Section 8 states that the editor-in-chief and publisher of print media outfits, and the station manager and owners of radio/TV stations who “fails or refuses to receive” or publish or broadcast the reply or correction of the news item as mandated will be fined an amount of P10,000 for the first offense, P20,000 for the second and P30,000 for the third offense. For repeated failures or refusal to receive, publish or broadcast the reply, a fine of P50,000 shall be imposed.
The measure struck down the original proposal of a P200,000 fine and imprisonment of not more than 30 days and the threat of closure for five-time offenders. It now provides that repeated violators would be fined an amount of P50,000.
Bayan Muna Rep. Teodoro Casiño Jr. likewise criticized what he deems as the contradictory clauses of the bill. He said, “If the committee truly recognizes and respects editorial judgment or, to be more emphatic, guarantees the constitutional right to a free press, what is the basis for penalizing its exercise? How can the law say it respects editorial judgment in one provision and then penalizes those exercising such judgment in another provision?”
Espina, meanwhile, added: “And while it supposedly recognizes the editorial prerogative of editing out potentially libelous material from a demanded reply, it also expunges all further liability for libel once a reply is aired or published.”
“While hyperbolic, it is not impossible to imagine a surreal scenario in which media outfits, weary of having to edit the rants of supposedly aggrieved officials and politicians, surrender their pages or air time to endless mudslinging and muckraking,” he said.
In his speech, Abante said that compliance with the ROR would extinguish any or all liability, criminal and civil, of the media practitioner or outfit.
Espina branded this as a “shameless blackmail.”
“Legislation is not about guaranteeing one right while taking away another, or asking someone to give up his rights in exchange for immunity from the consequences of abusive or irresponsible behavior. It is akin to imposing the punishment before a crime can be committed,” he argued.
However, nothing in the amended version guarantees immunity from libel and other suits. Section 11 even states that the publication of the reply does not preclude recourse to other rights or remedies available to the party or parties concerned.
Casiño said: “Unfortunately, the Committee has come out with proposed amendments that make the bill absurd, vague and a superfluous mutant in the Philippine legal system. Suffice it to say that such a bill, if passed into law, will be nothing but a tool of those in power to harass and control the media.” (Bulatlat.com)
