Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

Fifteenth Congress
First Regular Session

COMMITTEE REPORT No. _* 670

Submitted by the COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC INFORMATION on 22 FEB 2011

RE: House BillNo,__4262
Recommending its approval in substitution of House Bill Nos. 370 and 2275

Sponsors: Reps. Ben P. Evardone, Rachel Marguerite B. del Mar, Rufus B.
Rodriguez and Maximo B. Rodriguez, Jr.

MR. SPEAKER:

The Committee on Public Information to which were referred House Bill No.
370, introduced by Rep. Rachel Marguerite B. del Mar entitled:

“AN ACT
AMENDING REPUBLIC ACT NO. 53, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS
‘AN ACT TO EXEMPT THE PUBLISHER, EDITOR OR REPORTER OF ANY
PUBLICATION FROM REVEALING THE SOURCE OF PUBLISHED NEWS OR
INFORMATION OBTAINED IN CONFIDENCE’ BY INCLUDING WITHIN ITS
COVERAGE JOURNALISTS FROM BROADCAST, NEWS AGENCIES AND
INTERNET PUBLICATIONS”

and House Bill No. 2275, introduced by Reps. Rufus B. Rodriguez and Maximo
B. Rodriguez, Jr. entitled

“AN ACT
FURTHER AMENDING SECTION ONE OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 53, OTHERWISE
KNOWN AS AN ACT TO EXEMPT THE PUBLISHER, EDITOR, COLUMNIST OR
REPORTER OF ANY PUBLICATION FROM REVEALING THE SOURCE OF
PUBLISHED NEWS OR INFORMATION OBTAINED IN CONFIDENCE”


has considered the same and recommends that the attached House Bill No. 4262

entitled:
“AN ACT

AMENDING REPUBLIC ACT NO. 53, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS
‘AN ACT TO EXEMPT THE PUBLISHER, EDITOR OR REPORTER OF ANY
PUBLICATION FROM REVEALING THE SOURCE OF PUBLISHED NEWS OR
INFORMATION OBTAINED IN CONFIDENCE’ BY INCLUDING WITHIN ITS
COVERAGE JOURNALISTS FROM BROADCAST, NEWS AGENCIES AND
INTERNET PUBLICATIONS”

be approved in substitution of House Bill Nos. 370 and 2275, with Representatives
Rachel Marguerite B. del Mar, Rufus B. Rodriguez and Maximo B. Rodriguez, Jr. as
authors thereof.

Respectiully submitted:

BEN P. EVARDONE
Chairman
Committee on Public Information

THE HONORABLE SPEAKER
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
QUEZON CITY


16
7

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
QUEZON CITY

FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

HOUSE BILL NO. _ 4262

Introduced by Representatives Rachel Marguerite B. del Mar, Rufus B. Rodriguez
and Maximo B. Rodriguez, Jr.

AN ACT
AMENDING REPUBLIC ACT NO. 53, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS.
‘AN ACT TO EXEMPT THE PUBLISHER, EDITOR OR REPORTER OF ANY
PUBLICATION FROM REVEALING THE SOURCE OF PUBLISHED NEWS OR
INFORMATION OBTAINED IN CONFIDENCE’ BY INCLUDING WITHIN ITS
COVERAGE JOURNALISTS FROM BROADCAST, NEWS AGENCIES AND
INTERNET PUBLICATIONS.

Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the
Philippines in Congress assembled.

SECTION 1. Section 1 of Republic Act No. 53, as amended, is hereby further

amended to read as follows:

“SECTION 1. Without prejudice to his liability under the civil and
criminal laws, [the publisher, editor, columnist, or duly accredited reporter of
any newspaper, magazine or periodical of general circulation cannot be
compelled to reveal the source of any news report or information appearing in
said publication which was related in confidence to such publisher, editor or
reporter, unless the court or a House or Committee of Congress] A DULY
ACCREDITED JOURNALIST OF ANY LEGITIMATE PRINT, BROADCAST,
INTERNET, OR WIRE SERVICE ORGANIZATION, STATION OR
NETWORK, INCLUDING THE PUBLISHER, STATION OWNER AND/OR
MANAGER, BUREAU CHIEF, EDITOR, NEWS EDITOR, WRITER OR
REPORTER, CORRESPONDENT, OPINION COLUMNIST OR
COMMENTATOR, CARTOONIST, PHOTOGRAPHER, OR OTHER
PRACTITIONER INVOLVED IN THE GATHERING, WRITING, EDITING OF,
OR COMMENTING ON THE NEWS FOR MASS CIRCULATION OR
BROADCAST CANNOT BE COMPELLED TO REVEAL THE SOURCE OF


Sowra)a

ANY NEWS ITEM, NEWS REPORT OR INFORMATION APPEARING OR
BEING REPORTED, DISSEMINATED OR COMMENTED ON IN SAID
MEDIA, WHICH WAS RELAYED IN CONFIDENCE TO SUCH JOURNALIST
OR PRACTITIONER UNLESS THE COURT OR THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES OR THE SENATE OR ANY OF ITS COMMITTEES
finds that such revelation is demanded by the security of the State.”

SEC. 2. Insert a new section 2 after Section 1 of RA 53, as amended, to read
as follows:

“SEC. 2. FOR PURPOSES OF THIS ACT, A DULY ACCREDITED
JOURNALIST OR PRACTITIONER OF ANY LEGITIMATE PRINT,
BROADCAST, INTERNET, OR WIRE SERVICE ORGANIZATION, STATION
OR NETWORK, IS ONE WHO IS ACCREDITED WITH ANY REPUTABLE
ASSOCIATION OF MEDIA PERSONS SUCH AS BUT NOT LIMITED TO,
THE PHILIPPINE INFORMATION AGENCY — PRESIDENTIAL
COMMUNICATIONS OPERATIONS OFFICE (PIA - PCOO), THE
NATIONAL PRESS CLUB (NPC), THE NATIONAL UNION OF
JOURNALISTS OF THE PHILIPPINES (NUJP), AND THE KAPISANAN NG
MGA BRODKASTER NG PILIPINAS (KBP), AND/OR ONE WHO IS A
REGULAR EMPLOYEE OF A LEGITIMATE PRINT, BROADCAST,
INTERNET, OR WIRE SERVICE ORGANIZATION, STATION OR
NETWORK, PROVIDED, THAT ANY JOURNALIST ENGAGED BY ANY
LEGITIMATE MEDIA COMPANY SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE AN
ACCREDITED JOURNALIST.”

SEC. 3. Any law, decree, ordinance or rule and regulation inconsistent with or
contrary to the provisions of this Act is hereby amended or repealed.

SEC. 4. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its publication in the
Official Gazette and/or in at least two (2) newspapers of national circulation.
Approved,

we


Republic 07 the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

370

HOUSE BILL NO. _

Introduced by: HON. RACHEL MARGUERITE B. DEL MAR

EXPLANATORY NOTE

It is acknowledged that Republic Act No. 53, as amended, otherwise known as the
“The Sotto Law” has been the journalist's privilege statute by which he can refuse to reveal
the source of a confidential news report or information except when the court or a House or
Committee of Congress finds that the revelation is demanded by the security of the state.

The reason for the rule is that the identity of sources of a confidential news report or
information must be protected, otherwise the spring of data for new or commentary dries up
and the mission of the press to check and balance and expose wrongdoing is impeded.

Oddly, however, the privileged appi:es only to the publisher, editor, columnist or duly
accredited reporter of any newspaper, magazine or periodical of general circulation. The law
is silent about journalists from broadcast stations, news or wire agencies, and internet
newspapers, magazines and other publications.

‘The explanation is that when the law wes passed, electronic journalism was virtually
non-existent (broadcast stations played music or drama and gave the news but did not hire
news reporters). the news or wire agencies still had to be developed and recognized, and the
internet was not even a dream.

It is an omission that must be filled, an anomaly that must be corrected. The
journalists envisioned by Sotto Law cannot be confined to print practitioners.

In this context, the attached bill seeks to include within the coverage of the Sotto
Law, as amended, journalists from broadcast, news agencies and internet publications as a
matter of duty and necessity. The proposed amendment will not only strengthen confidence
in these other journalists but will also recognize the important role that they, together with
print practitioners, play in the building of community and nation.


Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City, Metro Manila
15" Congress
1" Regular Session

MINUTES OF THE MEETING CONDUCTED BY THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC
INFORMATION HELD ON JANUARY 25, 2011, 1:30 PM AT CONFERENCE ROOMS 3 AND
4, MITRA BUILDING, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, QUEZON CITY.

AUTHOR PRESENT:
Rep. Maximo Rodriguez, Jr
1. CALL TO ORDER
The Chairman, Rep. Ben P. Evardone, called the meeting to order at 2:07 p.m.

ROLL CALL

On motion of Rep. Teddy Casifio, there being no objections, the Body dispensed with the calling
of the roll

Ill. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING

On motion of Rep. Mercedes Alvarez, there being no objections, the minutes of the meeting of
Dec. 14, 2010 were approved by the Body.

IV. _ INITIAL DELIBERATION ON HOUSE BILL NO. 3754 — Local Film Industry Development
Act of 2011 (Rep. Fernandez)

Rep. Dan Fernandez informed the Body that his bill primarily seeks to enhance the functions
and powers of the Film Development Council of the Philippines (FDCP) created under Republic
‘Act No, 9167, by reorganizing it into the Philippine Film Commission. Thereafter, Rep. Evardone
directed the Secretariat to seek comments from stakeholders on the bill. The Committee agreed
to deliberate further on the bill in another meeting once it receives the inputs and position

papers from the stakeholders.

V. APPROVAL OF THE SUBSTITUTE BILL TO HOUSE BILL NOS. 370 (REP. DEL MAR)
AND 2275 (REPS. RUFUS RODRIGUEZ AND MAXIMO RODRIGUEZ, JR.) - FURTHER
AMENDING THE SOTTO LAW

Rep. Evardone said that the Kapisanan ng mga Brodkaster ng Pilipinas (KBP) has proposed a
few modifications to the substitute bill. He then requested Atty. Rudolph Jularbal, general
counsel of the KBP, to discuss the proposed changes

Atty. Jularbal informed the Body that the KBP is inclined to support HB 370 because it is more
comprehensive. He stated the KBP’s proposed amendment as follows:


“Sec. 1. Without prejudice to his liability under the civil and criminal laws, a duly
accredited journalist of any legitimate print, broadcast, internet, or wire service
organization, station or network, including the publisher, station owner and/or
manager, bureau chief, editor, news director, writer or reporter, correspondent,
opinion columnist or commentator, cartoonist, photographer, or other practitioner
involved in the gathering, writing, editing of, or commenting on the news for mass
circulation or broadcast cannot be compelied to reveal the source of any news
item, news report or information appearing or being reported, disseminated or
commented on in said media, which was relayed in confidence to such journalist
or practitioner unless the court or the House of Representatives or the Senate or
any of its committees finds that such revelation is demanded by the security of
the State.”

Atty, Jularbal said that the KBP wishes to include the following:

* “legitimate” - to distinguish it from those that operate without the proper authority or
permit from the appropriate government agency;

“station or network” — to qualify the broadcast organization;

“gathering” — to refer to correspondents;

“disseminated or commented on’ — because the source of the information being
disseminated or commented on should also be protected

With regard to the phrase “accredited journalist’ Atty. Jularbal said that this is difficult to define
because there are “stringers,” “contributors,” “citizen reporters,” and contribution by way of
blogs. He opined that the guiding principle should be that for as long as the media organization
recognizes and uses the material being submitted, then the source should be considered an

accredited source.

In response to the query of Rep. Casifio if the law intends to cover bloggers and blocktimers,
Atty. Jularbal admitted that bloggers are a gray area. He explained that the news organization
validates the independent source, therefore, a blog is not taken at face value.

For his part, Atty. Jose Vener Ibarra of GMA-7 stressed that the network favors limiting the
privilege granted under the expanded Sotto Law to legitimate writers of web-based news
services. To further qualify the inclusion of bloggers, Rep. Casifio gave the example of a
blogger who posts on his site a photo taken by his friend of a politician engaged in some
anomalous deed. He asked whether the Sotto Law would protect the blogger from revealing the
source of the photo. Atty, Ibarra replied that if the news organization picks up the story from the
blogsite, then the blogger would be considered the source, and the journalist who discusses the
news item would be the one covered by the privilege. Atty. Jularbal agreed with the observation
of Rep. Casio that the privilege should cover bloggers that are recognized by independent
online news publications as regular content providers.

As for blocktimers, Atty. Jularbal informed the Body that the KBP has an accreditation process
for them. He explained that a biocktimer refers to one that purchases airtime for a program and
not necessarily the on-air personality during the program, but for as long as they are under the
supervision of the station, in the sense that the station has the prerogative to cut them off the


vi.

air, then they should be considered as accredited journalists. Rep. Evardone further explained
that this is because the stations are liable for what the commentators or blocktimers say on-air,

On the query of Rep. Casifo if the privilege covers those who reveal information through
Facebook, Twitter or similar social network sites, Atty. Jularbal said that such network sites
could contain pages devoted to news and comments, which could then qualify them for the
privilege. However, Atty. Ibarra pointed out that news websites carry more responsibility and are
more accountable to the public than these social network sites.

As to the concem raised by Rep. Lani Mercado-Revilla on the posting of items on Youtube,
Rep. Maximo Rodriguez, Jr. said it is very difficult to identify the source of the video.

On motion of Rep. Casifio, the Committee approved the substitute bill as amended, ‘subject to
style

Thereupon, the Chair directed the secretariat to file the Committee Report on the bill as
amended, to the Bills and Index Service.

CONTINUATION OF DELIBERATION ON HOUSE RESOLUTION NO. 247 (REPS, RUFUS
RODRIGUEZ AND MAXIMO RODRIGUEZ, JR.) — Investigation on the Non-Compliance
with Executive Order No. 255, which mandates the playing of four Original Pilipino
Music (OPM) compositions every clockhour of programs with musical formats

Mr. Noel Cabangon of the Organisasyon ng Pilipinong Mang-aawit (OPM), reading from a
prepared statement, said that there are two main factors in the opposition to EO 255: 1) here
are not enough local materials to be played; and 2) many local materials may not fit current
formats lorded over by talk radio.

The Philippine Association of the Recording Industry (PARI) has belied the first claim, saying
that there are more than 26,000 locally recorded musical compositions of various genres and
formats in its database, he said. This number does not include thousands of music created by
Cultural communities and independent artists whose musical heritage and compositions have
not been recorded and disseminated simply because they do not have access to facilities and
resources. The efforts of institutions such as the KBP, Filipino Society of Composers, Authors
and Publishers (FILSCAP) and Metropop therefore are commendable and vital to the
establishment of bigger and more popular body of work in Philippine music, he added.

As to the second claim, Mr. Cabangon emphasized that talk radio is clearly not covered under
Sec. 1 of EO 255. The OPM has observed, however, that many talk radios still play music
during their programs,

The OPM stressed that the ongoing dialogue between OPM, KBP and the National
Telecommunications Commission (NTC) is an important step towards the effective promotion of
original Pilipino music.

On behalf of the FILSCAP, Ms. Debbie Gaite, general manager, informed the Body that the
organization has submitted to the Committee a partial inventory of approximately 25,900 original
Pilipino music works by FILSCAP members. The FILSCAP currently has around 1,000
Members, some of whom have been succeeded by their heirs. The list does not include works
by FILSCAP members who have not updated their list of works, and Filipino composers who

3


have migrated to other countries and joined foreign music societies, such as Mr. Freddie
Aguilar. It also excludes film and TV background music/musical scoring which may not be radio-
friendly, and works covered under public domain, some of which have been rearranged into

different genres.

On the part of the NTC, Commissioner Gamaliel Cordoba reported to the Body the results of its
dialogue last January 21, 2011 with KBP and OPM:

1. OPM does not only encompass music performed by Filipino artists but also works by
foreign composers, thus the parties agreed to come up with an expanded definition of
the term “OPM”;

2. KBP proposed modifications of the requirement for “four OPM songs in every clockhour
of a program”,

3. KBP will come up with a clear contemporary definition of what a “musical format" is since
some broadcasts have mixed formats;

4. To address the lack of OPM materials for specific types of genre, OPM and KBP agreed
to collaborate with and tap Filipino talents to produce more materials;

5. The KBP is of the opinion that instead of penal sanctions for non-compliance under Sec.
2 of EO 255, the law could extend tax and other incentives or even waive payment of
royalties under certain circumstances for radio stations that comply.

With respect to the second sentence of Sec. 2 of EO 255, which gives the NTC the authority to
Suspend or cancel the operation of any radio station for violation of the EO, Commissioner
Cordoba said this has to be clarified in light of the rulings of the Supreme Court in Chavez v.
Gonzalez and Divinagracia v. Consolidated Broadcasting System. The High Court ruled that the
NTC cannot issue content-related memorandum circulars or any other issuances and that it can
only deal with technical matters (such as use of bandwidth). He added that based on these
decisions, a quo warranto proceeding must be filed in court pursuant to a suspension or
cancellation of a franchise, because closing down a station goes against the legislative intent of
granting franchises.

Commissioner Cordoba also informed the Body that the parties agreed to come up with a
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with regard to the implementation of EO 255 and the
promotion of Filipino music and talents. A copy of the MOU will be submitted to the Committee.

As to the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) as provided under Sec. 3 of EO 255, Rep.
Rodriguez pointed out that conflict arose precisely because of the lack of IRR and that the IRR
would be more effective than a MOU. Commissioner Cordoba replied that there is an IRR
Promulgated in 1988, but it only detailed the contents of the EO, Rep. Rodriguez then requested
the NTC to submit the IRR to the Committee.

Rep. Rodriguez suggested that the stakeholders conduct a review of the IRR of EO 255. If the
IRR proves insufficient in promoting Filipino talent, then he will fle the necessary bill to address
this matter.

Atty. Vin Dancel of the OPM said the organization is willing to work with the other stakeholders
to come up with a better IRR. He added that if the NTC’s authority has limitations then it would
be better to identify the proper agency that would enforce the EO.


At this juncture, Rep. Evardone directed the NTC to act on the request of Mr. Elmar Ingles of the
OPM to furnish the Committee and the OPM copies of the reports on all the requirements that
are supposed to have been imposed by the NTC as the lead agency in implementing the EO.
This includes the reports of compliance since 1988 of all radio stations as to the extent of the
implementation of the EO, and the program logs of the radio stations. Mr. Ingles said this will
help the Committee and the stakeholders to determine the extent of NTC's efforts to enforce the

EO.

Atty, Jularbal stressed that there is no issue on the advocacy of promoting Filipino talent and
that it is a matter that the KBP has supported from way back. He however opined that the
reason for the issuance of EO 255 is no longer there, except for a few cases. He also stressed
that while the State has the right and obligation to promote Filipino talent and culture, the issue
at hand is the freedom of thought, expression and speech. The issue addressed by the
Supreme Court decisions cited by NTC is whether a broadcast station can be compelled to
adopt a particular advocacy in a particular way, a particular quantity and in a particular manner.
The rationale is that the State has no right to compel a radio station the content of its programs,
nor be told in a particular manner how, when and how much the radio station should promote
Filipino talent. This, he said, brings up an issue of constitutionality, which the KBP does not
want to raise because it believes in the advocacy itself.

Rep. Evardone replied that delving too deeply on the legal issues will lead nowhere and that the
best course of action is to follow Rep. Rodriguez's suggestion for all stakeholders to continue
the dialogue and help the NTC come up with more acceptable guidelines.

Ms. Gaite informed the Body that the FILSCAP, as a collector of royalties and distributor of
royalties, remits overseas forty percent (40%) of what it collects and distributes only sixty
percent (60%) locally 2s compared to the ratio In other countries which is 20:80, she pointed
out. Last year, FILSCAP collected a total of P75 million, she added. She then requested that the
FILSCAP be provided a seat in the ongoing dialogue among stakeholders, which Rep.
Evardone agreed to.

Vil. BRIEFING BY THE MOVIE AND TELEVISION REVIEW AND CLASSIFICATION BOARD
(MTRCB)

Chairperson Mary Grace Poe Llamanzares of the MTRCB briefly presented the mandate and
functions of the Board. She underscored the agency's mission, its procedure for review and
classification, the steps it has taken to help the industry move toward self-regulation, and the
adjudication process.

With respect to the monitoring of films and TV shows, Ms. Liamanzares said that the monitoring
unit is composed of less than 15 people, making it a daunting task to review hundreds of films
and shows daily. In this regard, the deputy cards issued by the MTRCB are very important
because the agency needs all the assistance it can get. However, the theatre owners have
asked the MTRCB to limit the issuance of such cards. Thus, the MTRCB is trying to maintain a
balance of trying to help the industry by not issuing too many cards, but it truly needs help in
monitoring all these movies and programs.


Vill. BRIEFING BY THE OPTICAL MEDIA BOARD (OMB)

Chairman Ronald Ricketts of the Optical Media Board (OMB) presented the mandate, functions
and current plans and programs of the agency.

Rep. Lani Mercado-Revilla asked about the number of cases the OMB filed against copyright
violators. Atty. Jose Luis Padilla of the OMB legal division replied that the agency has made
several arrests and that there are several pending administrative and court cases, but there
have not yet been any convictions under the OMB law.
Rep. Evardone asked the OMB to submit to the Committee its proposal for improvements to the
OMB law. He also requested the OMB to submit its accomplishment report for 2010 as well as
figures on the street value of the sales made by copyright violators.

IX. ADJOURNMENT
There being no other matters to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 4:38 p.m.
hereby certify to the correctness of the foregoing minutes.

(ammutnpgs

CATHERINE N. MACAPAGAL
Committee Secretary
Approved by:

BEN. t EVARDONE

Chairman


Explanatory Note -i-
H.B. No. 370

It may be stressed that this Bill passed on third and final reading in te House of
Representatives curing the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Congresses but was not approved by
the Senate, for lack of time upon congressional adjournment.

In view of all the foregoing, approval of the Bill is earnestly requested.



NOU BR

fears

10

uublic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF R3PRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

HOUSE BILLNO. 37%

Introduced by: HON. RACHEL MARGUERITE B. DEL MAR

ANACT
AMENDING REPUBLIC ACT NO. 53, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS
“AN ACT TO EXEMPT THE PUBLISHER, EDITOR OR REPORTER OF ANY
PUBLICATION FROM REVEALING THE SOURCE OF PUBLISHED NEWS OR
INFORMATION OBTAINED IN CONFIDENCE” BY INLCUDING WITHIN ITS
COVERAGE JOURNALISTS FROM BROADCAST, NEWS AGENCIES AND
INTERNET PUBLICATIONS

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress
assembled.

SECTION 1. Section | of Republic Act No. 53

to read as follows:

as amended, is hereby further amended

“SECTION 1. Without prejudice to his liability under the civil and
criminal laws, [the publisher, editor, columnist or duly accredited reporter of any
newspaper, magazine or periodical of general circulation cannot be compelled to
reveal the source of any news-report or information appearing in said publication
which was related in confidence 9 such publisher, editor or reporter unless the
court or a House or committce of Congress] A DULY ACCREDITED
JOURNALIST OF ANY PRINT, BROADCAST, INTERNET, OR WIRE
SERVICE ORGANIZATION, INCLUDING THE PUBLISHER, STATION


H.B. No. 370 a

i OWNER AND/OR MANAGER, BUREAU CHIEF, EDITOR, NEWS EDITOR,
3 WRIT OR REPORTER, CORRESPONDENT, OPINION COLUMNIST OR
3 COMMENTATOR, CARTOONIST, PHOTOGRAPHER, OR OTHER
4 PRACTITIONER INVOLVED IN THE WRITING, EDITING, COMMENTING
5 ON THE NEWS FOR MASS CIRCULATION CANNOT BE COMPE! 'D TO
6 REVEAL THE SQURCE OF ANY NEWS ITEM, NEWS REPORT OR
7 INFORMATION APPEARING OR BEING REPORTED OR DISSEMINATED
8 \ SAID MEDIA, WHICH WAS RELATED IN CONFIDENCE TC: SUCH
9 JOURNALIST OR PRACTITIONER UNLESS THE COURT OR THE HOUSE
40 OF REPRESENTATIVES OR THE SENATE OR ANY OF ITS COMMITTEES
uu finds that such revelation is demanded by the security of the State.”

12 SEC. 2, Repealing Clause. - All laws, decrees, executive orders, niles or regulations or

{3 parts thereof inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are aereby repealed or modified
44 accordingly.

15 SEC, 3. &ffectivity. - This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its complete
16 publication in at least two (2) newspapers ©” national circulation.

Approved,


FIFTEENTH CONGRESS ,
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES) Re we
First Regular Session

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

9
House Bill No. 2278

eepresentat imo B. Rodriguez, Jr.

EXPLANATORY NOTE

Every democratic nation today recognizes the value of freedom of the press
The recognition and respect for this freedom is the very essence of democracy.
Uncensored public discussion is 2 necessary condition in a society enjoying the
bounty of a free and democratic Statz. Hence, freedom of the press is founded on
the assumption that the widest possible dissemination .of information from diverse,
and perhaps even “antagonistic” sources is essential for the enhancement and
projection of the welfare and interest of the people. Indeed, government can be
responsive to the will of the people only when free debate and unhampered
exchange of ideas become the halimark of the State.

In the Philippines, freedom of the press is a right protected by no less than the
Constitution. At the very core of the right is the liberty to discuss publicly and
truthfully all matters of public interest without prior censorship or subsequent

punishment. It signifies the freedom of a person to communicate with other mernbers
of the body politic.

It was in this liberal spirit that the Legislature enacted Republic Act No. 53 in
1946. The Act exempted the publisher, editor, colurnnist, or duly accredited reporter
of any newspaper, magazine or periodical of general circulation from being
compelled to reveal the source of any news report or informetion appearing in said
publication which was related in confidence to such publister, editor or reporter,
unless the court or a House or committee 2f Congress finds that such revelation is
demanded by the security of the State


As in the case of anything goad, Republic Act No. 53 had already outgrown its

“use‘uiness, so to speak. it would heve been a very good law if only it anticipated the
growth and development of mass media. Unfortunately, only members of the print
mecia are covered under its provisio-s.

It is beyond doubt that included within the concept of the “press” are such
vehicles of communications as radic, television and printed publications. Republic
Act No. 53, therefore, failed to cope with the exigencies of modernization. In view of
the foregoing, early passage of this bill is earnestly sought.

fi

RUFUS B. ROPRIGUEZ

a
MAXIMO bac JR.


FIFTEENTH CONGRESS )
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES: )
First Regular Session )

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

one
House Bill No, 2275

Introduced by Representative Rufus B. Rodriguez and
Representative Maximo B. Rodriguez, Jr.

AN ACT
FURTHER AMENDING SECTION ONE OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 53, OTHERWISE
KNOWN AS AN ACT TO EXEMPT THE PUBLISHER, EDITOR, COLUMNIST OR
REPORTER OF ANY PUBLICATION FROM REVEALING THE SOURCE OF
PUBLISHED NEWS OR INFORMATION OBTAINED IN CONFIDENCE

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in
Congress assembled:

SECTION 1. - Section One of Republic Act No. 53 is further amended to read
as follows:

“SECTION 1,Without prejudice to ris liability under the civil and criminal laws,
the publisher, editor, columnist or duly accredited reporter of any newspaper,
magazine or periodical of geneval circulation and the manager or duly
accredited reporter or newscaster of any radio or television station, rietwork or
facility, cannot be compelled to “eveal the source of any naws report or
information appearing in said publication or emanating from said radio or
television station, network or fecility which was related! in confidence te such
publisher, editor or reporter unless the court or a Senate or House Committee
of Congress finds that such revelation is demanded by the security of the
State.”

SEC. 2. Effectivity. - This Act shall take effect immediately upon its approval,

Approved.


FACT SHEET

House Bill No.
(As Approved by the Committee)

“AN ACT
AMENDING REPUBLIC ACT NO. 53, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS ‘AN
ACT TO EXEMPT THE PUBLISHER, EDITOR OR REPORTER OF ANY
PUBLICATION FROM REVEALING THE SOURCE OF PUBLISHED NEWS OR
INFORMATION OBTAINED IN CONFIDENCE’ BY INCLUDING WITHIN ITS
COVERAGE JOURNALISTS FROM BROADCAST, NEWS AGENCIES AND
INTERNET PUBLICATIONS”

Introduced by: Rep. Rachel Marguerite B. Del Mar,
Reps, Rufus B. Rodriguez And Maximo B. Rodriguez, Jr.

Committee Referral: COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC INFORMATION
Committee Chairperson: REP. BEN P. EVARDONE

OBJECTIVE:

* To expand the coverage of the journalist's right to refuse to reveal the source of
published news or information obtained in confidence

KEY PROVISION:

* Mandates that duly accredited journalists of any legitimate print, broadcast,
internet, or wire service organization, station or network, including the publisher,
station owner and/or manager, bureau chief, editor, news editor, writer or
reporter, correspondent, opinion columnist or commentator, cartoonist,
photographer, or other practitioner involved in the gathering, writing, editing of or
commenting on the news for mass circulation or broadcast cannot be
compelled to reveal the source of any news item, news report or information
appearing or being reported, disseminated or commented on in said media,
which was relayed in confidence to such journalist or practitioner unless the
Court or the House of Representatives or the Senate or any of its committees
finds that such revelation is demanded by the security of the State.

RELATED LAWS:

« RAS53, as amended
«© RA1477