.jpg)
ATTY. MEL STA. MARIA: The advantage, questions, standard of a Corona testimony
Jessica Sanchez's rival in 'Idol' crown has severe kidney problems, needs immediate surgery - TMZ
Sensational Samal: More people flock to town of Jessica's mom after Sanchez makes it to Idol finale
NATO activates missile shield, reaches out to Russia
InterAksyon.com
The online news portal of TV5
MANILA, Philippines – Noted human rights lawyer Romeo Capulong on Thursday urged media outfits to “take some risks” and “push the envelope” to get around the “restrictive” guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court for the live broadcast coverage of the Ampatuan massacre trial.
Capulong heads the Public Interest Law Center, which prepared the brief filed by the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines, major broadcast networks, individual journalists and the families of the victims asking the high court to allow the live broadcast of the trial of the suspects in the November 23, 2009 mass murder of 58 persons, 32 of them journalists, in Ampatuan town, Maguindanao.
On Tuesday, the SC “partially” granted the petition but also imposed strict guidelines many media outfits said would actually discourage the live broadcast of the trial, among these requiring the full airing of the proceedings free of commercials, commentaries and annotations and banning repeat broadcasts except of short segments or still images and sketches based on recorded footage for news purposes.
At a meeting Thursday attended by major broadcast outfits and the PILC lawyers led by Capulong to discuss the guidelines, journalists hailed the ruling as a victory for press freedom and the people’s right to information, but agreed on the need to engage the high court and convince it to ease the restrictions.
At the same time, they agreed they would need to be “creative” and ensure the guidelines did not stifle the effective delivery of news about the trial or impinge on editorial judgment.
Capulong told the journalists that “there are doctrines” that say “if the law goes against common sense and practice (or) will result in absurdities, then it shouldn’t be followed to the letter.”
He also said despite the guidelines, the ruling was a “breakthrough decision.”
In a separate statement, Capulong said while Tuesday’s ruling “represents a victory in our campaign for transparency in government,” it was “above all else … a triumph for the Bill of Rights.”
“The greatest bearing of the Supreme Court’s ruling will be on the access to justice by the millions upon millions of our poor and marginalized countrymen,” he stressed.
“When the 12 justices allowed television cameras inside the sala of (Quezon City trial court) Judge Jocelyn Solis-Reyes, they effectively allowed the public unimpeded access to the courtroom, which before was not possible for various reasons, whether due to geography, accessibility or other physical limitations,” Capulong said.
“Simply by switching on the television or tuning in on the radio, Filipinos can witness and, not only that, participate in one of the most cherished traditions of a democracy, the administration of justice through an open and public trial,” he added.
Capulong also said the media could also take advantage of a section in the SC ruling that ordered the creation of a special committee that will study and recommend the arrangements and rules covering the live broadcast.
Section (k) of the ruling allows the committee to “conduct consultations with resource persons and experts in the field of information and communication technology.”
“What we can do is raise the concerns” over the guidelines with the special committee, Capulong said, and subject these “to rational discussion.”
Meanwhile, in a separate statement, Senator Ralph Recto described the SC guidelines as impossible to implement as he joined calls for the tribunal to relax the restrictions.
Rector said the conditions set by the high court would infringe on the TV networks’ business side if commercial breaks would be banned during the live coverage.
“You can’t interfere with the enterprise side of TV business. You can’t stop advertising load, which is the bread and butter of the industry,” he said.
“The TV networks are already doing invaluable public service by beaming the trial to millions of households, the least that they could expect as patriotic dividend is to permit them to do some business while helping the general public to get some sense of what’s happening inside the courtroom,” Recto, Senate ways and means chair, added.
