Fiscal’s office asked to put to trial 2 tabloids over ‘obscene’ serials

Friday, December 16, 2011

THE Cebu City Anti-Indency Board (Ccaib) asked the Office of the Cebu Provincial Prosecutor last Wednesday to review its resolution, dismissing the obscenity complaints against two local tabloids accused of publishing columns that allegedly contained “sexually suggestive” languages.

The board wants the prosecutor’s office to issue a new resolution, finding probable cause to hold the respondents for trial for allegedly violating Article 201 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Presidential Decree 969, and City Ordinance 1408, for allowing the publications of the allegedly obscene columns.

Have something to report? Tell us in text, photos or videos.

“There is no perfect definition of obscenity. What may be obscene to one person may not obscene to another,” the board said in its motion for reconsideration.

Named respondents in separate charges were Juanito Jabat, Banat News publisher; Miguel Belmonte, Banat News president; writer Cindy Jones; Michelle So, Sun.Star Superbalita editor-in- chief; Julius G. Neri Jr., Sun.Star Publishing Inc. president and general manager; and writer Fred Fuentes Monternel.

The Ccaib said the two local tabloids printed serials that were allegedly offensive and should be stopped “at all cost” because the tabloids are accessible to the public, including minor.

The board was referring to “From Junquera with Love” of Superbalita and “Wildflower” of Banat News.

‘Redeeming social values’

Angelo Fornolles, counsel for Superbalita, denied the serials were obscene. “Rather, they posses serious literary value with moral lessons, and at time, rather entertain or amuse,” he said.

Superbalita’s “From Junquera with Love” consisted of “fictional short stories that are serialized with each series” on separate publication dates, he said.

Banat News also denied the charges, arguing the complaint ought to be dismissed for insufficient evidence.

The tabloid’s counsel argued that the Ccaib concluded that the serials were indecent and obscene without providing any legal and factual basis.

“In light of all these factors in our contextual analysis both weigh heavily in favor of a finding that the material is not pornographic, indecent or obscene,” Collantes said in his resolution.

He also said Superbalita and Banat News also publish hard news, current events, sports, editorial columns, among others.

The prosecutor said the serials, when taken as a whole, have “serious literary work with redeeming social values.”

Ccaib said Collantes erred in finding that the dominant theme of the serials had redeeming value.

It argued that the determination of what is obscene is “essentially a judicial question best left to the province of the judiciary.”

“It is not correct for the public prosecutor to apply his own understanding on the issue of whether or not the publication is indeed obscene,” the board.

It sought the inhibition of Collantes and the creation of a panel of prosecutors that will handle its motion.

Ignored letters

In a related development, Vice Gov. Agnes Magpale said the Province wouldn’t have come up with an anti-indecency ordinance had the two tabloids not ignored its letters asking to tone down the sex in their serials.

Magpale said the letters went “largely ignored” and the sexual content in the publications allegedly increased in magnitude over time.

“There really is a need for it (the ordinance) and the general public wants it. I have surveys that confirm that,” she said.

Media’s opposition has been strong both to the first draft–titled the anti-tabloid ordinance–and to the revised version of the measure that is currently pending in the committee-level at the Provincial Board, which Magpale chairs.

In a statement last week, the Cebu Citizens-Press Council (CCPC) said the two provisions will give unconstitutional powers to the proposed Anti-Obscenity Board.

Legal power

Sections 9(b) and 9(c) of the would-be provincial law gives the board power to inspect and investigate all materials to see if these are not obscene and to recommend to the governor “the confiscation or forfeiture of any and all printed or written materials” if these are found to be obscene.

The multi-sectoral CCPC said the power to inspect and seize belongs solely to the court, which is allowed to exercise it only after a proper hearing.

“Inspection, investigation, and confiscation before a judicial determination of obscenity constitutes prior restraint and infringes due process on property rights,” CCPC said.

Magpale, in the interview, said she is open to further engagements to insure a more polished version ordinance, one that “adequately protects the public” and, at the same time, one that does not make media feel its rights are being infringed.

“The measure doesn’t intend to confiscate all the newspapers in the market because it is reported to have indecent content; it only intends to take a sample for confirmation,” she said.