Contact Details

Rm. N-411, House of Representatives, Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines
+63 2 931 5497, +63 2 931 5001 local 7370

Press Statements

Rappler’s chief executive officer Maria Ressa and Rey Santos, Jr. were convicted of a clearly prescribed offense of cyber libel when the trial judge errantly extended the prescriptive period of cyber libel by invoking the almost century old Act No. 3326, instead of applying the one-year prescription under Art. 80 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC). 

Act No. 3326 provides for the prescription of offenses defined by special penal laws based on the severity of the impossable penalty, in which case cyber libel is supposed to prescribe in 12 years since its penalty is imprisonment for six (6) or more.

Press Statements

The Philippine Deposit Receipts (PDRs) of ABS-CBN which are issued to foreign investors are completely compliant with the Constitution, and do not constitute a scheme to circumvent the constitutional requirement on 100% Filipino ownership and management of mass media enterprises.

The criticism that PDRs achieved indirectly what the Constitution directly prohibits, is utterly baseless speculation. 

Press Statements

Press freedom received another devastating blow from the improvident and barren conviction of Rappler’s Maria Ressa for alleged commission of cyber libel even before it was criminalized, and the prosecution for which has long proscribed.

Since cyber libel is libel defined under the. Revised Penal Code (RPC) committed through a computer system, the prescription of cyber libel is one year as provided for in Article 90 of the RPC.

Press Statements

The issuance of Philippine Deposit Receipts (PDRs) by media networks like ABS-CBN Corporation does not violate the constitutional requirement of 100% Filipino ownership and management of mass media.

PDRs are not vested with voting rights and full beneficial ownership to which shares of stock are entitled.

Press Statements

1. When the 1935, 1973 and 1987 Constitution were drafted and ratified, the concept and fact of some Filipinos having dual citizenships were already in existence and known, particularly joint Filipino and American citizenships due to the concurrence of the doctrines of jus sanguines and jus soli.

With respect to the requirement of Filipino capitalization, management and ownership of corporations, including those on mass media, the Constitution does not distinguish between a Filipino of single citizenship and a Filipino of dual citizenship.