Journalist and Libel

THE best way to harass or silence a journalist is to file imaginary cases of libel. By this a working newsman think twice before proceeding to his regular schedule of work.

He thinks of the ridicule, the anguish and disturbance caused to him by a libel case and the money he would spend to defend himself.

A lot of anxieties develop in his mind that would even result to loss of sleep.

He feels alone and worries so much about the prospect of losing his case and the future of his family.

Yes, that was long time ago when many men and women engaged in the practice of journalism do not know so much about libel cases.

As the years go by, however, people in the media, by University study, self education and research, understand better their position and know so much the rudiments of the profession.

A libel case is like an old favorite song that finds its way in the hearts of people because of its nice rhythm and poetic words.

It is the favorite song of government workers, politicians and executives to stop criticism leveled against them.

In short, it is a tactic designed to frighten the people who are just exercising press freedom.

What these government servants do not know is that the matter is sugar to the profession and therefore, makes it sweater and better as time goes on.

Another thing is they do not know that as government employees, they are public property and, therefore, subject to criticism at all times.

People who are onion-skinned have no place in the public service.

A journalist is a very careful person because his works are reflected in prints.

Before writing a news story, he thinks so much about how it would be accepted by the public. He studies his position and make sure he does not step on the toes of some people.

By the time the story hits the streets, everything had been ironed out and safe. This is so because journalists have no intention whatsoever to hurt anyone.

AS a media practitioner myself, I find libel cases much better and friendlier than being fired at, by an assassin.

I embrace the objective of the plaintiff in resorting to a more humane and civilized way to air a grievance.

In this manner, we know our enemies in the open court and things are discussed intelligently.

Justice, therefore, is accorded to a beleaguered newsman and no matter what, one sighs with relief to know he was given a chance.

I had more than four dozens of libel cases during my time and surely they made me a celebrity of sort.

Of course, we do not enjoy fighting in court with some people but the cases, whether we like it or not, would force us standing straight in fighting position.

We cannot run away and of all things that we despise so much is to apologize. That is the poorest decision a newsman could think to end all fears.

Some newsmen sometimes may have used libelous materials especially when very necessary to describe a situation.

One thing, however, is there is no malice attached. Stories are straight news and information as it happened.

To the words of a good friend, the famous international trial lawyer then Gov. Bono Adaza, malice is the most difficult thing to prove in any libel case.

Right because in the first place, there is no malice whatsoever. It exists only in the minds of people who want media to dance with their music. Being devoid of malice as an element, a libel case cannot prosper.

Notwithstanding the better advantage of media people in libel cases, I noticed more and more cases are being filed by a lot of people.

From Manila and elsewhere in the Visayas and Mindanao, more newsmen are summoned by the courts to answer complaints. I hope these will end all assassinations in the process.

To my colleagues, therefore, I urge you to be strong and determined to fight the enemies of press freedom.

Let us prove to them we are not statues much less men who follow their wishes.

Our theories, convictions and principles must prevail.

Let press freedom ring!