Title
Babst vs. National Intelligence Board
Case
G.R. No. L-62992
Decision Date
Sep 28, 1984
Journalists challenged military interrogations and libel suits as threats to press freedom; Court dismissed, citing mootness and proper forums.

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-62992)

Facts:

  • Parties
    • Petitioners: Arlene Babst, Odette Alcantara, Ceres P. Doyo, Jo-Ann Q. Maglipon, Domini Torrevillas-Suarez, Lorna Kalaw-Tirol, Cielo Buenaventura, Sylvia Mayuga, Sheila S. Coronel, et al., all media practitioners (columnists, feature writers, reporters).
    • Respondents: National Intelligence Board (NIB) Special Committee No. 2 (predominantly AFP officers, incl. Brig. Gen. Wilfredo Estrada (Ret.) as chairman), plus Brig. Gen. Artemio Tadiar, Jr., and Gen. Fabian Ver (Director General, NIB).
  • Underlying Events
    • Since July 1980, several petitioners received “invitations” (styled subpoenas) by military authorities to appear for “dialogues”/interrogations on their publications, beliefs, associations, and private lives.
    • Typical letter (Dec 20, 1982) to Arlene Babst: summoned to Fort Bonifacio on Dec 22, with warning that failure to appear “shall be considered as a waiver” and committee “will be constrained to proceed in accordance with law.”
    • On Feb 9, 1983, Brig. Gen. Tadiar filed a libel complaint (P10 million claimed damages) against Torrevillas-Suarez and Doyo before the City Fiscal, later filed with the RTC.
  • Petition and Reliefs Sought
    • Original petition (Jan 25, 1983) for prohibition with preliminary injunction to bar respondents from:
      • Issuing further “subpoenas”/“invitations” or interrogating petitioners;
      • Filing libel suits on matters subject to NIB inquiry.
    • Amended and supplemental petition (Mar 3, 1983) added allegations of intimidation by Tadiar’s libel suit and sought to prohibit same.
  • Respondents’ Position and Termination of Proceedings
    • Respondents contended invitations were voluntary dialogues, not compulsory subpoenas, and that no jurisdictional overreach occurred.
    • They argued libel suit by Tadiar was in his personal capacity and not pending before NIB.
    • On Jan 19, 1983, NIB Chairman Ver ordered termination of Special Committee No. 2’s proceedings, rendering interrogations moot.

Issues:

  • Did the NIB Special Committee’s letters of invitation and interrogations violate petitioners’ constitutional rights to free expression, free press, and personal liberty?
  • Was the issuance of said invitations and interrogations within the jurisdiction of the NIB or an abuse of discretion warranting prohibition?
  • Is the filing (or threatened filing) of libel suits by Brig. Gen. Tadiar on matters previously inquired into by the NIB subject to prohibition or injunctive relief?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.