In the motion, Bulatlat argued that the memorandum filed by the NTC “is a content-based prior restraint on protected expression, which is unconstitutional” and Bulatlat “suffered from grave injustice or irreparable injury” from the implementation of the website blocking.
Tags: website blocking
“The ATC is neither an indispensable nor a necessary party in this case as it does not have any involvement in the issuance of the assailed Memorandum,” said Bulatlat, pointing out that parties of interest are already impleaded as defendants in the case.
The blocking of the websites occurred in the context of incessant red-tagging.
This is prior restraint against protected speech. It is downright unacceptable as it is based on Esperon’s mere hearsay.