NEWSOUNDS v.

DY
GR No. 170270 & 179411
April 2, 2009

Facts:

Petitioners Newsounds Broadcasting Network Inc., (Newsounds) which runs DZNC and
Consolidated Broadcasting System, Inc. (CBS) which run Star FM are stations operated,
organized, and incorporated by Bombo Radyo Philippines (Bombo Radyo). Both petitioners are
operating out of Cauayan City, Isabela.

In 1996, Newsounds relocated its broadcasting station, management office and

transmitters on property still in Cauayan City, owned by another affiliate corporation of Bombo
Radyo which is CBS Development Corp. (CDC).

During the same year 1996, CDC secured necessary permits from the municipal
government to build a commercial establishment on the said property. The Housing and Land Use
Regulatory Board (HLURB) issued a Zoning Decision certifying the property as commercial. Also,
the Office of the Municipal Planning and Development Coordinator (OMPDC) of Cauayan affirmed
that the commercial establishment to be constructed by CDC conformed to local zoning
regulations, noting as well that the location “is classified as a Commercial area. Similar
certifications would be issued by OMPDC from 1997-2001

A building was erected and both DZNC and Star FM operated from 1997-2001 after
securing necessary operating documents.

When they were renewing their 2002 operating documents, additional documents were
required from them which were not required before. Hence, they were not able to secure the
necessary operating documents.

Petitioners obtained from the DAR orders stating that the land is considered commercial.
They submitted this for the 2003 operating documents renewal. However the City Administrator
claims that the DAR orders were void. Again, the mayor’s permit was denied. This also continued
for the 2004 renewal and the permit was again denied.

The legal officer of the City attempted to physically close the station however the petitioners
filed with the COMELEC seeking enforcement of the Election Code which prohibited the closure of
radio stations during election period. Petitioners was able to continue operations until the end of the
election period.

Petitioners filed a petition for mandamus and preliminary mandatory injunction to the RTC
but was denied. They also filed actions (Certiorari) with the CA but also lost.
 Issue:

Whether or not there has been a violation of the freedom of speech and of the press?

Ruling:

Yes

The court recognized that the LGU concerned has legal authority to promulgate ordinances
required for permits. However, the burden is with the government concerned to establish
compelling reasons to infringe the freedom of speech and expression as in the case at bar. The
court justifies further its ruling based on the concept of content based restraint (subject to more
strict scrutiny) rather than content neutral regulation for the reason that the circumstances
surrounding the case warrants it such as the alleged ill motives of the defendants together with the
timing as it is very near election. The steps employed by the City is to ultimately shutdown the
petitioners. The case falls on the classification of Prior Restraint. To reiterate, Prior restraint refers to
official governmental restrictions on the press or other forms of expression in advance of actual
publication or dissemination.

The following undisputed facts bring the issue of free expression to fore. Petitioners are
authorized by law to operate radio stations in Cauayan City, and had been doing so for some years
undisturbed by local authorities. Beginning in 2002, respondents in their official capacities have taken
actions, whatever may be the motive, that have impeded the ability of petitioners to freely broadcast,
if not broadcast at all. These actions have ranged from withholding permits to operate to the physical
closure of those stations under color of legal authority. While once petitioners were able to broadcast
freely, the weight of government has since bore down upon them to silence their voices on the
airwaves.