Friday, January 11, 2008

Philippine Press Freedom*

Situationer on the current outfit of Philippine Journalism/Press:

1. President Gloria Arroyo has said that a free press is the right of its practitioners and critical to the operation of a democratic society. But Arroyo instituted a media block out on reporting military operations. She authorized a raid on a Manila newspaper, and allowed threats of disenfranchisement against broadcast media and threats of prosecution for inciting sedition.

2. Today, the Philippine press has slipped from its past status as the “freest in Asia” to “partly free.”

3. The Philippines is a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as adopted and proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 217A (III) on 10 December 1948. “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”

4. Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which the Philippines is also a signatory. (2.) “Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds…or through any other media of his choice.

5. Article III, Section 7 of the same Constitution affirms that “The right of the people to information on matters of public concern shall be recognized. Access to official records, and to documents and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions…”

6. A Code of Ethics for Philippine Journalists was drafted by the National Press Club and the Philippine Press Institute in 1972. It is premised on the obligations and responsibilities the journalist owes to different entities…

Balancing the views from different ends, where should we draw boundary among: 1. press freedom and their responsibilities; 2. public's right to information; 3. SOPs of police authorities when such case as The Peninsula siege occurs?

4 comments:

Ienne said...

I agree. Transparency and accountability are matters of first importance, and can serve as the ultimate panacea to the cancer of the society.

Ienne said...

Balancing the views from different ends, where should we draw boundary among: 1. press freedom and their responsibilities; 2. public's right to information; 3. SOPs of police authorities when such case as The Peninsula siege occurs?

-From this (whether it's a rhetoric question or not), the role of the judiciary branch of the government and its ideal character of impartiality and neutrality, should be highly emphasized.

theporsche02 said...

Precisely,the dilemma is -- the judiciary branch does not effectively serve its purpose.

Ienne said...

Exactly. The judiciary branch of the government has never been active. All this time, it has been passive in interpreting laws and rules the Constitution and the legislature have to offer.