We already have laws governing or affecting the conduct of media. We have laws on libel, privacy, sedition, pornography and a host of other crimes that impinge on the operation of our relatively free press.
If in the course of our coverage we violate any existing law, the authorities are free – in fact, duty-bound – to file the necessary charges in court. It is that simple.
Interviewing persons suspected of having violated the law or even persons already convicted of some crime is part of the day’s work for the press. When we interview a suspect or a convict, it does not follow that we subscribe to, sympathize with, or abet his alleged crime.
Instead of presuming to tell private media how to cover the news or whom to interview, government officials should attend to their own housekeeping, including keeping their hands clean.
Since Lacson is clothed with parliamentary immunity, he cannot be held to account for what he said on the floor except in the same place.
Section 11, Article VII, of the Constitution says: "No (senator or member of the House of Representatives) shall be questioned nor be held liable in any other place for any speech or debate in the Congress or in any committee thereof."
If only to be fair, Lacson should be man enough to repeat outside the Senate his accusations so his victims could have recourse in law. As it is, the exchange is one-sided.
He said his informant did not want to file the complaint himself because he had no faith in the justice system. By impliedly sharing that distrust and resorting to a privilege speech, the senator is flashing a dangerous message and setting a bad example.
At the risk of stressing the obvious, we have to point out that the Senate or a congressional committee is the wrong place to determine the guilt or innocence of anybody accused of a crime. This is not theory, but a fact borne out by history.
Is it now a crime to enter a building where the husband of the President happens to hold office?
Is the senator implying that when journalists go to that building, they do so to collect payola, get instructions or join a criminal plot? That’s a reckless jump of logic.
Lacson’s charge of money laundering against First Gentleman Miguel Arroyo is another matter. While he is not a government official, as spouse of the President he is now a public figure whose life is fair subject for scrutiny.
Arroyo’s misfortune is that many people are ready to believe the worst said of him even without benefit of proof. It’s a tough PR (public relations) or image problem.
As he is the Achilles’ heel of President Arroyo, the opposition is trying to hit the President through him.
Former President Cory Aquino is scheduled to drive down Ayala Ave. at 3 pm today. Everyone is urged to come to Makati in yellow from 2 to 4 p.m. Owners of buildings and companies along Ayala Ave. may want to shower her with confetti and allow their staff to come down to join the rally.
Those in high-rise buildings from EDSA to Makati Ave. may want also to join the outpouring and shower her with yellow confetti as in the rallies of old.
Possible meeting places for groups are hotel lobbies and open space in the Makati commercial area, and churches nearest to EDSA and Ayala Ave. such as the Santuario de San Antonio church and the Sacred Heart church on Dao St. near Ayala Ext.
The crowds can gather and just walk out at 2 p.m. Parishioners and parish groups from the churches can organize themselves to meet in their churches.
Don’t forget to wear yellow or something yellow. Bring shredded old yellow pages and carbon black banners to remind us of the dark days and the shame of the Marcos dictatorship and Ninoy’s liberating martyrdom.