RTC decides on fate of Rappler CEO (1)
Talks of silencing the media once again reopen as the Manila Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 46 decides tomorrow (Monday, 15 June) on the cyber-libel case filed by businessman Wilfredo Keng against Rappler CEO and Chief Executive Maria Ressa over a published controversial article.
Keng, the complainant, referred to a published article entitled “CJ using SUVs of ‘controversial’ businessmen” as
rather defamatory and made with malicious intent after “unconfirmed” quoting of unnamed sources.
Keng’s camp argued that accusations were made in the article which pointed at his alleged involvement with illegal activities despite no clear sources provided.
As stated in the article published online, Keng was accused of being allegedly involved as the ‘mastermind’ in a murder case of Manila Councilor Chika Go in 2002.
He was also said to be allegedly included in other activities entailing human trafficking and drug smuggling to which in his argument was certified by the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) to be non-existent.
Keng’s camp argued that accusations were made in the article which pointed at his alleged involvement with illegal activities despite no clear sources provided.
“Contrary to the accused’s claim, the PDEA certification dated 15 August 2016, which states that Mr. Keng has no derogatory record with the PDEA for any violation of RA (Republic Act) 9165 shows that the supposed statements in said ‘intelligence report’ about Mr. Keng are patently false,” they stated.
Keng argued that even as he approached Rappler regarding taking down the article online or publishing his side, no action, however, was made even after seven months of negotiation.
“These circumstances highlight not only the continuing and present publication of the libelous Rappler article but accused’s malice in defaming Mr. Keng,” it stated.
He testified, as well, that no interviews were done on his behalf regarding his alleged involvement in the crimes accused of him while citing misleading statements on the article regarding his involvement with illegal transactions with Chinese nationals.
“Instead, accused maliciously made it appear in the Rappler article that they sought Mr. Keng’s comments regarding their accusations against him when they reported that: ‘Keng has denied his involvement in the illegal transaction, saying it’s easy to get visas in the Philippines,’” they said.
With this, Keng’s side deemed Rappler’s article as “patently defamatory” and “certainly and obviously malicious emphasizing that his identity was blatantly indicated after citing his name, occupation and positions in several companies.”
They said that Article 345 of the Revised Penal Code stated that every defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious if no motive was reflected.
“Every defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious, even if it be true if no good intention and justifiable motive for making it are shown,” it stated.
On a final note, Keng argued that the article has disrupted his image and reputation where he also suffered “mental anguish, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral and social humiliation.”
They said that the cyber-libel, also similar to a libel case, includes only the motive to cause dishonor and to disrespect a person’s reputation.
As stated under the offenses listed in RA 10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, cyber-libel refers to unlawful acts of libel as defined under the Revised Penal Code committed through a computer system.
Among the punishments indicated under the same law include a fine at a maximum range of P5 million to P10 million.
Keng argued that the article has disrupted his image and reputation where he also suffered mental anguish, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral and social humiliation.
However, Ressa, in her prior arguments, said that she cannot be held liable for libel under RA 10175 since the law had not been in effect when the story was published since it took effect 15 days later after being approved on 12 September 2012.
She added that the complaint could no longer be pursued as the one-year prescription period of filing a libel case under the Revised Penal Code had already expired.
The trial started on 23 July 2019, a few months after Ressa was arrested on 13 February where she and the article’s writer Reynaldo Santos Jr. have both also posted bail amounting to P100,000. TO BE CONTINUED