On Tuesday, a group of lawmakers allied with the administration of President Rodrigo Duterte moved to amend Constitutional amendments protecting free speech.
In its current form, the Constitution protects “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.”
The subcommittee proposed adding the word “responsible” before “speech” in the article.
While the proposal was made by a subcommittee proposing constitutional forms in the House of Representatives, Deputy Speaker Fredenil Castro said that proposal to add “responsible” didn’t actually come from them.
So where did it come from? No other than the Office of the President.
“It (proposed amendment) did not come from the subcommittee. It was from the Presidential Committee on Human Rights secretariat,” Castro said in an interview on ANC’s Early Edition.
“This time, if you go around, there is so much abuse of this freedom. They think it is unrestrained. Therefore, we propose the insertion of that phrase,” Castro said during the House Committee on Constitutional Amendments’ discussions on charter change earlier this week.
However, according to a report in ABS-CBN News, presidential spokesperson Harry Roque did not confirm if it was the executive branch that pushed for the constitutional amendment, which has been viewed as an attempt to curtail freedom of speech and the press.
“I cannot confirm that because it certainly did not come from my office,” Roque said in a press conference in Albay.
Many have sounded the alarm over the proposed insertion of “responsible” in the article.
Former Solicitor General Florin Hilbay said inserting the word “responsible” to the free speech clause in the Constitution is “incompatible with our current jurisprudence and with the idea of freedom of speech and of the press.”
“The danger of inserting the word responsible is you’re giving the state the power to define what is ‘responsibility.’ There is an inherent conflict there because if the government gets to define what is responsible speech, then they have the basic control over the amount of criticism they can get,” Hilbay told ANC’s Early Edition.
“The function of the media is to put critical light on public officials, the way they conduct themselves, the way they conduct public functions. It doesn’t go the other way around,” he said.
Hilbay, who teaches constitutional law at the University of the Philippines, said the proposed insertion is unnecessary as there are enough laws to police possible abuses in the right to free speech.
The proposed amendment came a day after the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) decided to revoke the business registration of news website Rappler, who aggressively covers — and is seen as critical of — the Duterte administration.
Rappler believes the SEC move is a form of intimidation.
The Duterte administration claims it had nothing to do with the SEC’s moves but many doubt this is true considering that subpoenas were issued summoning Rappler CEO Maria Ressa and former Rappler investigative reporter Reynaldo Santos Jr., over an investigative story published over six years ago.
Aside from Rappler, Duterte has lashed out at other media outlets like the Philippine Daily Inquirer, which was recently sold to his friend, billionaire Ramon Ang, president of the San Miguel Corporation.
He’s also threatened to block the franchise renewal of broadcasting giant ABS-CBN News.
Supporters of the administration argue that the moves against Rappler are purely legal, and not about freedom of speech.
First, their license gets revoked, the government moves to re-define free speech, then a criminal investigation is opened into Rappler.
Not politically motivated? Hmmm.
Later today, journalists will hold a protest in Quezon City at 6pm to call on the public to support freedom of speech and press freedom.
