Ban on ‘Terrorist’ Interviews Illegal – Lawyer, Ex-UP MassCom Dean

A human rights lawyer said over the weekend that the proposals by the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and Malacañang to impose a ban on media interviews with “terrorists” or “terrorist groups” would amount to “prior restraint” of press freedom, which, he said, is illegal.

BY ALEXANDER MARTIN REMOLLINO

Bulatlat

A human rights lawyer said over the weekend that the proposals by the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and Malacañang to impose a ban on media interviews with “terrorists” or “terrorist groups” would amount to “prior restraint” of press freedom, which, he said, is illegal.

Interviewed by Bulatlat, Edre Olalia of the Public Interest Law Center (PILC) said, “Under the law, the greater weight should be on the protection of press freedom, rather than its abridgement.”

AFP deputy chief of staff Lt. Gen. Edilberto Adan had gone on record March 4 proposing sanctions against journalists and media outfits that would interview “terrorists.”

Press Secretary Ignacio Bunye said in a radio interview the next day that there was already a law that “prohibits the airing of, let us say, interviews where the one being interviewed calls for the overthrow of the government.” On March 6, Bunye issued a statement saying the concern of the government was not really about banning journalists from interviewing “terrorists,” but the content of the interviews.

“That’s ridiculous, and to be candid about it, stupid,” said Olalia said when asked to comment on the Bunye statements. “Can a reporter, interviewing a ‘terrorist,’ read his mind and predict the outcome of the interview?”

Prof. Luis Teodoro, a former dean of the University of the Philippines (UP) College of Mass Communication, agreed with Olalia that the proposed bans on media interviews with “terrorists” would be tantamount to prior restraint. “That would violate Article III, Section 4 of the Constitution,” he said in a separate interview with Bulatlat.

Article III, Section 4 of the Constitution provides that: “No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.”

Olalia also said that there is danger in such proposals, considering how the Macapagal-Arroyo government has been using the “terrorist” label. “It is those who question the government’s anti-people policies who are called terrorists,” he explained.

President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo is known to have gone on record several times calling legal cause-oriented groups and even some mainstream opposition politicians as “communist fronts” or “communist sympathizers.” The Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) is included in the U.S. Department of State’s list of “foreign terrorists,” together with its armed group the New People’s Army (NPA) and Jose Maria Sison, senior political consultant to the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP).

Media opposition

The Adan and Malacañang proposals have triggered opposition from media groups in the Philippines.

On March 5, the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP) condemned the Adan proposal, saying: “Adan engages in typical double-speak when he says the military distinguishes between legitimate dissenters and terrorists. His proposal is pure and simple censorship and an imposition of prior restraint on the press. Adan’s statements only serve to intensify media opposition to an anti-terrorism bill that threatens drastic curtailment of civil liberties in the country.”

The NUJP is preparing a signature campaign to oppose the “media gag” proposals.

Meanwhile, alumni of the College Editors Guild of the Philippines (CEGP), an organization of campus papers fighting for student rights and press freedom, have initiated an online petition calling the Adan proposal a “terror plot on press freedom.”

“The military always considers as ‘enemies’ any and all forms of dissent and opposition, and lumps them together with so-called terrorists and dissidents,” the statement read. “Critics of military corruption and military connivance with criminal syndicates, bandits and terrorists may be deemed ‘enemies of the state.’

“More importantly, at a time when the current administration is the target of growing legitimate protests due to its brazen corruption, mismanagement, bankruptcy and the inability to unite the people, could be aimed at restoring barefaced suppression of our most essential rights that enable us to responsibly and democratically institute changes in the people's favor, correct wrongdoings and punish wrongdoers.”

The CEGP alumni statement cited data from the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) showing that the Philippines is now second only to war-torn Iraq as “the worst place” for journalists. “A fiat by the military against interviews with the latter's enemies would only be a license to silence more journalists who would commit the ‘crime’ of ‘interviewing terrorists,’” the statement read.

International level

But the issue has not remained confined to the Philippines. On March 8, the Reporters Sans Frontieres (RSF or Reporters Without Borders), an international organization defending press freedom, issued a statement condemning the proposed ban on media interviews with “terrorists.”

“We are aware of the need to combat terrorist organizations, but we condemn the fact that the media could be exposed to sanctions for just doing their job of disseminating the news,” the press freedom organization said.

“The term ‘terrorist group’ is very vague,” the group continued. “Reporters Without Borders believes that it should be up to the news media themselves, and not any other body, to decide who they interview.”

Olalia agreed. “While the State has a right to protect itself, it should not be at the expense of press freedom or other democratic rights,” he said.

Teodoro said that the public could benefit from media interviews with even real terrorists. “When these individuals and groups are interviewed,” he said, “the public may get insights into whatever issues they have, and this paves the way for a deeper understanding of the causes of terrorism and how it may be solved.” Bulatlat