In an interview on ABS-CBN News Channel yesterday, Senate President Vicente “Tito” Sotto has labeled the controversial Pepsi Paloma articles that The Philippine Daily Inquirer took down from its website as “the original fake news.”
In his interview with journalist Tina Monzon-Palma, Sotto also asked: “What business does it [the articles] have in a real, looked up [to] newspaper?”
Sotto requested the Inquirer to take down the articles in a letter sent in May to its president and chairman, Paolo Prieto. Sotto’s request came to light after writer Rodel Rodis posted the senator’s letter on the latter’s Facebook page.
Rodis wrote two of the controversial articles: “The Rape of Pepsi Paloma” and “Was Pepsi Paloma murdered?” While writer Totel de Jesus wrote the other one titled, “Tito Sotto denies whitewashing Pepsi Paloma rape case.”
Read: Inquirer reporters up in arms after controversial articles in rape case were removed from website
The stories were about the late actress Pepsi Paloma who filed a case against Sotto, his brother Vic, and their friends Joey de Leon and the late Richie D’Horsey, for allegedly raping her in 1982. All four men are known comedians in the Philippines.
Three years after the alleged rape, Paloma died in an apparent suicide.
In Sotto’s interview last night, Sotto said the articles were a type of “disinformation.”
He said: “To me, once the people know what is true, they’ll see that it is not. So I have decided to brush them aside and not pay attention to this type of disinformation. Those are the original fake news.”
Sotto also said he has chosen to move on from the controversy. He tells Monzon-Palma: “I no longer pay attention to it. If you did not mention it, I would not have been reminded.”
Meanwhile, Sotto is once again in the midst of an internet maelstrom. During a senate discussion of the proposed Safe Streets Act on Wednesday, he asked the bill’s author, Risa Hontiveros: “Are we not limiting the act of harassment when it’s committed on streets and public spaces by including the qualifier, ‘gender-based’?
In his discussion with Hontiveros, Sotto gave an example: “Perhaps we can avoid that because for instance, just to set an example: [I]n an alley, a straight guy touched the groin of another straight guy who just happened to pass by just to vex him and not because of the person’s SOGIE [gender preference]. In this bill, would the offender be held liable?”
He continues: “For example, the person is just doing it as a form of a joke, he touched the other person, will he be liable? You [Hontiveros] said yes, the answer I think is no.”
Hontiveros answered that the male victim in Sotto’s hypothetical scenario can file a case against the other man. She also said: “A woman who has been touched by a guy, we don’t think of it as a joke, because that truly makes women feel unsafe.”
The Safe Streets Act is, based on its official description, “an act defining gender-based street and public spaces harassment.”
The act penalizes against “unwanted comments, gestures, and actions forced on a person in a public place without their consent and is directed at them because of their actual or perceived sex, gender, gender expression, or sexual orientation and identity.”
The actions include, among others, “following, flashing, public masturbation, groping, and stalking.”
Many netizens didn’t take kindly to Sotto’s line of questioning, unaware that he was talking about the hypothetical scenario where a straight man was touched by another straight man in order to vex him.
Wrote @kishaberinguela: “Tito Sotto, you are a shame to mankind. I’ve personally experienced that ‘accidental groping’ and I tell you that this is a frustrating excuse to harass and violate human rights.”
When I said that our Senate President is shit…I meant it.
Tito Sotto, you are a shame to mankind. I’ve personally experienced that “nahipuan lang” and I tell you this is just a frustrating excuse to harass and violate women’s rights.
You are a sad excuse for a human being. https://t.co/o5mW5nlsJW
— Kisha Beringuela (@kishaberinguela) August 2, 2018
User @beareyno wrote that molestation is a crime.
“For example, yung sinabi ko na binibiro lang, hinipuan na ganun, will they be liable? You (to @risahontiveros) said yes, the answer I think is NO.”
-Senate President Tito Sotto on the Safe Streets and Public Spaces BillMolestation is not a joke. It’s a crime. pic.twitter.com/f0hH13NIEo
— Miranda🌹 (@beareyno) August 1, 2018
Another user @vinceliban, reminded Sotto that “sexual harassment is not a joke.”
┳┻|
┻┳|
┳┻| psst! tito sotto!
┻┳|
┳┻|
┻┳|
┳┻|
┻┳|
┳┻|
┻┳|
┳┻|
┻┳|
┳┻| _
┻┳| •.•) sexual harassment
┳┻|⊂ﾉ is not a joke.
┻┳| rape is not a joke.
┳┻| stop being a clown
┻┳| & be a fucking
┳┻| senator!— Vince Liban; 🏳️🌈 (@vinceliban) August 2, 2018
On the other hand, @irisvicencio called him “a disgusting enabler.”
“Eh paano yung nahipuan lang?” – Senate president Tito Sotto
With the power and ability to protect women from harassment, molestation, and rape- Sen. Sotto chose to protect those that harass, molest, and rape.
We have a disgusting enabler running our government, wtf?
— Iris Vicencio (@irisvicencio) August 2, 2018
What are your thoughts on this controversy? Share it by tweeting to @CoconutsManila.
Reader Interactions