THE leadership of the House of Representatives yesterday belied the claim that Speaker Martin Romualdez has spent P1.8 billion in just a year for his trips.
The claim was made by one the hosts of Sonshine Media Network International (SMNI) whose lawyers, during a hearing, invoked “freedom of the press” in defending the network from lawmakers who accused it of being a purveyor of fake news and red-tagging.
House Secretary General Reginald Velasco told the hearing of House committee on legislative franchises that the travel expenses incurred by the Speaker, other lawmakers and House officials from January 2023 to October 2023 amounted to only P39.6 million.
Velasco, citing the House’s financial reports on foreign travel, said the Office of the Speaker’s total expenses from January to October this year was only P4,347,712.58 while all other congressmen and the House secretariat who are on official trips spent P35,257,411.01 for the same period.
On SMNI’s “Laban Kasama ng Bayan” program, host Jeffrey Celis alleged that a “source” in Congress told him that Romualdez spent P1.8 billion for travel in just a year, prompting Quezon Rep. David Suarez to call for an inquiry.
It was in the same network that former president Rodrigo Duterte lambasted the House leadership for stripping his daughter Vice President Sara Duterte of confidential funds under the proposed P5.768-trillion national budget for 2024.
Surigao del Sur Rep. Johnny Pimentel said that since the figure is a far cry from the host’s claim, SMNI has to explain why it should not be held liable for violating the provisions of its legislative franchise by giving “wrong reports to the public or deliberately false information.”
Mark Tolentino, legal counsel of Swara Sug Media Corporation which owns SMNI, invoked the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence on freedom of the press and freedom expression, but lawmakers reminded him and fellow SMNI lawyer, former Iloilo Rep. Rolex Suplico, that such freedoms are definitely not “absolute.”
Tolentino also disclosed that SMNI is no longer owned by Davao-based religious group leader Pastor Apollo C. Quiboloy who is wanted in the United States for alleged rape, human trafficking, exploitation of power and physical abuse.
“We consider him as a honorary chairman but he’s not part of the corporate officers, his name is not part of the corporate papers. He’s not a stockholder of SMNI or Swara Sug Media Corporation,” said the lawyer.
FREEDOM OF THE PRESS
Tolentino said there was no deliberate spreading of false information because the hosts, Celiz and former undersecretary Lorraine Badoy who worked for the Duterte administration, were not accusing Romualdez of spending P1.8 billion on trips as they were merely asking a question during the TV program.
“Freedom of the press and freedom of expression is one of the highest forms of constitutional right in our Philippine constitution,” he said, while citing the presumption of good faith under the Civil Code. “So, the one who (accuses) bad faith on the part of SMNI, the one who alleged that there is violation of Republic Act 11422 (SMNI franchise law), should be the one to prove it, because we are presumed innocent.”
Panel chair Parañaque Rep. Gustavo Tambunting said that while free speech and press freedom are constitutional rights, the allocation of TV and radio frequencies is not a guaranteed right since only Congress can grant it.
“It is subject to the authority of Congress over the grant, amendments, extension or revocation of legislative franchises. TV and radio frequencies are part of the national patrimony and are owned by the state. No private entity has any claim or right over TV and radio frequency allocations,” he said. “It is authorized to exercise its oversight function to determine whether or not the franchise grantees faithfully comply with the terms and conditions of its franchise.”
Suarez reminded SMNI that a responsible media practitioner “would first validate that information before they go out on public.” He said the hosts were not really asking a question because if they really wanted to, all they had to do was ask the Office of the Speaker to validate the information they received from an unnamed source.
“That means that your allegation or the claim of your program hosts that the Speaker alone incurred a P1.8-billion travel expense is a lie,” said the Quezon lawmaker.
Tolentino said the SMNI also has a disclaimer that the statements made by the anchors do not necessarily reflect the network’s official stand but Pimentel reminded him that a franchise holder is still bound “by the provisions stated in your franchise.”
“In short it is very clear na ginamit lang ‘yung SMNI (that SMNI was just used) to have a smear campaign against Congress,” Pimentel said.
Suplico, for his part, said the network “cannot tell the anchors what to say.”
“I just wanted to point out that we cannot dictate on our anchors what questions to ask how to ask it, when to ask it. In the same manner if there are guests here, we cannot also tell the guests to answer this way or that way. they exercise a certain degree of independence,” he said.
BROADCAST CODE
The Kapisanan ng Broadcaster ng Pilipinas (KBP) revealed that SMNI has not sent any of its anchors to seminars on responsible broadcasting, a requirement for accreditation of broadcast journalists.
KBP vice president for legal and Regulatory Compliance Group Rudolph Jularbal said SMNI violated the rule which requires all broadcasters of its member-networks to undergo seminar on the Broadcast Code of the Philippines.
When asked by Antipolo City Rep. Romeo Acop if SMNI followed the provisions of the KBP Code of Conduct, Jularbal replied: “Your Honor, we beg your indulgence, but in the context of what has been presented and of which I am informed this hearing, the network is lacking in observance of the Code of Conduct.”
The franchise committee also tackled two resolutions of the Makabayan bloc: one on alleged fake news peddling and baseless red-tagging of individuals, groups, and organizations and another on alleged fake news peddling, baseless red-tagging, and grave threats against Rep. France Castro (PL, ACT) of the Makabayan bloc by Duterte and SMNI.
“There is free speech, then there is vile speech. In these deliberations, let us make it so that the evidence that SMNI is a purveyor of the latter comes out, and so that its accountability under the laws is demonstrated,” said Castro who earlier sued the ex-president before the Quezon City Prosecutor’s Office.
Rep. Raoul Manuel (PL, Kabataan), another member of the Makabayan bloc, said “SMNI, its hosts, and its shows have repeatedly engaged in acts of dissemination of fake news and malicious red-tagging.”
“It habitually engages in the reporting as news of misleading claims, deliberately disseminating false information, willful misrepresentation, wild accusations, and red tagging against the opposition, critics, and officials of the government in violation of the terms of its legislative franchise and to the detriment of public interest,” he said.
