GMA-7 defends television program

Television and radio broadcaster GMA-7 Network denied accusations by the Commission on Elections (Comelec) that it had violated the election campaign law.

Comelec Chairman Benjamin Abalos said GMA’s television program "Bio-Data," which features candidates in the presidential and vice presidential races, constituted premature campaigning and political advertising.

The campaign period does not begin until Feb. 10.

The Comelec has sent GMA a letter ordering it to pull the plug on the program or face sanctions.

In a position paper defending its television program, GMA assistant vice president for legal affairs Dick Perez told the Comelec that the television program is not covered by the election campaign law and is not involved in partisan politics.

"Bio-Data features all Comelec-qualified presidential and vice presidential candidates and focuses on their family background, education, career history, wealth, personal traits and stand on issues… It was designed, conceptualized and produced exclusively by GMA’s news and public affairs department which is not aligned with any candidate or political group or coalition," Perez said.

A section in the Omnibus Election Code defines "election campaign" or "partisan political activity" as "an act designed to promote the election or defeat of a particular candidate," Perez said.

The program, he explained, was "not designed to promote the election or defeat of any candidate" but was meant to inform voters and help them make an intelligent choice come May 10.

"The program features all the six presidential candidates and gives all of them the same time and time slot. The fact that all contenders are being featured negates any notion of partisanship," he said.

The television program did not air speeches, announcements or commentaries for or against any candidate, Perez said.

"The candidates’ statements concerning their candidacy or their stand on issues are merely incidental to the story and are not intended by the program to solicit votes," he argued.

"Besides, these statements are to be treated as matters of public interest, which the State cannot prevent from being broadcast or aired without offending the constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech, expression, and of the press, as well as the right of the people to information on matters of public concern."