ALAM helps mediamen for TRO vs Customs
ALAM helps mediamen
for TRO vs Customs
Alab ng Mamamahayag (ALAM) has helped
anew the oppressed media men covering the Bureau of Customs.
ALAM
caused the preparation and submission of their motion for reconsideration seeking
for the Supreme Court to issue a temporary restraining order (TRO) stopping the
implementation of the memorandum circular that regulates media coverage within
the offices of the bureau.
The motion ratiocinated that there
was a new development where the bureau, through its PIAD office, issued last
February 22 a “media advisory” to implement Customs Memorandum Order No.
37-2011.
The bureau issued the advisory a few
days after it received a resolution from the Supreme Court requiring it to
comment on the petition of these media men and at the same time denying their
TRO application for lack of urgency.
The petition for prohibition is
docketed as “Napoleon Sanota, et al versus Bureau of Customs,” G.R. No. 199479.
“There is now an urgency considering
that the bureau issued a media advisory implementing the memorandum that
operates like a media regulatory body when the Constitution forbids even the Congress
to make one,” said Berteni “Toto” Cataluña Causing, president of ALAM that is registering
this year as a partylist organization.
ALAM has been organized to gather
all journalists all over the country, particularly the community newspapers
reporters, editors and publishers and local radio broadcasters, commentators
and field reporters.
ALAM sums up its battle cry as “Walang
Demokrasya Kung Walang Media.”
Causing
is at the same time the president of Hukuman ng Mamamayan Movement, Inc.
(HMMI), a group that is actively involved in the campaign to educate Filipinos
of the merits why the system of Grand Jury and Trial Jury is the best solution
to the century-old problems of injustice in the country.
The motion states:
“This
‘Media Advisory’ is a glaring proof of the CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER to the
rights of the petitioners to exercise press freedom.
“Any form of regulation that hampers or deters the
exercise of the right to gather information or facts from public places or
elsewhere outside the zone of privacy or the zone of state or national security
is as good as restraining the exercise of the right to exercise this right
fought for by our forefathers.
“Jurisprudence loves to call the same ‘prior
restraint.’ It directly affects the very content or the substance of the
freedom of the press.
“The same CMO does not only implement a simple accreditation
procedure not amounting to chilling the right enshrined in the constitution. It
actually puts regulations restricting the coverage and movements of the media
persons covering the bureau. It also actually constitutes the bureau as an ‘adjudicatory
body’ whose purpose is to punish what it deems as ‘erring’ media men. It also amounts to laying down policies of
requiring requirements like those required in applying for business permits.”
“In short, the language and the tenor of same CMO
show that it actually works to control accesses to the facts and information only
found inside the Bureau of Customs offices.
“Ironically, these data are undisputedly matters of
public interest. But this memorandum
circular limits or prevents the petitioners from these matters.
“The offices inside the zone of the Bureau of
Customs have never been a private trust.
They belong to the public’s trust.
In ratifying the 1987 Constitution from where the Bureau of Customs got
its authority to exist, the people gave their implied trust that the persons
who would be appointed to run the Bureau would take care of the offices inside
it.”
Comments