Desierto favors live TV coverage of Erap trial

Filipinos may yet be treated to another television drama after Ombudsman Aniano Desierto changed his mind and dropped his objection to the proposed media coverage of the corruption trial of jailed former President Joseph Estrada.

"I am now in favor of the live (media) coverage of Estrada," said Desierto, adding that government lawyers would likely ask the Sandiganbayan this week to allow media coverage of Estrada’s corruption trial.

"It will help the cause of justice... not only the prosecution but also the defense and the anti-graft court itself," Desierto said, arguing that live media coverage of the trial would force the prosecution and defense panels to prepare well for every court appearance.

But the prosecution motion is expected to go through rough sailing not only because of the objection of Estrada’s defense lawyers but also because of an earlier Supreme Court resolution banning live media coverage of the court proceeding.

Estrada’s lead defense counsel, former Justice Secretary Serafin Cuevas said they would continue to oppose the motion because media coverage of Estrada’s impeachment trial in the Senate proved to be detrimental to his case.

"As you have seen, only the negative aspect of Estrada had been released on television and tackled on radio," Cuevas said.

Moreover, the SC ruled in June last year against live media coverage of the event when the Kapisanan ng mga Brodkasters ng Pilipinas (KBP) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) asked the high court to allow live media access to court proceedings.

Voting 8-6, the Supreme Court denied the request and ruled that every accused’s right to due process is more important than having the trial against him televised nationwide.

But the composition of the high court has changed since then with the retirement of Justice Minerva Reyes and the appointment of former presidential chief legal counsel Antonio Carpio.

The eight jurists who voted against media coverage were Estrada appointees: Justices Sabino de Leon, Angelina Gutierrez, Bernardo Pardo, Minerva Reyes and Arturo Buena. Another Estrada appointee, Justice Consuelo Santiago was on leave when the vote was taken.

Justices Santiago Kapunan, Vicente Mendoza and Jose Vitug also voted against media coverage. Vitug wrote the majority opinion.

"An accused has a right to a public trial but it is a right that belongs to him, more than anyone else, where his life and liberty can be held critically in balance," Vitug wrote in the majority ruling.

Courts are not like government agencies where the people’s will are expressed and made to bear on the justiciable issues brought before them, Vitug held.

Those who dissented were Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr., Justices Reynato Puno, Artemio Panganiban, Leonardo Quisumbing, Jose Melo and Josue Bellosillo.

Desierto also claims conditions were different when Estrada’s cases were being handled by a regular Sandiganbayan division and not by a special division as is the case today.

When the KBP request was brought before the Sandiganbayan last year, the 15-man anti-graft court voted 8-6 in favor of media coverage but the third division that handled the Estrada cases opposed the proposal.

Meanwhile, the Sandiganbayan’s Estrada division ordered the physicians of Estrada’s son, former San Juan Mayor Jose "Jinggoy" Estrada, to appear before the court to explain the younger Estrada’s health situation.

Special division chairman Justice Minita Nazario ordered physicians Roberto Anastacio, chief cardiologist of the University of Sto. Tomas Hospital, and Lorenzo Hocson, director of the San Juan Medical Center, to appear in court at 9 a.m. tomorrow.

Nazario issued the order after the court allowed Jinggoy to leave detention to seek medical attention at the Makati Medical Center for the fourth time since he and his father were arrested in April last year.