ to propose or incite to sedition or rebellion
(whatever that means to the NTC), and what constitutes ‘rebellious/terrorist’
propaganda, comments and the like (whatever that means to the NTC)." Diokno and another FLAG lawyer Theodore Te
serve as lead counsels for the petitioners. Senator Joker Arroyo agreed stating that the
NTC has no power to control the content of any news program of any media outlet.
Its only power, the senator said, relates to technical matters such as
allocation of frequencies and collecting fees due to the government. “Beyond
that, it has no power whatsoever,” he said. Senate President Franklin Drilon said that
if the NTC entices the PNP and the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) to
exert this power, it will have a chilling effect not only on the media but also
on the citizenry. NTC Commissioner Ronald Olivar Solis said
they welcomed the petition. “The court should be the one to resolve this issue,”
he said. The big difference with members of the media
before martial law and media today is that the former were caught flat-footed as
they were initially in “denial” that martial law would ever be proclaimed.
Media people today, Santos said, are decisive in fighting even the slightest
threat to the media profession. He related that there were already clear
indications that martial law would be declared then and that many of his
colleagues knew that Marcos was cooking up the ingredients for it as early as
1969. But still they refused to believe that it would be proclaimed at all.
“Hindi pa kasi nangyayari sa Pilipinas ang martial law nuon kaya walang
mapagkukumparahan. Hindi kami handa sa mga pangyayari,” (A declaration of
martial law never happened in the Philippines before so there was no point of
comparison. We were caught unprepared.) he said. He remembers losing his job when Marcos
issued Presidential Decree 1081 (PD 1081) that placed the entire nation under
martial rule. All television and radio stations, newspapers and publications
were closed. The only newspaper that continued printing was the Daily Express
owned by Cocoy Romualdez, Marcos’ brother-in-law, while the only television
station that continued operations was government- owned PTV-4. “Walang lugar para sa media na babatikos sa
gobyerno. Yung mga kilalang peryodista na kritikal sa gobyerno, kung hindi
hinuli at kinulong ay namundok,” (There was no space for media, which was
critical of the government. Known journalists who were critical of government
were either jailed or went to the hills.) he said. Santos said that the attitude of media today
is different. In the face of threats to press freedom, the reaction of media is
to fight repression before things get out of hand. “Ngayon, hindi na papayag ang media na
tatakutin sila,” (Today, media people are not cowed.) he said. “They have
learned from the lessons of the past and they don’t want that to happen again.” The distinction between Marcos and Macapagal-Arroyo,
he also said, is that while Marcos had long prepared for a dictatorship before
he declared it, Arroyo was unprepared but was just desperate to retain her
post. But, Santos added, Arroyo is not even confident that she can hang on to
power. Since last year, the president has been faced with calls for her
resignation or ouster for allegedly rigging the 2004 elections. Bobbie Malay, also a journalist before
Martial Law, has the same view. A former reporter of The Manila Times and
Taliba (Vanguard), Malay said that the determining factor, which shaped the
media’s decisiveness in fighting repression, is the development of the
democratic movement that struggled against a tyrant (referring to Marcos) and
similarly oppressive post-dictator administrations. “Ang susi sa pakikipaglaban ng mga
mamamahayag ay ang kamulatan ng mamamayan, organisado man o hindi, na mulat sa
kanilang mga karapatan at handa itong ipaglaban,” (The key to the struggle of
journalists is the awareness of a people, whether organized or not, who are
cognizant of their rights and are ready to fight for it.) she said. Bulatlat © 2006 Bulatlat
■
Alipato Publications Permission is granted to reprint or redistribute this article, provided its author/s and Bulatlat are properly credited and notified.
Media to Beat the Odds
BulatlatNo to prior restraint
The petition cited National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) Memorandum
Circular No. 1-3-2006, as an attempt to stop, ban or censor the publication or
airing of speeches that the government deems as seditious or tends to incite to
sedition. The memorandum, the petition stated, is consistent with the
pronouncements of Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita, Philippine National Police
(PNP) chief Arturo Lomibao and Department of Justice (DoJ) Secretary Raul
Gonzales. Media and repression
Key factor