Malacañang spokesperson Harry Roque said Rappler CEO Maria Ressa did not provide evidence to refute the cyber libel case against her, noting as if she wanted to be convicted.
Judge Rainelda Estacio-Montesa sentenced Maria Ressa and former Rappler researcher Reynaldo Santos Jr. of six months to six years in jail, but they were granted bail pending their appeal.
The Manila Regional Trial Court Branch 46 found Ressa and Santos guilty of cyber libel in connection to Rappler’s published article that cited an “intelligence report” linking the private complainant and businessman Wilfredo Keng, to drug smuggling and human trafficking in 2012.
Roque said Ressa did not submit evidence to counter the accusation of Keng that the article linking him to criminal activities defamed his character and reputation.
He also reiterated the President has nothing to do with Ressa’s conviction.
“Paano namang hindi mako-convict si Maria Ressa, hindi naman sila nag-introduce ng evidence na wala silang malice. Ni hindi sila nag-introduce ng evidence na vinerify nila iyong kanilang nire-report na kriminal ang isang pribadong indibidwal bago nila ipinublish, walang ganoong ebidensiyang prinisenta,” Roque, a lawyer, said in a televised briefing.
(How will she not be convicted? They did not introduce evidence that they don’t have malice. They also did not submit any evidence that they verified their report that a private individual is a criminal before they published it. They did not present those kinds of evidence.)
Also read: Roque advises Maria Ressa, Santos to apply for probation to avoid jail time
Roque: Ressa acted as if she wanted to be convicted
“Para ngang gusto niyang ma-convict. Well, ayan po, na-convict nga,” he added.
(It’s as if she wanted to be convicted. Well, she got convicted now.)
The Manila Regional Trial Court Branch 46 said Ressa and Santos did not verify the “intelligence report” linking Keng to drug smuggling and human trafficking. The court also noted that neither of the defendants took the witness stand.
The court also found Ressa, who is the “executive editor” of Rappler, liable despite they claimed she does not edit the online new site’s stories.
It also said it was a “clever ruse” for Rappler not to call Ressa its “editor-in-chief” “to avoid liability of the officers of a news organization” for libel.
The court also ruled the prescriptive period for cyber libel is 12 years, which means one could file a case within 12 years after an alleged libelous article was published. Rappler, however, claimed the prescriptive period was just one year.