[Just Saying] Ted Failon, press freedom, and the Supreme Court docket

The SC choice is an admonition to decrease courtroom judges with a penchant for issuing gag-and-contempt orders to be extra constitutionally circumspect

Like King Solomon, Supreme Court docket (SC) magistrates should decide correctly however not like him, they aren’t royalties. They’re public servants, fallible human beings vulnerable to error, being unduly influenced and, God forbid, corrupted. The SC, its justices and selections shouldn’t be immune from open criticism.

In Stradcom Company vs. Failon (G.R. No. 190980, October 10, 2022), broadcast journalist Ted Failon was sought to be cited for legal contempt.   

In his radio program, he commented on a pending case about authorities bidding filed by Bayan Muna with the SC. He relayed his severe anxiousness over the end result of the SC decision. Apparently, his confidence within the SC was not completely optimistic.   

Due to his uneasiness, Failon additionally talked about a sure case the place   he claims the SC flip-flopped in its taking cognizance of a movement for reconsideration. He stated: “At tila ba isang malaking himala, tila baga isang hindi maipaliwanag na pangyayari biglang nagbukas ang pintuan ng Supreme Court docket at tinanggap ang panibagong movement…” (Ang like an enormous miracle, like a troublesome to clarify occasion, the Supreme Court docket abruptly opened its doorways and accepted a brand new movement…)

He additionally commented on one other case the place sure public officers weren’t thought-about resigned of their current place upon submitting of their candidacy for public workplace. Exasperatingly, he sarcastically lamented:  “Por dios por santo mga kapatid ko sa pananampalataya, mga kapatid ko sa pananalig, mga kapamilya, ano na ang nangyayari sa ating Kataas-taasang Hukuman?!!!” (For God’s sake, my brethren in religion, members of the family, no matter occurred to our Supreme Court docket?!!!)

It was alleged that he contemptuously depicted the SC as “fickle minded, missing firmness and resoluteness in its selections” and obstructed the orderly administration of justice.   

The SC dismissed the petition, ruling that Failon:

“merely expressed his frustrations and disagreements with previous selections of this Court docket to bolster his fears in regards to the final result in Bayan Muna. His phrases weren’t the form of expressions which have been adjudged contumacious by this Court docket worthy of its train of the contempt energy. He didn’t insinuate disreputable motives to this Court docket or any of its particular members; neither did he use intemperate language to demean the Court docket’s dignity or the respect because of it. Even his sarcastic intimations can’t be deemed actionable. The contempt energy, although seemingly plenary, must be utilized judiciously and sparingly with excessive self-restraint for the aim of ‘correction and preservation of the dignity of the courtroom, not for retaliation or vindication.’ Recognizing the suitable of the folks to criticize the courts and judges pretty and courteously by professional means, we ‘must be affected person and tolerate as a lot as potential every thing which seems as hasty and unguarded expression of ardour or momentarily outbreak of disappointment on the final result of a case.”

And as to the accusation that he violated the sub judice rule by discussing a pending case in his radio program, the SC stated:

“There was no exhibiting that respondent’s remarks and even his interview with Congressman On line casino may trigger a severe and imminent menace to the dispensation of justice in Bayan Muna. A perusal of the assailed interview exhibits that it was merely a reiteration of the arguments raised by petitioners in Bayan Muna, which isn’t of that nature to generate the substantive evil of obstructing the administration of justice within the ongoing case that must be forestalled. To emphasize, a public utterance or publication is not going to be disadvantaged of the constitutional assure of freedom of speech and of the press just because it pertains to an ongoing judicial continuing upon the belief that the expression unavoidably tends to impede the orderly dispensation of justice within the pending case.“

The choice, in impact, highlights that, in a democracy, there should be “a profound nationwide dedication to the precept that debate on public points must be uninhibited, strong, and wide-open, and that it could properly embrace vehement, caustic and generally unpleasantly sharp assaults on authorities and public officers.” (Terminiello v. Chicago 337 US 1, 4).

It additionally validates US Supreme Court docket Choose David J. Brewer’s reminder that: “Justices must be the objects of fixed watchfulness by all, and their judgments topic to the freest criticisms. The time is previous within the historical past of the world when any residing man or physique of males could be set on a pedestal and embellished with a halo. True many criticisms could also be, like their authors, devoid of excellent style, however higher all types of criticism than no criticism in any respect. The transferring waters are vigorous and well being; solely in nonetheless waters is stagnation and dying.” (Authorities by Injunction, Nationwide Corp Report, 848,849)

The well-written SC Stradcom choice, penned by Justice Marvic Leonen, exhibits the SC’s majesty – due to its erudition – and humility – due to its openness to criticism, making the workings of the Structure alive for press freedom. Additionally, it’s an admonition to decrease courtroom judges with a penchant for issuing gag-and-contempt orders to be extra constitutionally circumspect. – Rappler.com

Mel Sta. Maria is former dean of the Far Jap College (FEU) Institute of Legislation. He teaches regulation at FEU and the Ateneo College of Legislation, hosts exhibits on each radio and YouTube, and has authored a number of books on regulation, politics, and present occasions.