Constitutional Law Digest Stef Macapagal

Tulfo v. People
GR Nos. 161032 and 161176
16 September 2008
Facts:
Atty. Din So o! t"e #$rea$ o! %$stoms !i&ed !o$r separate
'n!ormations aainst (r)in *$&!o+ S$san %ambri+ Rey Sa&ao+ ,oce&yn
#ar&i-o+ and ."i&ip .ic"ay+ acc$sin t"em o! &ibe& in connection )it" t"e
p$b&ication o! artic&es in t"e co&$mn /Direct 0it1 o! t"e dai&y tab&oid
Remate. *"e co&$mn acc$sed So o! corr$ption+ and portrayed "im as an
e2tortionist and sm$&er.
A!ter tria&+ t"e R*% !o$nd *$&!o+ et a&. $i&ty o! &ibe&. *"e %A
a!!irmed t"e decision.
'ss$es:
1. 3"y )as Borjal v. CA not app&ied to t"is case4
2. 35N t"e assai&ed artic&es are pri6i&eed.
3. 35N t"e assai&ed artic&es are !air commentaries.
R$&in:
1. #or7a& )as not app&ied to t"is case beca$se:
a. #or7a& stemmed !rom a ci6i& action !or damaes based on
&ibe&+ and )as not a crimina& case.
b. *"e r$&in in #or7a& )as t"at t"ere )as no s$!!icient
identi!ication o! t"e comp&ainant.
c. *"e s$b7ect in #or7a& )as a pri6ate citi-en+ )"ereas in t"e
present case+ t"e s$b7ect is a p$b&ic o!!icia&.
d. 't )as "e&d in #or7a& t"at t"e artic&es )ritten by Art #or7a&
)ere /!air commentaries on matters o! p$b&ic interest.1
2. N8. *"e co&$mns )ere $ns$bstantiated attac9s on Atty. So+ and
cannot be co$ntenanced as bein pri6i&eed simp&y beca$se t"e
taret )as a p$b&ic o!!icia&.
a. (6en )it" t"e 9no)&ede t"at "e mi"t be in error+ e6en
9no)in o! t"e possibi&ity t"at someone e&se may "a6e
$sed Atty. So:s name+ as *$&!o s$rmised+ "e made no
e!!ort to 6eri!y t"e in!ormation i6en by "is so$rce or
e6en to ascertain t"e identity o! t"e person "e )as
acc$sin.
b. A&t"o$" !a&sity o! t"e artic&es does not pro6e ma&ice+ t"e
e2istence o! press !reedom m$st be done /consistent )it"
ood !ait" and reasonab&e care.1 *"is )as c&ear&y
abandoned by *$&!o )"en "e )rote t"e s$b7ect artic&es.
*"is is no case o! mere error or "onest mista9e+ b$t a case
o! a 7o$rna&ist abdicatin "is responsibi&ity to 6eri!y "is
story and instead misin!ormin t"e p$b&ic.
c. *$&!o "ad )ritten and p$b&is"ed t"e artic&es )it" rec9&ess
disreard o! )"et"er t"e same )ere !a&se or not. *"e test
&aid do)n is t"e /rec9&ess disreard1 test+ and *$&!o !ai&ed
to meet t"at test.
d. (6idence o! ma&ice: *"e !act t"at *$&!o p$b&is"ed anot"er
artic&e &ambastin Atty. So a!ter t"e commencement o! an
action. *$&!o did not re&ent nor did "e pa$se to consider
"is actions+ b$t )ent on to contin$e de!amin Atty. So.
*"is is a c&ear indication o! "is intent to ma&in Atty. So+
no matter t"e cost+ and is proo! o! ma&ice.
3. N8. Good !ait" is &ac9in+ as *$&!o !ai&ed to s$bstantiate or e6en
attempt to 6eri!y "is story be!ore p$b&ication.
a. *"e pro6ided no detai&s o t"e acts committed by t"e
s$b7ect. *"ey are p&ain and simp&e base&ess acc$sations+
bac9ed $p by t"e )ord o! one $nnamed so$rce.
b. Not /!air1 or /tr$e1 beca$se /!air1 is de!ined as /"a6in
t"e ;$a&ities o! impartia&ity and "onesty.1 /*r$e1 is
de!ined as /com!ortab&e to !act< correct< e2act< act$a&<
en$ine< "onest.1 *$&!o !ai&ed to satis!y t"ese
re;$irements+ as "e did not do researc" be!ore ma9in "is
a&&eations+ and it "as been s"o)n t"at t"ese a&&eations
)ere base&ess. *"e artic&es are not /!air and tr$e reports+1
b$t mere&y )i&d acc$sations.
=e&asco+ ,r.+ ,:
1
Constitutional Law Digest Stef Macapagal
(&ements o! !air commentary >to be considered pri6i&eed?:
a. *"at it is a !air and tr$e report o! a 7$dicia&+ &eis&ati6e+ or
ot"er o!!icia& proceedins )"ic" are not o! con!identia&
nat$re+ or o! a statement+ report+ or speec" de&i6ered in
said proceedins+ or o! any ot"er act per!ormed by a p$&ic
o!!icer in t"e e2ercise o! "is !$nctions<
b. *"at it is made in ood !ait"<
c. *"at it is )it"o$t any comments or remar9s.
,o$rna&ists may be a&&o)ed an ade;$ate marin o! error in t"e e2ercise o!
t"eir pro!ession+ b$t t"is marin does not e2pand to co6er e6ery de!amatory
or in7$rio$s statement t"ey may ma9e in t"e !$rt"erance o! t"eir pro!ession+
nor does t"is marin co6er tota& abandonment o! responsibi&ity.
*"e mere !act t"at t"e s$b7ect o! an artic&e is a p$b&ic !i$re or a matter o!
p$b&ic interest does not mean it is a !air commentary )it"in t"e scope o!
;$a&i!ied pri6i&eed comm$nication+ )"ic" )o$&d a$tomatica&&y e2c&$de t"e
a$t"or !rom &iabi&ity.
*"e con!identia&ity o! so$rces and t"eir importance to 7o$rna&ists are
accepted and respected. 3"at cannot be accepted are 7o$rna&ists ma9in no
e!!orts to 6eri!y t"e in!ormation i6en by a so$rce+ and $sin t"at $n6eri!ied
in!ormation to t"ro) )i&d acc$sations and besmirc" t"e name o! possib&y an
innocent person. ,o$rna&ists "a6e a responsibi&ity to report t"e tr$t"+ and in
doin so m$st at &east in6estiate t"eir stories be!ore p$b&ication+ and be
ab&e to bac9 $p t"eir stories )it" proo!.
,o$rna&ists are not storyte&&ers or no6e&ists )"o may 7$st spin ta&es o$t o!
!e6ered imainins+ and pass t"em o!! as rea&ity. *"ere m$st be some
!o$ndation to t"eir reports< t"ese reports m$st be )arranted by !acts.
Freedom o! e2pression as )e&& as !reedom o! t"e press may not be
$nrestrained+ b$t neit"er m$st it be reined in too "ars"&y.
Obiter 1:
It may be clich that the pen is mightier than the sword b!t in this
partic!lar case the lesson to be learned is that s!ch a mighty weapon
sho!ld not be wielded rec"lessly or tho!ghtlessly b!t always g!ided by
conscience and care#!l tho!ght.
Obiter $:
A rob!st and independently #ree press is do!btless one o# the most e##ective
chec"s on government power and ab!ses. %ence it behooves government
#!nctionaries to respect the val!e o# openness and re#rain #rom concealing
#rom media corr!ption and other anomalo!s practices occ!rring within
their bac"yard. On the other hand p!blic o##icials also deserve respect and
protection against #alse inn!endoes and !n#o!nded acc!sation o# o##icial
wrongdoing #rom an ab!sive press. As it were the law and j!rispr!dence
on libel heavily tilt in #avor o# press #reedom. &he common b!t most !n"ind
perception is that government instit!tions and their o##icers and employees
are #air game to o##icial and personal attac"s and even ridic!le. And the
practice on the gro!nd is j!st as disconcerting. Reports and acc!sation o#
o##icial miscond!ct o#ten times merit #ront page or primetime treatment
while de#enses set !p retraction iss!ed or ac'!ittal rendered get no more
i# ever per#!nctory coverage. &he !n#airness needs no belaboring. &he
balm o# clear conscience is sometimes not eno!gh.
2