My stand on Maria Ressa’s conviction

AS a columnist who’s had his share of libel cases, I would have denounced as repression of press freedom the Manila court decision convicting fellow journalists Maria Ressa and Reynaldo Santos Jr. for cyberlibel.

Ressa is the executive editor and chief executive officer of Rappler, an online news publication, while Santos is a former researcher/writer of the same publication.

But why am I not criticizing the court’s decision like some of my fellow journalists and foreign news media?

First and foremost, the Rappler article about billionaire businessman Wilfredo Keng, for which the two were charged and convicted, was a complete untruth.

Second, Keng is a private individual whose reputation was destroyed by the Rappler article.

Government officials and public figures — like movie stars — don’t have the same privilege as private individuals, even if adverse published reports about them turn out to be inaccurate; provided, however, that the reports were done without malice on the part of the writer.

On May 29, 2012, Santos wrote that Keng lent his Suburban SUV to then- Chief Justice Renato Corona, who was undergoing impeachment proceedings in Congress.

The SUV was completely armored and Corona needed it as a shield from people who might have wanted to do him harm.

The Rappler article was republished in February 2014, after the cybercrime law was passed.

In the article, Santos described Keng as a “shady character” involved in human trafficking and drug smuggling.

Let me tell you about Willy Keng, whose wife stood as baptismal ninang ( sponsor) to my daughter Monik in 1995.

I’ve known Keng from the time when his wife Tina was still selling goods in Baclaran, Parañaque in 1989.

He’s a law- abiding businessman whose varied business interests include mining, real estate, shopping malls and textiles in this country and in China.

He earned his billions by dint of hard work.

“I have been a private, hardworking businessman for 37 years now. I started out in the humblest of beginnings, a young man with my wares on a few feet of space in the bangketa ( sidewalks) of Manila. I know how it felt to be poor with only my good name, the reason I’m protecting that name with all my might so I can bestow it on my children,” said Keng in a press statement after the verdict on Ressa and Santos was handed down.

After that Rappler article came out, Willy asked me to accompany him to see Isidro Lapeña, the then director general of the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA), to clear his name.

I was a witness when Keng told Lapeña: “Sir, I’m here to present myself to you. If I have a record as a drug dealer in your agency, you can now arrest me.” Negative, Lapeña told Keng. PDEA’s validation that Keng had no derogatory record with the agency became the basis for Willy’s request for Rappler to publish his side.

Keng, through his lawyers, practically pleaded with Rappler more than 20 times to either delete the controversial article about him or publish his side.

He was rebuffed each time. Had Rappler made the necessary corrections on the article or deleted it, Keng wouldn’t have filed the cyberlibel case.

“Sira na reputasyon ko, pare. Paano ako haharap aking mga kliyente o kasama sa

negosyo? ( My reputation has been besmirched, my friend. How can I face my clients or business associates?)” Willy told me after I tried to dissuade him from filing the libel complaint.

I told him that people would forget about the derogatory article and that it would take so much of his time if he sought Rappler’s prosecution.

I couldn’t blame Willy as he was deeply hurt by the article which, I repeat, was a complete falsehood.

Many people would surely criticize me for defending Keng and going against my kabaro (colleagues) but then press freedom should not be abused. Ressa and Santos clearly violated a tenet in journalism to give a person who has been accused of wrongdoing his side of a controversy.

Willy pleaded many times with Rappler to air his denial of the accusation against him to no avail.

As a parting shot, let me state that I always give the side of a government official or public figure who has been featured in my column when he asks, even if I know that his denial is a fib.

I never write about the alleged shenanigans of a private individual unless it concerns government transactions.

I have never been motivated by malice in writing articles critical of government officials, so that even if the articles turned out to be untrue I did so with public interest in mind.

As a dyed in the wool journalist (ahem), I wouldn’t spare even my close friends and relatives from my acid pen if I perceived them to have done wrong.

As a result, I’ve incurred the disfavor of some friends and relatives who have been criticized in my column.

What motivated Rappler to write falsehoods about Keng?

I don’t know, but I can venture a guess: Rappler was helping the Yellow administration of President Benigno Simeon Aquino 3rd prosecute Chief Justice Corona.

Keng, who was Corona’s friend, was collateral damage.