Court of Appeals affirms ban on Erap documentary

The Court of Appeals has affirmed an order of Malacañang to prohibit the showing of former President Joseph Estrada’s bioflick “Ang Mabuhay Para sa Masa.”

In a 13-page ruling, the CA said the documentary film could be allowed for public viewing if it would be modified and “balanced” to recognize the legality of the Arroyo presidency.

In the decision penned by Associate Justice Arcangelita Romilla-Lontok, the CA noted the film is an actual narration of the life of Estrada as a young boy, a movie actor and a politician, but a portion of which “consists of analysis, commentaries and conclusions of the producer/narrator.”

“The portion entitled ‘Power Grab’ by its descriptive appellation, connotes illegal seizure of power purportedly by the present President,” the CA said.

The CA ruled that the bioflick claiming an illegitimate government on public television is politically sensitive and runs contrary to the Supreme Court ruling that declared legal the assumption of power of President Arroyo after Estrada was ousted from office.

The CA added the film “might even qualify as libelous and defamatory” on insinuations of a unified action to overthrow Estrada by political and business personalities.

The CA said the petitioner, Public Perception Management Asia Inc. (Publikasia), should recognize the legality of the transfer of power from Estrada to Mrs. Arroyo and show it on film.

“The balancing factor in the form of replies by personalities defamed should likewise be integrated in the film as part thereof,” the CA ruled.

The CA also affirmed the findings of the Office of the President (OP) that Estrada’s bioflick is not a newsreel as argued by Publikasia, the petitioner.

Publikasia applied for exemption for review before the Movie and Television Review and Classification Board (MTRCB) on Aug. 22, 2006.

Publikasia argued Estrada’s film is just a compilation of newsreels that should be exempted from review.

But the MTRCB denied Publikasia’s application saying the film does not fall under the exemption provided by PD 1986 as it is more of a documentary than a newsreel.

The MTRCB also stressed the film falls within its review power.

The following day, the MTRCB sent Publikasia a letter declaring the film as “unsuitable for exhibition,” citing some of the scenes of Estrada’s unceremonial ouster from office in 2001.

The MTRCB said the film “may undermine the faith and confidence of the people in their government or duly constituted authority as the law provides.”

Publikasia then filed a motion for reconsideration but the MTRCB again disapproved its television airing.

Publikasia elevated its case before the OP.

After conducting a review, the OP declared the film unsuitable for public viewing, agreeing with the observations of the MTRCB.

The OP added the film could only be shown after the trial of Estrada in the Sandiganbayan is concluded.

Even if Estrada’s case had been already resolved with finality by the Sandiganbayan and given absolute pardon by the President, the CA said this does not exempt the film from the conditions imposed by Malacañang.

“Considering that the case against President Estrada before the Sandiganbayan has been resolved with finality and the latter was found guilty of the crime charged, the grant upon him of presidential pardon for the same did not render the imposition of the said conditions (by Malacañang) inutile,” the CA said.