Ombudsman slams journalist over ‘SALN wiretapping’

MANILA, Philippines — Ombudsman Samuel Martires yesterday slammed veteran journalist Malou Mangahas for supposedly secretly recording their informal conversation about his decision to suspend the release of the 2018 statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN) of President Duterte to the media.

In a press statement, Martires said he was never formally interviewed by Mangahas, who quoted him in her story about the non-release of the 2018 asset statement of Duterte to the media, published by the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ) on Dec. 11.

Martires admitted that he and Mangahas briefly talked about withholding Duterte’s SALN to the media. He said the journalist persistently followed him at a hallway of a hotel in Manila on Dec. 9 where an anti-corruption forum organized by the Office of the Ombudsman was being held at the time.

Martires said Mangahas was not invited to the event and never informed him that he was being interviewed – a claim the PCIJ disputed.

Worse, Martires said, Mangahas did not inform him that their conversation was being recorded. This was also disputed by the PCIJ.

“She did not only disrespect me, she also violated the Anti-Wiretapping Law,” Martires said in Filipino.

“And isn’t her act considered an unethical behavior, especially for a veteran broadcaster and writer?” he added.

Under Section 1 of Republic Act 4200, or the Anti-Wiretapping Law, “it shall be unlawful for any person, not being authorized by all the parties to any private communication or spoken word, to tap any wire or cable, or by using any other device or arrangement, to secretly overhear, intercept or record such communication or spoken word by using a device commonly known as a dictaphone or dictagraph or detectaphone or walkie-talkie or tape recorder, or however otherwise described.”

In her story, Mangahas quoted Martires as saying that she should just get the SALN of Duterte from the Office of the President and the Office of the Executive Secretary. Martires was also quoted as saying that SALN is a “complicated matter,” thus they were supposed talk about it some other time.

Mangahas, in her article, described Duterte as the “most secretive President when it comes to the details of his wealth” and described his Freedom of Information (FOI) edict as a “lie.”

In response to Martires’ claims, the PCIJ, in a statement, said that they had filed several letters and made multiple phone calls to the Office of the Ombudsman and that of Martires to follow up on their request for Duterte’s 2018 SALN, but these proved fruitless.

While invitations were sent to the press by the ombudsman’s media relations bureau, PCIJ said it only learned of the ombudsman’s scheduled public forum, and said there was “no real problem if journalists from PCIJ would also attend it.”

“Malou went to the forum, registered as a journalist from PCIJ on the forum’s attendance sheet,” the statement read.

Mangahas, who had requested to talk to the ombudsman at the start of the program, “dutifully” introduced herself to Martires as a journalist from GMA and PCIJ on the sidelines of the conference, after which the interview transpired.

“The second part of the introduction (PCIJ) was not audible perhaps to Ombudsman Martires because he promptly butted in and said, ‘O, Malou, kilala kita (I know you),’” PCIJ added.

“Ombudsman Martires was well aware that what transpired was a proper interview, a public conversation between a journalist and a public official, on a matter of public concern. The queries raised in the interview were public policy issues (SALN, the ombudsman’s long-awaited new guidelines) that Ombudsman Martires responded to, without being coaxed or compelled to do so. In fact, he was in an apparent jovial mood when the interview ended,” the statement read further.

PCIJ explained that later that day, Martires asked a reporter from another media agency to contact Mangahas for another meeting with him as “he supposedly did not explain well his answers to her queries earlier that day.”

Mangahas also learned that Martires offered to meet with her anywhere she wanted to that day.

“Malou, however, didn’t get a chance to speak with either the reporter or Ombudsman Martires that time as she was out working on some other tasks,” PCIJ said, stressing that the ombudsman never invited Mangahas to meet at his office.

On Martires’ claim that Mangahas violated the Anti-Wiretapping Law, PCIJ said: “Ombudsman Martires knew that as a public official with expertise and mandate on the issues raised, he was speaking face-to-face with a journalist with a legitimate journalistic purpose, on a matter of public interest. The conversation occurred in a public space and even with the full knowledge and in full view of his own personnel from the Office of the Ombudsman.

“PCIJ respects the views of Ombudsman Martires on this matter but respectfully insists, too, that all he has to do now is release President Duterte’s SALN for 2018, pending the long-awaited issuance of his new guidelines, and consistent with the mandate of the Office of the Ombudsman as ‘the Protector of the People,’” it added.

Nonetheless, Martires said that while he acknowledges the people’s right to access the SALN of public officials, he also has a “mandate to protect the right” of public officials in accordance with the Implementing Rules and Regulations of Republic Act 6713 or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards of Public Officials and Employees.