Case Summary (G.R. No. 210088)
Procedural History
Petitioners filed suit for damages and sought preliminary injunction/TRO against respondents’ advisories warning media of liability for disobeying lawful orders during emergencies. The Makati RTC denied the TRO and subsequently dismissed the complaint for lack of cause of action. On appeal, the CA affirmed dismissal and refused reconsideration.
Issues
- Whether respondents’ advisories and actions constituted unconstitutional prior restraint, censorship, or chilling effect on press freedom
- Whether expert testimony (Dean Pangalangan) should have been admitted
- Whether denial of TRO and injunction was proper
Court’s Analysis on Press Freedom and Prior Restraint
– Freedom of the press enjoys highest constitutional protection but is subject to reasonable regulation under the State’s police power for public safety and order.
– Prior restraint is a governmental restriction or prohibition of expression in advance of publication. The challenged advisory merely reminded all media practitioners of existing penalties for disobeying lawful orders; it did not prohibit coverage or require prior approval.
– No evidence of actual chilling effect: media continued coverage of the incident and similar events, and no show that journalists refrained from reporting out of fear.
– Respondents’ orders to vacate the scene and temporary detention were lawful exercises of authority to maintain public safety amid an armed standoff.
Court’s Analysis on Expert Testimony
– Admission of expert opinion is discretionary. No abuse of discretion in excluding Dean Pangalangan’s testimony as legal interpretation lies within the court’s competence and no factual question requiring such expertise was at issue.
Court’s Analysis on Injunctive Relief
– Four requisites for injunction not met: petitioners
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 210088)
Factual Antecedents
- On November 29, 2007, Senator Antonio Trillanes IV, Brig. Gen. Danilo Lim and other “Magdalo” officers walked out of RTC–Makati Branch 150 during their “Oakwood Mutiny” coup‐d’état case.
- The group occupied the Manila Peninsula Hotel lobby, held a press conference calling for President Arroyo’s ouster, then moved to a function room with members of the press following.
- Judge Oscar Pimentel issued Warrant of Arrest for Direct Contempt against Trillanes’s group; NCRPO Chief Geary Barias attempted service but the group refused to accept it.
- Police gave a 3:00 PM deadline to vacate; when it lapsed, PNP hurled tear gas, fired warning shots, broke in, and arrested Trillanes’s group and journalists present.
- Journalists were taken to Camp Bagong Diwa, processed, then released before midnight of the same day.
- DILG Secretary Puno warned that journalists ignoring lawful police orders may be charged with obstruction of justice and willful disobedience.
- AFP Chief Esperon and DND Secretary Teodoro backed the police action; DOJ Secretary Gonzales issued an advisory reminding media organizations that disobedience to lawful orders during emergencies could incur criminal liability.
- Former PNP Director General Razon supported the advisory, cautioning that media could be charged with obstruction for disobeying police warnings.
Procedural History
- January 28, 2008: Petitioners filed Complaint for Damages and Injunction, with prayer for TRO and/or preliminary mandatory injunction; 72-hour TRO granted immediately.
- Petitioners alle