Case Summary (G.R. No. 212670)
MTRCB Proceedings and Sanctions
MTRCB’s Legal Counsel found probable cause under PD 1986, Section 3(c), and initiated formal adjudication. TV5 internally required the hosts to explain their comments. The Tulfos apologized; TV5 imposed a three-episode suspension. Meanwhile, MTRCB’s Hearing and Adjudication Committee held a preliminary hearing, issued a 20-day preventive suspension order, and on May 30, 2012, suspended “T3” for three months, imposed a ₱100,000 fine, and placed the show on probation per episode after suspension.
Court of Appeals Ruling
TV5 obtained a TRO and preliminary injunction from the Court of Appeals, which later held (March 7, 2013) that:
- MTRCB has statutory authority to regulate TV content;
- The Tulfos’ remarks were ordinary threats, not indecent, defamatory, or “fighting words” endangering public order;
- TV5 had exercised proper self-regulation under RA 7831; and
- MTRCB sanctions constituted unwarranted prior restraint on speech.
The Court of Appeals set aside the MTRCB decision and denied reconsideration on May 15, 2014.
Issue Before the Supreme Court
Whether MTRCB’s determination that the Tulfo brothers’ utterances violated PD 1986, Section 3(c) fell within the Board’s power to censor content that is “immoral, indecent, contrary to law and/or good customs…or with a dangerous tendency to encourage…violence.”
Supreme Court’s Analysis on MTRCB’s Authority
The Supreme Court reaffirmed that under PD 1986, Section 3(b), MTRCB may screen and review all television programs. Section 3(c) empowers it to delete or prohibit content deemed objectionable by “contemporary Filipino cultural values.” Absent a clear exception in the law, MTRCB’s power encompasses religious, public affairs, and entertainment programming alike.
Application of Free Speech Principles
Relying on the 1987 Constitution’s hostility to prior restraints, the Court applied Iglesia ni Cristo v. CA. Any censorship bears a presumption of invalidity, and the MTRCB must shoulder the burden to justify restrictions. Criticism of public or private figures, even if coarse or offensive, is protected unless it poses a clear and present danger to public order.
Definition and Limits of “Fighting Words”
“Fighting words” are those that by their utterance inflict injury or provoke immediate breach of the peace. Citing Soriano v. Laguardia and U.S. precedent in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, the Court held that the Tulfos’ threats lacked the capacity to incite imminent violence or public unrest. Personal insults between private individuals, no matter how profane, remain protected speech absent a demonstrated risk to state security or public order.
Self-Regulation under RA 7831 and Its Impact on Penal
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 212670)
Facts
- T3 Kapatid Sagot Kita (“T3”) was a weekday public‐affairs program on TV5 (5:15–5:45 PM), hosted by the Tulfo brothers (Raffy, Erwin, Ben), focusing on exposing abuse and scams.
- On May 7, 2012, the Tulfos broadcast comments (“Subject Utterances”) threatening Raymart Santiago and Claudine Barretto for allegedly mauling their brother Ramon.
- MTRCB special agents filed an incident report alleging that the hosts’ remarks were indecent and had a dangerous tendency to encourage violence or crime.
- The MTRCB Chief Legal Counsel found probable cause under Section 3(c) of PD 1986 and recommended formal adjudication; summonses were issued to TV5 and its Airtime Management head.
MTRCB Adjudication
- TV5 conducted its own internal show‐cause proceedings; the Tulfos apologized and were initially suspended for three episodes.
- May 9, 2012: MTRCB’s Legal Counsel filed a formal complaint, prompting a preliminary hearing.
- May 10, 2012: MTRCB Hearing and Adjudication Committee issued a 20‐day preventive suspension against T3.
- May 14, 2012: Respondents were ordered to file a Position Paper by May 21.
- May 30, 2012: The Committee’s Decision suspended T3 for three months, imposed a ₱100,000 fine, and placed the show on probation/per‐episode permit after suspension.
TV5’s Recourse and Supreme Court Intervention
- May 11, 2012: TV5 f