MANILA, Philippines — The Commission on Human Rights on Wednesday urged the government to review laws and policies that threaten press freedom and freedom of expression in the Philippines as it warned that these can produce a "chilling effect" on criticism of government.
"At present, legal provisions on defamation and criminal libel may be seen as a direct threat to truth-telling, especially if laws are weaponized to silence valid criticisms. Time and again, journalists have been at the receiving end of such abuse of laws," CHR said.
Related Stories
The commission's statement was released in response to the conviction on cyber libel of Rappler CEO Maria Ressa and former Rappler writer-researcher Reynaldo Santos, Jr.
The Manila Regional Trial Court Branch sentenced Ressa and Santos to the indeterminate penalty of imprisonment ranging from six months and one day as minimum to six years of prision correccional as maximum.
The cyber libel case is one of a string of suits that Rappler and its executives face. The Palace has stressed that although President Rodrigo Duterte has targeted Rappler in his speeches and addresses, he personally has nothing to do with those cases.
CHR warned that "the court's decision sends a chilling effect to the work of journalists and all those who speak the truth."
Decriminalizing libel
Members of the Philippine press have long called for the decriminalization of libel, which has been penalized in the Philippines since 1932.
Media watchdog Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility said in 2014 that the “libel provisions of the [Revised Penal Code] have been problematic for free expression and press freedom since 1932...which has been used in many instances to silence journalists.”
CHR's statement highlighted that the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has also expressed concern over the continued criminalization of libel in the Philippines.
The OHCHR said that both the Revised Penal Code and Cybercrime Prevention Act contain provisions that are adverse to the exercise of free speech.
RELATED: Suits by 'sensitive' senators threaten free speech
In General Comment No. 34 of 2012 on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the OHCHR "provides that defamation laws should not stifle freedom of expression," CHR said.
The Philippines is a state party to the ICCPR.
READ: 'Thinking Pinoy' indictment no win for free speech, advocates warn
The OHCHR also stipulates that imprisonment should never be the penalty for defamation cases.
"It is high time for the government to revisit these laws and its applications in favor of how the people can best enjoy their rights—not limit them—particularly on freedom of opinion and expression. Under the a democracy, a balance between criticism and truth must be in place," the CHR said.
In a statement on Monday, ICT rights advocacy group Democracy.Net.PH — among the groups that questioned the constitutionality of the Cybercrime Prevention Act — pointed out that "criminal libel is commonly used as a tool for the powerful to use government resources in the oppression of the weak."
It called libel "an affront to the right to freedom of expression" that it said "ensures that the full power and the might of state is brought to bear on a matter that should only be between two private parties."
"It is time to decriminalize libel, whether online or offline, and take away the participation of the state in disagreements on speech. The state has no business aiding and abetting a private person's demand for restitution for hurt feelings from another person's expression, whether made offline or online," the group said.
"In the end, it is not enough to say that we support freedoms. Laws and policies must also make their enjoyment possible," the CHR said on Wednesday.
"It is only under the regime of truth that we can hold perpetrators to account and ensure the best participation of the people under a democratic society. We cannot stay silent in the face of injustices." — with reports from Kristine Joy Patag