The people’s right to official information is an indispensable element of a functioning representative democracy. The ideal of a “government by the people” presupposes that the people have access to information on matters of public concern in order to effectively exercise its governing power[1]. As observed by the Philippine Supreme Court in one case, “there can be no realistic perception by the public of the nation’s problems, nor a meaningful democratic decision-making if they are denied access to information of general interest.” The free flow of information about the affairs of government paves the way for debate in public policy, and fosters accountability in government.”[2] The Supreme Court has proclaimed that the right to this information is not a private right, but a public right, which may be asserted by any citizen. This information includes laws and jurisprudence which are undoubtedly of public concern.
However, exception is made to this rule. The Court has resolved to refrain from posting in its Internet Web Page the full text of decisions in cases involving child sexual abuse in response to a letter from a mother of a child abuse victim addressed to the Chief Justice expressing anxiety over the posting of full text decisions of the Supreme Court on its Internet Web Page. The mother submitted that confidentiality and the best interest of the child must prevail over public access to information and pleaded that her daughter's case, as well as those of a similar nature, be excluded from the Web[3]. As mentioned the Supreme Court in its decision, there is New Jersey statute which provides that all court documents which state the name, address and identity of a child victim in certain sexual assault, endangering the welfare and abuse and neglect cases should remain confidential. The name of the victim shall not appear in any public record; rather, initials or a fictitious name shall appear. The offenses covered by the law include aggravated sexual assault, sexual assault, aggravated criminal sexual contact, criminal sexual contact, endangering the welfare of children, and any action alleging an abused or neglected child. Furthermore, Sec. 29 of RA 7610 provides:
Sec. 29. Confidentiality. — at the instance of the offended party, his name may be withheld from the public until the court acquires jurisdiction over the case.
It shall be unlawful for any editor, publisher, and reporter or columnist in case of printed materials, announcer or producer in the case of television and radio broadcasting, producer and director in the case of the movie industry, to cause undue and sensationalized publicity of any case of a violation of this Act which results in the moral degradation and suffering of the offended party.
Sec. 44 of RA 9262 similarly provides:
Sec. 44. Confidentiality.—All records pertaining to cases of violence against women and their children including those in the barangay shall be confidential and all public officers and employees and public or private clinics or hospitals shall respect the right to privacy of the victim. Whoever publishes or causes to be published, in any format, the name, address, telephone number, school, business address, employer, or other identifying information of a victim or an immediate family member, without the latter's consent, shall be liable to the contempt power of the court.
Any person who violates this provision shall suffer the penalty of one (1) year imprisonment and a fine of not more than Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P500,000.00).
Likewise, the Rule on Violence Against Women and their Children states:
Sec. 40. Privacy and confidentiality of proceedings.—All hearings of cases of violence against women and their children shall be conducted in a manner consistent with the dignity of women and their children and respect for their privacy.
Records of the cases shall be treated with utmost confidentiality. Whoever publishes or causes to be published, in any format, the name, address, telephone number, school, business address, employer or other identifying information of the parties or an immediate family or household member, without their consent or without authority of the court, shall be liable for contempt of court and shall suffer the penalty of one year imprisonment and a fine of not more than Five Hundred Thousand (P500,000.00) Pesos.
Similarly, I believe parties in a case can file a petition in court to withhold their names when such cases were posted in the Internet Web Page the full text of decisions of the cases they were involved. I agree with Office of the Solicitor General in its comment that in order to determine whether the subject matter upon which the right to privacy being invoked falls within the constitutionally-protected zone of privacy, it must be shown that the person's expectation of privacy is reasonable. The reasonableness of such expectancy depends on a two–part test: (1) whether by his conduct, the individual has exhibited an expectation of privacy; and (2) whether this expectation is one that society recognizes as reasonable.[4]
Then again, I do not support the view that criminals should be protected from the publicity of posting in its Internet Web Page the full text of decisions. Criminals must answer to the law for their unlawful acts but if the l their names be withheld from the public, they do not have to answer to the community. Moreover, the community does not know of the crimes committed by these law-breakers – because their names from the public – and that makes the community vulnerable to the criminals’ next crime.
[1] House Bill No. 2993 Introduced by Reps. Emmanuel Joel J. Villanueva, Del R. De Guzman, Lorenzo R. Tañada III, Loretta Ann P. Rosales, Mario J. Aguja and Ana Theresia Hontiveros-Baraquel
[2] Baldoza vs. Dimaano, Adm. Matter No. 1120-MJ, 5 May 1976
[3] People of the Philippines vs. Melchor Cabalquinto G.R. No. 167693 September 19, 2006
[4] People of the Philippines vs. Melchor Cabalquinto G.R. No. 167693 September 19, 2006
DISCLAIMER: The author is neither a lawyer nor is giving a legal advice on the matter. This is just an academic requirement in the college of law.
Walang komento:
Mag-post ng isang Komento