Friday, June 20, 2008 Ombud to rule on SAL release soon By Jujemay G. Awit Sun.Star Staff Reporter
HE Office of the Ombudsman-Visayas wants balance in providing information—balance between transparency and the protection of a person’s privacy.
This was the reason that Deputy Ombudsman Pelagio Apostol gave members of the media and the Cebu Citizens-Press Council (CCPC) yesterday, in holding off the release of the statements of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALNs) of government officials.
The anti-graft office is centralized, he said.
Representatives from both the Cebu Daily News and Sun.Star Cebu both asked for reasons behind the hold-off when formal requests were made.
Guidelines
“We need guidelines from Manila whether we can already release the (SALNs),” said Apostol.
He did mention the guideline that allows the release of the SALNs to the media for transparency’s sake. But the guideline was in 2002 yet.
Sun.Star Cebu editor-in-chief Pachico Seares, also CCPC executive director, pointed out that if there are new policies, the Visayas ombudsman would surely be informed of them. Since there is a standing policy that allows the release of SALNs, then these should have been released already.
The SALNs were due on April 30.
Apostol, however, explained that out of respect to Tanodbayan Merceditas Gutierrez, the lower office should seek formal clearance.
He promised an answer within 10 days.
Cebu Regional Trial Court (RTC) Judge Meinrado Paredes of Branch 13 noted that the SALN is important for public information.
“If you become strict in the release of the SALNs, you are discouraging the filing of Republic Act 1379 cases from the people,” said Paredes.
RA 1379 forfeits in favor of the state any property found to have been unlawfully acquired by any public officer or employee.
Regional State Prosecutor Fernando Gubalane, however, said he understood Apostol’s apprehensions in the release of the SALNs and other information to the media.
He narrated an incident of erroneous reporting that resulted to the transfer of one employee from the Cebu City Prosecutor’s Office. He was an assistant city prosecutor then.
The CCPC, in its second quarterly meeting yesterday, gave journalists a venue to air their views on covering the justice beat, including access to information. Representatives from the five local newspapers attended, as well as members of the Kapisanan ng mga Brodkasters ng Pilipinas.
Sources in the justice beat were also given a chance to air their side.
The guest speakers were Deputy Ombudsman Apostol; Judge Paredes, representing the RTC; Judge Francisco Seville, representing the Municipal Trial Court in Cities;
Provincial Prosecutor Pepita Jane Petralba and Assistant Cebu City Prosecutor Maria Luisa Ratilla, representing the provincial and city prosecutor’s offices, respectively.
Petralba did not have a lot of explaining to do. Her office has always been open to the media.
Ratilla, for her part, explained that records involving inquest proceedings, for one, are available for photocopying since these involve arrested persons whose capture may have already been covered by the media.
Prosecutors are more particular about records involving complaints under preliminary investigation, because they could have been “frivolous” complaints only meant to embarrass or damage someone’s reputation.
MOA
Judge Seville suggested that the media sign a memorandum of agreement with the Regional Court Administrator’s Office for easy access to information involving the
courts.
Judge Paredes, in his presentation, advised the media to invoke Section 7, Article 3 of the Constitution, which provides, “The right of the people to information on matters
of public concern shall be recognized.”
“Access to official records and those documents and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions or decisions, as well as to government research data used as basis for policy development shall be afforded to citizens, subject to such limitations as may be provided by law,” the judge pointed out.
Sun.Star Cebu reporter Karlon Rama also pointed out Section 5 (e) of Republic Act 6770, or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials, a law that the Office of the Ombudsman is tasked to uphold. It declares it a “duty” of public officials and employees to “make documents accessible to the public.”
The provision continues: “All public documents must be made accessible to and readily available for inspection by the public within reasonable working hours.”
Rama spoke in behalf of justice beat reporters about the difficulties they’ve encountered in accessing public information.
“Here, unlike the governance beat, you don’t have politicians following you hoping to be interviewed and to get free print, radio or television airtime. Unlike the police beat, you don’t have colonels presenting suspects in orange detainees’ T-shirts declaring how brilliant they were in carrying out the arrest,” Rama said.
“Here, people don’t talk even if they should—not unless they want to.”
Justice journalists’ concern
* It is difficult to gain access to information and documents, even those that are considered public records, including the Statement of Assets and Liabilities of public officials, from the Office of the Ombudsman-Visayas, an office that is supposed to promote transparency.
* Policies on access to non-restricted court records vary. Some judges allow reporters to photocopy records, while others don’t even allow a read-through.
* Policies on access to court trials vary. Section 2 of Rule 135 of the Rules of Court provides for the proceedings of the court to be made public. However, the court, at its discretion, can decide to exclude the public from the proceedings for whatever reason. Photographers are also prohibited from taking photos during court trials.
* Reporters are called to appear as witnesses in cases.
* Libel cases are filed against reporters to compel them to testify in one party’s favor in exchange for the dropping of the libel cases against them. These libel cases are
filed in court even if the evidence is weak and the cases are clearly meant just to harass journalists.
* Reporters (who are made witnesses in proceedings at the courts) are browbeaten by lawyers. They are made to recall details of events that occurred years ago.
News sources’ suggestions
l Cebu City Regional Trial Court Branch 13 Judge Meinrado Paredes advised reporters to invoke Section 7, Article 3 of the Constitution, which provides for the right of the people to information on maters of public concern, subject to limitations provided by law. He also advised the media to bring to the attention of the Executive Judge their difficulty in gaining access to information and documents. If he refuses or declines, Paredes said the media could write the Regional Court Administration Office or RCAO in Lapu-Lapu City.
l Municipal Trial Court in Cities Branch 7 Presiding Judge Francisco Seville advised the media to have a memorandum of agreement with the RCAO so they will have no difficulty gaining access to documents and information.
l On the varying policies on access to court trials and records, Judge Paredes suggested that the Executive Judge call a meeting of judges to come up with a uniform procedure on access.
l On the calling of reporters to appear as witnesses, Paredes suggested that reporters politely decline on the ground that they have no personal knowledge on the matters they are called to testify. They may also invoke the gag rule, that is, say that they cannot disclose their sources. If the judge commits grave abuse of discretion, the reporter may file a petition for certiorari with injunction. But if the reporter is forced to testify under pain of contempt, then he is advised to just tell the truth and be an impartial witness.
l On the filing of libel cases to compel reporters to testify in one party’s favor in exchange for the dropping of the libel cases against them, Paredes suggested filing a motion to dismiss or demurrer to evidence if the evidence is weak. If there is grave abuse of discretion, he recommended filing a petition for certiorari with injunction. And if one is acquitted because the case against him was grossly unfounded, the judge said one could file a civil case for malicious prosecution.
l On the browbeating of witnesses by lawyers, Paredes suggested that reporters politely ask that they be given the opportunity to be represented by counsel or to seek the advice of counsel. If asked about the details of events that occurred long ago, reporters can simply say they do not recall these details.
l Deputy Ombudsman Pelagio Apostol of the Office of the Ombudsman-Visayas asked for time to get clearance from the Manila office for the release of the Statements of Assets and Liabilities.
