SolGen’s quo warranto is still relevant because should Congress Pass a bill for a new franchise, and the PDRs are still there, then the President will veto it since it’s unconstitutional.
They could have done much worse. Those actions are pretty milquetoast, really. Imagine how much more sympathy ABS-CBN could have garnered if it hyped up its closure and insisted on the incompetence of the Duterte administration.
They could have made Rappler look really fair. They didn’t, and here we are.
That being said, should public officials require control over editorial content in broadcast media as a condition precedent for the passage of a law? That’s what’s implied here.
That PDR aspect? That’s for the political arena, at this point. Especially with the new rules, a Petition for Quo Warranto does not become a request for an Advisory Opinion on the occasion of the justiciable issue being moot. The last time I looked, the Supreme Court does not deliberate on questions of fact, and the scope of judicial notice is now very limited.
4 Likes
Gusto ko sana magpaka-eloquent kaso babagsak pa rin naman yung quality ng discussion. 
I agree that legally, ABS-CBN does not have the right to broadcast on TV2 at the moment. Did the Duterte administration have a hand in this: YES.
Is press freedom under attack? YES. In fact, hindi lang si Duterte ang gumawa ng ganyan.
This FB post by Ed Lingao explains things better, and everyone should read it. Ganyan ang position ko on this topic, basically.
When an administration goes to great lengths to shut down a platform of media because the principal does not like the network, that is an attack on the media. Bring them to court. Sue them. Build a case. You have all the departments at your disposal. There is even that archaic and much abused libel provision in the Revised Penal Code. When you just use your numbers in Congress for a political attack, that may be “legal”, but that, to anyone with a basic grasp of english, is still an attack on the press.
In the end, it is about controlling editorial content with methods beyond the purview of law, using your powers to influence what stories are covered, and how they are presented. Not all attacks against the media are done with a gun.
Make no mistake, every administration does this, but some do it to different degrees - some with intimidation, others do it with a lot of screaming and arm-twisting. Others simply order an all-out assault. Erap’s method vs the Inquirer and my old The Manila Times was the ad boycott, and ordering investigations against the owners of the media companies until the Gokongweis were forced to sell the newspaper. All still legal. Yet these were clearly attacks on the press.
Knowing everything that has happened since 2016, it wouldn’t have been hard to predict that this will happen. Hindi lang na-anticipate ng iba that they would do this legally, considering how the Duterte administration has tried to skirt or just simply ignore the law in the past.
Fair pa ba ang mga nangyayari? I don’t think so. But how we feel doesn’t matter, may magsasabi na naman nyan.
Mas interesting kung ano ang mga susunod na mangyayari.
4 Likes
^i feel like ABS CBN would Stop short of doing this. Gandang test case sana for precedent (kaso our supreme court isnt the stalwart democratic institution I thought it was so baka futile exercise din)… nakikita ko sa kanya is its still a business first and foremost and it would likely hedge its bets, will try to walk on eggshells around this admin and not ruffle any more feathers than it already has.
2 Likes
SEC ruled Rappler’s was illegal.
SC can rule on things with utmost importance. Just look at Chel’s Writ of Kalikasan fiasco.
Their ruling – either via the Rappler case, or via Calida’s QW Petition – will settle once and for all if PDRs = Ownership.
If they rule in favor of Calida - which I think they will - ABS-CBN will need to buy those billions back, or their new franchise gets vetoed. If not vetoed, Calida will go to the SC again.
Who listens to Ed Lingao? Bring them to court kamo? Bakit sila umiyak dun sa QW Petition ni Calida? Keso daw hindi tamang forum at usurpation ng powers of congress.
Attack na kung attack sa press… Pero di sila worried kung tama nga allegations ni Calida na binalahura na ng ABS-CBN hindi lang yung terms and conditions nung franchise nila kundi yung 1987 Constitution na mismo?
Tama ba na lumabag sa batas for “press freedom”?
From Apa Ongpin
excerpts
I will start with my conclusion. Shutting down the largest broadcast network in the Philippines is a brazen abuse of political power. Government exists, theoretically, in order to protect the public interest, to act in favor of the greatest good for the greatest number. This particular act obviously serves no one except Duterte and his henchmen. Instead of creating value, the shutdown has destroyed it at a rate significant enough that I predict it will register on our already battered GDP…
…Let us, at the outset, discard the nonsense peddled by the Palace, that president Duterte is “neutral” on this issue. This allegation assigns more agency to the unlovely SolicitOrc General Calida than he could have. We do know that the mental faculties and judgement of the president are impaired: he insists on demonstrating this in no uncertain terms every Monday night on television. Nevertheless, no one believes Calida would act without the assent, if not the order, of the president.
Calida, of course, blames this on the Congress, for failing to act on the franchise renewal. This is actually true, so let’s examine what a franchise is, and why they have failed to act on it…
…When a government is able to block a multi-billion peso business from operating for no good reason, that is, simply, wrong on all levels, whether from a moral, legal, or practical standpoint. This is a clear abuse of political power and twisting of the law. Because it is wrong, we must say so, and we must fight it.
2 Likes
Good job on the ad hominem attack. Unfortunately for you, it does not have any impact on me.
And yes, I listen to Ed Lingao, mostly in that “wag po” show with Lourd De Veyra who is another Duterte hater. I also read what you quoted, which is why I made that reply, i.e. “bring to court” pero iyak nung binanatan ng quo warranto petition.
Meron pang banat si Lingao about editorial ek ek. Walang issue sa editorials, ope-eds, columns, even FB posts and twitter rants. The President has been relentlessly attacked by mainstream media and all these other personalities since the campaign in 2016. Not even Noynoy was attacked so viciously.
Ang problema e yung reporting. Reports are reports. They’re not supposed to have colors and opinions in them.
Even then, I only saw Digong got ticked off by 1 report and only 1, and that was NOT even ABS-CBN. That was Rappler in their “report” about Bong Go interfering with the Philippine Navy Frigate acquisition.
In short, argument ni Lingao e sablay.
Kung gusto mo makinig sa sablay. E bahala ka. Walang pipigil sayo.
Credible nga ba reporting the ABS-CBN? Do you want screenshots of their headlines vs other news outfits?
How about their press statement today saying walang action ang Supreme Court about their urgent petition? That same statement said that the SC will raffle the case on Monday, May 11. Wala pa ring action?
Credible yan sayo?
If there’s someone who broke the law, it allegedly was ABS-CBN, hence, paso yung prangkisa nila. Their franchise have be opposed by Noynoy and some other groups since 2014. SolGen Calida alleged they broke the law.
Where did I acknowledge na attack of the Press yung shutdown ng ABS-CBN?
What I said was, nag sugal sila by trying to screw the then Presidentiable. Malas nila nanalo si Duterte. E ngayon, nasilip ang kabulastugan nila, tapos iiyak sila?
Sino ang petty ngayon?
Present evidence before the Supreme Court? That’s a first. The Court ruled on the Rappler PDRs only after it went through the Court of Appeals, which received the evidence. Note that the Court did not rule PDRs illegal in the first place.
I’ve filed for Writ of Kalikasan before the Supreme Court, have you? These things rely heavily on evidence. At the level of the Supreme Court, it requires judicial notice. If you file any case there expecting your allegations to be taken as fact, on judicial notice, the new Rules of Evidence are going to work against you. The new Rules on Evidence, which took effect on May 1, apply to pending actions. They narrow the scope of judicial notice quite considerably. This is true especially since PDRs are not exactly cookie cutter contracts. I daresay that the New Rules on Evidence cut down on actions from lawyers like Calida.
That being said, I have worked with Calida before. Not exactly the sharpest tool without his ghostwriters. Then again, you’re only as good as your last pleading.
Who listens to Ed Lingao? What’s wrong with him? Reasonable fellow, war correspondent. Appear on his show prepared or you will be eaten alive. I think I did well in my time there. Ask Lorraine Badoy how well she did. That being said, your diatribe on Ed Lingao, as well as your ad hominems, betray the fact that you did not understand the point.
It is the wrong forum to prove those allegations that ABS-CBN flagrantly disregarded the Rule of Law. Those are allegations of fact which are not justifiable before the Supreme Court. Moreover, if even half those allegations are true, the appropriate remedy is to go to the regulator. Prove it there. Otherwise, that purported violation of ABS-CBN is going to be based on surmise and supposition. That’s not going to stand, because if it does, it means that you can be put behind bars on mere suspicion. There are going to be a lot of unintended consequences.
I recommend you read the Rules of Court again, as you appear to have some legal background (although the more I read you, the more I start doubting that assessment). I also recommend you read the Rappler ruling again, because there the Court clearly explained that their rulifng was for Rappler’s take on a PDR.
Let’s assume that you didn’t acknowledge that it is an attack on press freedom. “Attack kung attack na sa press.” That’s a capitulation to me. Anyway. Let’s assume, further, good faith on Calida’s part. It still is the wrong forum; the issues so raised cannot be brought into sharp relief.
That being said, are you seriously suggesting that editorial control of mass media by the administration in exchange for a license is proper? That’s a lot.
This, for all intents and purposes, is this administration’s CJ Renato Corona moment. Remember it well.
4 Likes
Did the SC reject Calida’s QW Petition?
Nwy… That wasn’t my point earlier. My point was that Rappler’s and ABS-CBN’s cases re PDRs are very similar and the SC could choose to rule on the QW or not.
Congratulations! Have a cookie!
He’s undefeated in the SC so far. Calida tore Chel Diokno a new one in that Writ of Kalikasan.
He’s blinded by his Ninoy and Cory worship.
You probably should remind the SC to reject the QW petition immediately.
Either way, most likely the QW petition is now rendered moot and academic, so I do hope in the committee hearings, congress will invite Calida and the SEC to give their opinions re PDRs.
I’m all for granting ABS-CBN a new franchise for as long as those issues presented in the QW petition are fully resolved. If not, then I hope Digong vetoes it for being doubtful as to its constitutionality. He’s done it in the earlier BBL. He should do it again.
What that meant is that, it’s irrelevant.
Did I say that?
Digong himself has said repeatedly, you can criticize him to your heart’s content.
But what ABS-CBN did was foul and unethical. All other networks did NOT air those Trillanes Ads using innocent children. Cayetano also was able to obtain a TRO but ABS-CBN ran those ads anyway.
They rolled the dice. The house is cashing in. Iyak na lang sila.
Are you sure?
From what I can recall, yes. I’m 100% about the TRO too.
You obviously see nothing wrong with the politicians exercising editorial control over mass media. What does that say about you?
The quo warranto petition is moot, because the body that investigates the issues in the petition isn’t the Supreme Court, it should be Congress. Congress is in the best position to determine the facts. If Congress decides again that the issues in the quo warranto are met, and the Solicitor General still has a hard-on for ABS-CBN, then he can raise another quo warranto petition. Anything else is an infringement of the separation of powers.
Not for being spectacular in oral argument, though. What I can say, though, is that Calida’s been lucky that judicial activists think standing is something to be trifled with, and that the hierarchy of courts can be ignored. Not like the Solicitor General’s been undefeated, just in these little things that he files. Petitions for Writs of Kalikasan get thrown out every single day. That’s effing hilarious to think Diokno got torn a new one over that decision. Obviously, you need to meet lawyers who just toss these losses aside like they’re nothing. They are. That’s why I ask you if you’ve ever filed something before.
The Supreme Court may choose to rule on it, because there are “issues that are worthy of repetition” on that ground, but as I did say earlier, the facts are going to be in dispute. It is going to be impossible for the Supreme Court to receive evidence. The change in the Rules of Evidence on May 1 are going to make those kinds of shots in the dark pretty impossible to win.
The only time the Court can rule on it is if it exactly similar, or if you went to law school you would know this, if the case is on all fours. Just strikingly similar? Needs a trial where you can present facts. If necessary, then should be remanded to the Court of Appeals.
That being said, Justice Tijam agrees with you. Whether Justice Tijam understands the implications of his desire, that’s another question. Him speaking out of turn (on social media, no less) may cause him to be inhibited from the case.
That’s what happens when you don’t have a Supreme Court practice. Too used to Gadon-like antics. Such a blight on the profession, he is.
Lingao? Blinded by worship? Ad hominem argument, if ever there was one. Hilarious.
Here’s the thing about press freedom. . It’s not irrelevant to the people raising it. That’s why a court case in the Supreme Court is a question of what really matters to people. Press freedom doesn’t mean that much to you, okay.
The 2020 Rules of Evidence now say that when a point like that is not countered, it is deemed admitted. Good thing we’re not in court.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! When loyalty trumps competence, there’s no room for criticism. Otherwise, he’d have a deeper bench. He doesn’t.
Do you believe he can be criticized? He doesn’t know how to respond. At least he has that in common with Aquino. Hence his latest episode of eating crow in front of everyone, apologizing to the oligarchs. Completely useless, and a waste of time. They even managed to shut up Secretary Nograles, because the difference was so stark.
IDGAFF if ABS-CBN violated anything; whatever sanctions there are should be brought to regulators and courts that have the capacity to determine material facts. That Quo Warranto? File it in the Court of Appeals so it can receive evidence. Otherwise, it should get dismissed. Let the chips fall where they may.
What matters is that Congress didn’t renew it, for whatever reason. That reason is subject to the Court of Public Opinion. Congress and the last two Presidents didn’t pass the franchise law, so it’s gone. Does Coco Martin win the sympathy war? So what? Let them all deal with the fallout. I find hilarious that you think the Trillanes ads are the worst thing they can do to your beloved leader; that’s merely the tip of what they can really do.
2 Likes
Ever heard about this thing called “ethical standards”?
Smart man, that Tijam guy.
Yes. Guy wrote books about the Aquinos. He idolizes them. He can’t see any fault in them.
So ano relevance nya sa paso na prangkisa?
And here lies the problem.
Bakit ako tawang tawa dito?
3 Likes
Cherry picking statements? Okay. Missing the point completely on that one.
Lingao also thought that the Cybercrime Law was shit, and that was an Aquino thing, but okay. Whatever you say.
Seems like you don’t understand who should be imposing ethical standards on the press. Then again, not like you understood or bother to understand the value of press freedom. Your words, not mine.
I don’t think it’s smart to say things that can get you inhibited from a case. Wasn’t that Sereno’s problem as well? Some consistency would be nice.
The President vetoing unconstitutional legislation is a failure on the part of Secretary Sitoy. It should not get that far.
2 Likes
Right. Because other networks didn’t air it, and a court judge issued a TRO. It has to be 100% ethical.
Oh look who actually missed the point. Again, anong kinalaman sa press freedom sa pasong prangkisa?
Right. Is Justice Tijam still sitting in the SC?
Can you clarify this? Presidents should not veto unconstitutional bills?
Hmmm.
Yep. Zero comprehension.
Here’s a franchise. Wouldn’t it be a tragedy if you suddenly didn’t get renewed on matters… well I can always make stuff up. It’s holding a franchise hostage for editorial control. There it is, in bold letters.
He is. He also said the matter is now with Congress, the matters in the quo warranto petition. I surmise he may be in the minority in the “capable of repetition” position, but that’s such a big no-no.
You have the LEDAC and the entire legislative staff to ensure that the bills are in fact, constitutional, even before they reach his desk. It’s also a failure on the part of people to be involved in the crafting of legislation. We saw this with the Cybercrime Act. Judicial interference, the bald one called it then. Oh well. People have short memories, especially when inheriting the worst traits of the LP.
It is always amazing to see the President’s most ardent supporters without a clue on how laws are made. If a veto is made, then even if the veto cannot be overridden. That kind of defeats the purpose of the override power. It’s a failure of the people involved to do their jobs. You mean to tell me the President currently has no hand in whatever legislation is passed? Here’s a hint: it never passes Committee without informally securing feelers from Malacanang that the bills are getting signed.
Please, don’t let me stop this President’s supporters from shooting even more of their feet.
2 Likes
That is funny.
And that just rendered the things you said invalid. Try looking for a sitting justice who made a comment against ABS-CBN.
What’s more amazing is that you believe that if a bill passes both houses then it’s perfect and always constitutional.
Says the guy who said: “IDGAFF if ABS-CBN violated anything”. Haha!
Cherry picking the closing. Okay. One last point: for all their sins (and there are many), their violations have never, ever been proven in court of competent jurisdiction or a quasi-judicial agency.
Sometimes, as @markku notes, I wonder if you actually understand the rebuttals.
I’m not saying that all the laws that pass Congress are constitutional. Far from it. Stop putting words into my mouth. Especially with my litigation history. What I’m saying is that their failure to understand constitutional limits means their system failed; that they suck at their jobs. This, I told Senator Pia Cayetano to her face in 2012, in Slice. You should try it sometime.
It shouldn’t even have to reach the President’s desk. If it gets there and the President has to veto an entire bill? Considering how much control the President has over the House, that’s a huge failure.
Anyway, you’re free to challenge the franchise law once it gets passed. Your dime, bud, not mine. The last time I got paid for something like that it set me up for a year.
Shutting up; now bound by sub judice.
1 Like