Still on Basic Legal Competency Training for journalists. I hope it would serve as an aid memoire to those who attended the seminar.
Prof. Theodore O. Te’s lecture, specifically The Courts and Media, focused on how journalists should cover the judiciary. It also talked about contempt of court and subjudice.
Te says when covering the courts, most journalists often ask themselves:
1. Am I allowed to write that?
2. Am I allowed to write about that?
3. Am I allowed to write (about) that in that way?
4. Am I allowed to know (about) that?
5. Are they allowed to know how/why I know? And
6. Who decides all these?
He suggested some basic tips to journalists in covering the courts.
To get away with subjudice and contempt, Te says journalists should only report what had happened during a court hearing, without an attempt to influence the outcome of a case.
“The role of the press in relation to the judiciary needs to be regulated,” Te continued in his lecture. “Judges have the duty to defend and uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary. They should sanction those who obstruct or impede the judicial processes.”
The judge is considered the king inside the court and will do anything to protect its integrity. He has the authority to disallow journalists from taking photos and getting footages during court hearings. Otherwise, the judge could charge them with contempt.
Te also cited a Supreme Court en banc (pronounced as “on bonk”) decision on the Macasaet case where the Court declares respondent Amado P. Macasaet, publisher of Malaya newspaper, guilty of indirect contempt of court. He was asked to pay a P20,000 fine.
It stemmed from the articles of Macasaet that came out in four issues of Malaya on September 18, 19, 20 and 21, 2007 containing statements and innuendoes about an alleged bribery incident in the SC. These include: 1.) Bribery in the Court; 2.) The Bribe Giver; 3.) Cecilia, please save the court; and 4.) Wrong date, same facts.
The bases used by the SC in charging Macasaet with contempt talked about ethics, media freedom and responsibility.
It says: “Freedom, however, has not guaranteed quality journalism. The press has been vulnerable to a host of legitimate criticisms such as incompetence, commercialism, and even corruption…”
“Oftentimes, journalists writing about the judiciary and court cases lack basic knowledge of the law and judicial procedures, on the basis of which they draw faulty conclusions which they pass on to their readers as gospel truths.”
“Trial by publicity also influences the independence of judges as the public is fed with partial information and vocal opinions, and judges are pressured to decide in accordance with the public opinion. Faith in the judiciary is undermined when judges rule against the expectations of the public which has been brainwashed by dramatic reports and graphic comments.”
“In some cases, unchecked rumors or allegations of irregularities are immediately published because journalists lack professional competence to verify the information, or are simply eager to break the news and attract a wider readership.”
Prof. Theodore O. Te’s lecture, specifically The Courts and Media, focused on how journalists should cover the judiciary. It also talked about contempt of court and subjudice.
Te says when covering the courts, most journalists often ask themselves:
1. Am I allowed to write that?
2. Am I allowed to write about that?
3. Am I allowed to write (about) that in that way?
4. Am I allowed to know (about) that?
5. Are they allowed to know how/why I know? And
6. Who decides all these?
He suggested some basic tips to journalists in covering the courts.
To get away with subjudice and contempt, Te says journalists should only report what had happened during a court hearing, without an attempt to influence the outcome of a case.
“The role of the press in relation to the judiciary needs to be regulated,” Te continued in his lecture. “Judges have the duty to defend and uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary. They should sanction those who obstruct or impede the judicial processes.”
The judge is considered the king inside the court and will do anything to protect its integrity. He has the authority to disallow journalists from taking photos and getting footages during court hearings. Otherwise, the judge could charge them with contempt.
Te also cited a Supreme Court en banc (pronounced as “on bonk”) decision on the Macasaet case where the Court declares respondent Amado P. Macasaet, publisher of Malaya newspaper, guilty of indirect contempt of court. He was asked to pay a P20,000 fine.
It stemmed from the articles of Macasaet that came out in four issues of Malaya on September 18, 19, 20 and 21, 2007 containing statements and innuendoes about an alleged bribery incident in the SC. These include: 1.) Bribery in the Court; 2.) The Bribe Giver; 3.) Cecilia, please save the court; and 4.) Wrong date, same facts.
The bases used by the SC in charging Macasaet with contempt talked about ethics, media freedom and responsibility.
It says: “Freedom, however, has not guaranteed quality journalism. The press has been vulnerable to a host of legitimate criticisms such as incompetence, commercialism, and even corruption…”
“Oftentimes, journalists writing about the judiciary and court cases lack basic knowledge of the law and judicial procedures, on the basis of which they draw faulty conclusions which they pass on to their readers as gospel truths.”
“Trial by publicity also influences the independence of judges as the public is fed with partial information and vocal opinions, and judges are pressured to decide in accordance with the public opinion. Faith in the judiciary is undermined when judges rule against the expectations of the public which has been brainwashed by dramatic reports and graphic comments.”
“In some cases, unchecked rumors or allegations of irregularities are immediately published because journalists lack professional competence to verify the information, or are simply eager to break the news and attract a wider readership.”
