Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 263 views

    Chavez vs. Gonzales

    Uploaded by

    Israel Varquez
    1. In 2004, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo won the Philippine presidential election amid allegations of election fraud. In 2005, radio station dzMM aired recordings, known as the "Garci Tapes", of phone conversations between President Arroyo and a COMELEC commissioner about rigging the 2004 election results. 2. In response, the Department of Justice ordered an investigation into media organizations that aired the tapes and the NTC warned stations that airing the tapes could lead to license suspension or revocation. 3. Petitioner Francisco Chavez filed a case arguing these acts violated freedom of expression. The Supreme Court ruled the NTC warning was an unconstitutional prior restraint on protected freedom of

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Chavez vs. Gonzales

    Uploaded by

    Israel Varquez
    263 views3 pages
    1. In 2004, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo won the Philippine presidential election amid allegations of election fraud. In 2005, radio station dzMM aired recordings, known as the "Garci Tapes", of phone conversations between President Arroyo and a COMELEC commissioner about rigging the 2004 election results. 2. In response, the Department of Justice ordered an investigation into media organizations that aired the tapes and the NTC warned stations that airing the tapes could lead to license suspension or revocation. 3. Petitioner Francisco Chavez filed a case arguing these acts violated freedom of expression. The Supreme Court ruled the NTC warning was an unconstitutional prior restraint on protected freedom of

    Original Description:

    Violation of Constitutional Right

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. In 2004, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo won the Philippine presidential election amid allegations of election fraud. In 2005, radio station dzMM aired recordings, known as the "Garci Tapes", of phone conversations between President Arroyo and a COMELEC commissioner about rigging the 2004 election results. 2. In response, the Department of Justice ordered an investigation into media organizations that aired the tapes and the NTC warned stations that airing the tapes could lead to license suspension or revocation. 3. Petitioner Francisco Chavez filed a case arguing these acts violated freedom of expression. The Supreme Court ruled the NTC warning was an unconstitutional prior restraint on protected freedom of

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    263 views3 pages

    Chavez vs. Gonzales

    Uploaded by

    Israel Varquez
    1. In 2004, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo won the Philippine presidential election amid allegations of election fraud. In 2005, radio station dzMM aired recordings, known as the "Garci Tapes", of phone conversations between President Arroyo and a COMELEC commissioner about rigging the 2004 election results. 2. In response, the Department of Justice ordered an investigation into media organizations that aired the tapes and the NTC warned stations that airing the tapes could lead to license suspension or revocation. 3. Petitioner Francisco Chavez filed a case arguing these acts violated freedom of expression. The Supreme Court ruled the NTC warning was an unconstitutional prior restraint on protected freedom of

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    FRANCISCO CHAVEZ vs. RAUL M.

    GONZALES, DoJ Secretary;


    and NTC

    FACTS:
    In 2004, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo won in the
    presidential elections against her nearest rival, Fernando Poe, Jr.
    Sometime in June 2005, dzMM radio station aired the Garci
    Tapes where the parties to the conversation discussed “rigging”
    the results of the 2004 elections to favor President Arroyo. In a
    press conference in Malacañang Palace, a recordings of alleged
    conversations between President Arroyo and COMELEC
    Commissioner Garcillano was identified. Then DoJ Secretary
    Raul Gonzalez ordered the NBI to investigate media
    organizations which aired the Garci Tapes for possible violation of
    Republic Act No. 4200 or the Anti-Wiretapping Law. The NTC, on
    one hand, issued a press release warning radio and television
    stations that those who will air the Garci Tapes will face
    suspension or revocation of their license. Petitioner Francisco I.
    Chavez, as citizen, filed a petition to nullify the “acts, issuances,
    and orders” of the NTC and respondent Gonzalez on the grounds
    that it violated the freedom of expression and the right of the
    people to information on matters of public concern.

    Issue: Whether the NTC warning constitutes an impermissible


    prior restraint on freedom of expression.

    Held: Freedom of expression is the foundation of a free, open and


    democratic society. Freedom of expression is an indispensable
    condition to the exercise of almost all other civil and political
    rights. No society can remain free, open and democratic without
    freedom of expression. Freedom of expression guarantees full,
    spirited, and even contentious discussion of all social, economic
    and political issues. To survive, a free and democratic society
    must zealously safeguard freedom of expression.
    Freedom of expression allows citizens to expose and check
    abuses of public officials. Freedom of expression allows citizens
    to make informed choices of candidates for public office. Freedom
    of expression crystallizes important public policy issues, and
    allows citizens to participate in the discussion and resolution of
    such issues. Freedom of expression allows the competition of
    ideas, the clash of claims and counterclaims, from which the truth
    will likely emerge. Freedom of expression allows the airing of
    social grievances, mitigating sudden eruptions of violence from
    marginalized groups who otherwise would not be heard by
    government. Freedom of expression provides a civilized way of
    engagement among political, ideological, religious or ethnic
    opponents for if one cannot use his tongue to argue, he might use
    his fist instead.
    Section 4, Article III of the Constitution prohibits the enactment of
    any law curtailing freedom of expression:
    “No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of
    expression, or the press, or the right of the people peaceably to
    assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.”
    Thus, the rule is that expression is not subject to any prior
    restraint or censorship because the Constitution commands that
    freedom of expression shall not be abridged. Over time, however,
    courts have carved out narrow and well defined exceptions to this
    rule out of necessity.
    Exceptions:
    The exceptions, when expression may be subject to prior
    restraint, apply in this jurisdiction to only four categories of
    expression namely:
    1. pornography,
    2. false or misleading advertisement,
    3. advocacy of imminent lawless action, and
    4. danger to national security.
    All other expression is not subject to prior restraint. The history of
    press freedom has been a constant struggle against the censor
    whose weapon is the suspension or cancellation of licenses to
    publish or broadcast. The NTC warning resurrects the weapon of
    the censor. In sum, the NTC press release constitutes an
    unconstitutional prior restraint on protected expression. There can
    be no content-based prior restraint on protected expression. This
    rule has no exception.v

    You might also like