Media ‘processing’ - Rightful or a Violation of a Right?
December 2nd, 2007 Shobe_ceo
The recent Trillanes coup (attempt) gave rise to but another controversy that the State is now faced with. Right after the surrender of Trillanes and his supporters, the police force proceeded in gathering all the media people involved, or were together with Trillanes’ team, inside the Manila Peninsula Hotel. The policemen explained that it was for a short inquiry or processing, to verify the media people’s identity and/or participation with the coup (attempt).
It must be noted that before the said processing, the media people were forewarned and asked to leave the premises for their safety and to easily facilitate the negotiation and/or arrest of the group of Trillanes. But the media people did not listen and chose to remain inside the Manila Peninsula, for some personal or competitive purposes. In that light, the media people became instruments to obstruct, or at least make it more difficult, for the police force to execute its plans in order to end the nuisance at once.
The press plays a very important role in the society. It shows to the world what is truly happening in a micro and/or macro prospective. It influences the way people think and perceive things. It can even create a certain culture or belief, if it wishes. It can also serve as a cover up for protection by some accused. And the latter is exactly what the policemen wish to avoid in heeding for the media to move out of the premises.
To some people, the media’s act was heroic and shows true dedication in the service of nation in showing what is happening to the world. But to some it is pitiful, in sane, or worse, a conspiracy to protect the accused. As a dear Constitutional Law professor, Dean Andy Bautista, has mentioned, “It is just like in a burning house! We cannot absolutely deprive the owners of the house to go inside and save some belongings, but as a rule of duty, we must do so for their protection. Now if they insist in doing so, they may do so, but not without taking the risk for themselves.” The media people, in insisting to stay inside the Manila Peninisula during the coup (attempt), should bear the hassle of any processing, inquiry, or whatever procedure that the police enforcers may require them to undertake. That is not just for their own safety but more for the nation’s security, knowing that some Magdalo can very well be in a disguise as a media man, simply to effect an escape. I am sure that a true dedicated serviceman wouldn’t want someone (an accused) to use his/her name (service) as a means of escaping liability from the State.
So now we come to the famous question of whether the holding made against the media people constitutes an arbitrary detention or a violation of the freedom of the press and a deprivation of their right w/o due process of law. Due process of law, as well as the equal protection of the law, is provided for in Article III, Section 1 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution:
Section 1: “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws”
Due process, as contemplated by the law, can either be ‘Procedural due process’ or ‘Substantive due process’. Procedural due process requires a step-by-step procedure of how a law (or a thing) shall be implemented, and faithful execution according to the prescribed procedure is tantamount to compliance with due process. On the other hand, Substantive due process is the absence of arbitrary laws and questions the very essence or substance of the law itself, as whether it is just or not.
Without a doubt, the policemen has complied with the proper call of procedure in dealing with the media men. The processing is applied to ‘all’ members of the press, without distinction as to who is famous or not (shame to those who were even proud of being able to escape from this process). Now, the last question is whether there was an actual need for the said processing, it is ’substantial’ and just? I personally believe that the police enforcers had a reasonable ground to conduct the said processing. It is paramount to public interest that they assure that they are not setting free the people liable to the distress that just occurred. The main consideration for the act is the general welfare of the community, especially those within the surrounding vicinity. Hence, there is no violation of due process, whether procedural or substantive.
I would like to end this with a call on the press for a balanced judgment. It was obvious from the interviews with Trillanes how their group push and pursued on using the media as a means to get the sympathy of the people and/or as a cover (protection) from the armed forces. For a couple of times, they insisted on the fact that the present administration is willing to sacrifice the media people just to get what it want. By mid of their act, they were firm on their stand that they will not surrender, no matter what. And at the end of the day, they moved on to say that they will surrender since their conscience cannot take it, to put the media peoples’ lives at stake, as compared to what the administration was willing to sacrifice. On the other hand, many believe that the real reason behind the surrender was the fact that no one heeded their call. They received only a minimal support, if not none, that is not sufficient to actually bring their mission to success, and so they surrendered and gave the lame excuse of ‘for the sake of the press’, again to gain sympathy and the side of the press. Whereas, in the first place, they are the ones who put not just the press but the whole nation at stake. They put at stake the slowly growing and recuperating economy back to zero. Investors were threatened, tourists were frightened, citizens were sacrificed. How can one call for a positive change if he himself is the greatest contributor for a nuisance. Clearly, everyone must rethink things out.
Entry Filed under: Atenista, For the Mind, Life of Law, Philippine Cases, Philippines, Shobe_CEO, Showbiz Chikka
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to comments via RSS Feed
