Flordeliza G.

Jamila Philosophy of Law 1

JD-1

A.M. No. 07-09-13-SC August 8, 2008

RE: IN THE MATTER OF THE ALLEGATIONS CONTAINED IN THE COLUMNS OF MR.

AMADO A.P. MACASAET PUBLISHED IN MALAYA DATED SEPTEMBER 18, 19, 20, AND
21, 2007

DISSENTING OPINION
CARPIO, J.:
The Case
This resolves a contempt charge against respondent Amado A.P. Macasaet, a newspaper
columnist, for authoring publications imputing bribery to a member of this Court.
This case implicates two competing but equally vital State interests: on the one hand, the right
of journalists to be protected from contempt of court under the constitutional guarantees of free
speech and of the press and, on the other hand, the right of the courts to maintain order,
impartiality and dignity in the administration of justice.
The Facts
Macasaet writes a daily column, "Business Circuit," in Malaya, a newspaper of general
circulation. In the 18-21 September 2007 issues of Malaya, Macasaet ran a story, based on
information obtained from confidential sources, of an alleged bribery in the Court committed as
follows: on separate occasions in the second week of September 2007, 2 five3 boxes containing
cash worth P10 million were delivered to the Court and received by a certain "Cecilia," a staff of
an unnamed lady Justice, who opened one of the boxes and saw its contents. Forthwith, the
Justice terminated "Cecilias" employment. The payoff was made allegedly in connection with a
decision rendered by the Justice "acquitting" a Filipino-Chinese businessman. Macasaets story,
which carried commentaries on the state of the judiciary and reputation of judges,4 exhorted
"Cecilia" to divulge everything she knows about the alleged bribery and the Court to investigate
the matter.

Subsequently, Newsbreak, an online magazine, posted on its website5 a news report that the
Court is investigating a bribery incident based on facts substantially similar6 to what Macasaet
wrote. Written by Marites Danguilan Vitug, Newsbreak editor, and Aries Rufo, Newsbreak
reporter, the news report named Justice Consuelo Ynares-Santiago as the member of the Court
involved in the alleged bribery and one Cecilia Delis, as her staff whose employment she
terminated.
On 24 September 2007, Justice Santiago issued a statement denying the "accusations and
insinuations" published in Malaya and Newsbreak. Justice Santiago also asked the Court to
investigate the matter.

In a Resolution dated 25 September 2007, the Court en banc required Macasaet to explain
"why no sanction should be impose[d] on him for indirect contempt of court" under Section 3(d),
Rule 71 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. After Macasaet submitted his compliance and
Delis her affidavit, the Court, in the Resolution of 16 October 2007, created a Committee,
composed of former members of the Court,9 to "receive evidence from all parties concerned"
and submit its report and recommendation within 30 days from the start of its hearing.
Macasaet, Vitug, Rufo, Delis and other Court employees10 appeared and testified before the
Committee.
Macasaet, Vitug and Rufo uniformly testified that they obtained the information on the alleged
bribery from their respective confidential sources. Delis denied having received or opened any
box containing cash intended for Justice Santiago. While admitting that she was a staff of
Justice Santiago, Delis denied having been fired from service and claimed that she resigned
effective 15 March 2007. Danilo Pablo of the Courts Security Division testified that while visitors
to the Court are listed in the logbook at the Courts gate, the security personnel, as a matter of
policy, do not open gifts or boxes intended for members of the Court.
It was determined during the hearings conducted by the Committee that the case referred to in
Macasaet and Newsbreaks publications is G.R. No. 172602 (Henry T. Go v. The Fifth Division,
Sandiganbayan). The petition in G.R. No. 172602 sought the nullification of the
Sandiganbayans ruling denying quashal of the Information filed against petitioner Henry T. Go
(Go) for violation of Section 3(g), Republic Act No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act).
In a Decision dated 13 April 2007, penned by Justice Romeo J. Callejo, Sr., the Third Division,
by a divided vote, 12 dismissed the petition in G.R. No. 172602. Go sought reconsideration and
while his motion was pending, Justice Callejo retired from the Court. In the Resolution dated 3
September 2007, penned by Justice Santiago, a Special Third Division, again by a divided
vote,13 granted Gos motion, reversed the Decision of 13 April 2007, and dismissed the
Information filed against Go. The respondent sought reconsideration which awaits resolution.
In its Report and Recommendation dated 10 March 2008 (Report), the Committee found that
"there exist valid grounds to cite Macasaet for indirect contempt. The Report found that (1)
Macasaets publications were false, baseless,14 unbelievable,15 and malicious16 and (2)
Macasaet was negligent in failing to ascertain the veracity of his story.17 The Committee
concluded that Macasaets publications generated public distrust in the administration of justice
and thus, contumacious. The majority finds the Reports findings and conclusion well-taken and
accordingly imposes a punitive fine on Macasaet.