Cebu Citizens-Press Council (CCPC) statement on arrest of Iriga reporter
The case of Jose Rizal “Jores” Pajares could’ve been handled by the Iriga City, Camarines Sur police with more caution, less aggressiveness as the personal information handled by the Radyo Natin reporter falls under the No. 2 exception of Data Privacy Act (DPA) of 2012: “personal information processed for journalistic … purposes, subject to applicable laws.”
Would the office protocol of the police, requiring prior permission of the
police chief, fall under “applicable laws” in the exception to the rule? We doubt if the reporter and the arresting officer were sure about that. The general rule is specific while the exception is broad: “subject to applicable laws.”
The outcry of some media organizations states only the general rule of the DPA. The police reply does not tackle media’s basis for condemning the arrest, let alone the exception to the general rule. An inquiry into the incident must include clarification of the law.
Would the police requirement of prior permission qualify as exception to journalists’ work protected by the DPA?
The DPA specifies (in Section 7) “Protection Afforded to Journalists and
their Sources” but it also provides penalties on persons who violate “knowingly and unknowingly.” Absence of malice here won’t help the violator, journalist or not.
But even as the legal rule is sorted out, media deserves to know from the police
how the news reporter deserved the brash and aggressive action from them. That is
important for the continuing relations between the reporters and the law enforcers they cover.