Bulatlat hailed as a ‘big win’ for press freedom, a court decision voiding a government order to block its website and those of 26 other alternative news outlets at the tail-end of the Duterte administration.
In June 2022, the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) ordered internet service providers to block the websites of the 27 independent media and progressive organizations after the National Security Adviser Hermogenes Esperon Jr. alleged that these were supporting terrorist organizations.
On Nov. 18, Judge Catherine Manodon of the Quezon City Regional Trial Court voided the NTC order, citing that it not only lacked legal authority but also violated press freedom and constituted censorship.She also noted that the defendants-NTC and Esperon-failed to prove that Bulatlat posed ‘clear and present danger.’
‘The local court’s decision unblocks all the 27 websites, making this a victory against state censorship, and against the use of ‘anti-terrorism’ rhetoric to justify the violation of free speech and expression,’ Bulatlat said in a statement.
The NTC order was issued on June 8, 2022, at the request of Esperon, who alleged that the outlets were affiliated with or supporting terrorist organizations.
No power to block
On the motion of Bulatlat’s publisher, Alipato Media Center, Inc., the court ruled that NTC had no power to block, restrict, or ‘limit access’ to news websites, saying its mandate covers only regulation, supervision, and adjudication of ‘matters relating to telecommunications services and facilities.’
These include the approval of rates, issuance of certificates of public convenience, and settlement of disputes between operators and subscribers, it noted.
The court also pointed out that NTC cannot invoke Sec. 46(m) of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 as a legal basis for its memorandum because restricting online media access requires observance of due process, including the conduct of a hearing or the issuance of a notice.
‘To interpret Sec. 46(m) as granting such power would unduly expand the scope of the law and sanction acts beyond the statutory limits,’ it said in the decision made public on Wednesday. ‘The NTC treated the letter from defendant Esperon as something it had to follow as a ministerial task.’
‘Limits of administrative power’
The National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers, counsel for Bulatlat, called the ruling a ‘clear statement on the limits of administrative power and the continuing need to guard against censorship disguised as regulation.’
‘Bulatlat’s reporting, like that of any media organization, may be contested, criticized, or challenged in the arena of public debate. What the Constitution does not allow is for the state to shut down that discourse,’ NUPL said.
It urged the public to view the court decision as an imperative to treat the press as an entity ‘that can report and publish without fear of being taken down.’
The court also confirmed that access to Bulatlat was indeed restricted even after readers used different internet service providers and devices to access it.
‘Their testimonies show that even if a complete blockage did not occur, the assailed memorandum still resulted in a real and perceivable sense of restriction, as certain users were intermittently or persistently unable to access the site,’ it explained.
Violation of freedoms
The NTC move, as a whole, is a violation of the freedom of the press, speech, and expression guaranteed by the 1987 Constitution, it said.
‘In this case, the blocking of various websites. falls squarely within the ambit of prior restraint because it constitutes ‘government censorship of publication,’ noting that defendants NTC and Esperon failed to justify the existence of any ‘clear and present danger’ posed by the Bulatlat website. ‘No competent proof was presented to show the plaintiff’s publication or operation posed an imminent threat to national security or public order,’ it said.