media manangement guide final2

8/11/2019 Media Manangement Guide Final2

1/29

1

Republic of the PhilippinesSupreme Court

Philippine Judicial Academy

MANUAL GUIDEFOR THE JUDICIARY IN DEALING WITH MEDIA

A. Objectives and Executive Summary

This Manual is intended as a guide for appellate justices,

trial judges and court officers in dealing with media. It points

out factors and circumstances which judges and court officers

should consider in determining whether or not to participate in

a media event. It lays down rules on media coverage of court

proceedings and access to court records. It indicates the best

option for those of them who believe that they are victims of

unjust and unfair media criticism and denunciation. It also

cites the pertinent rules in responding to media violations of the

sub-judice rule. Finally, it provides practical rules on judiciaryinformation, education and communication.

The Manual aims to emphasize the ethical considerations

that may confront judges in dealing with the media while at the

same time generating a better understanding of the culture and

values of media and a greater appreciation of the work of

journalists as they cover the Judiciary.

In this Manual, the term "judge" includes a justice of a

collegiate judicial tribunal.

B. Coverage

Media include the print, broadcast and video

dissemination of news, information or opinion to the public.

Media event covers a) a particular proceeding before, or

decision by, the court or judge; b) the behavior or conduct of

judges and court officers in and out of court; or c) other


2/29

2

aspects of the court's operations including, specifically

procedures, disposition rates or use of technology.

In this Manual, participation in media event refers to the

involvement of a judge or court officer in the events mentioned

above including responding to an inaccurate report or

comments concerning a proceeding, decision or activity of the

court.

C. Contents of the Judiciary-Media Relations Manual

The contents of the Judiciary-Media Relations Manual arethe following:

Introduction

Chapter I - The Judge in Media Events

Chapter II - Understanding the Culture and Values ofMedia

Chapter III - Media Coverage of Court Proceedings

Chapter IV - Media Access to Court Records

Chapter V - Responding to Media Criticism, InaccurateReporting and Violations of the Sub-JudiceRule

Chapter VI - Guidelines for Court Officers in Dealing withMedia

Chapter VII - Judicial Communication with Media

D. General Principles in Judiciary-Media Relations

1. There are five interacting constitutional principles

involved in judiciary-media relations. These are: a)

Independence of the Judiciary (Art VIII, Constitution)

which decrees that the courts should be left alone to do

their task without any pressure or undue influence from

whatever source; b) Right to Due Process of the litigants,

(Sec. 1, Art. III, Constitution) which provides that no


3/29

3

person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property

without due process of law; c) Freedom of Expression

(Sec. 4, Art III, Constitution) which covers the freedoms

of speech, expression and the press; d) Right to

Information on Matters of Public Concern(Sec. 7, Art. III

Constitution) which guarantees to the people the right to

be informed on all matters that concern them and their

government; and, e) the Vital Role of Communication and

Information in Nation-Building (Sec. 24, Art. II,

Constitution) which stresses the paramount importance,

inter alia, of media in the political, economic, social and

cultural growth of the country

2. Sometimes, the demands of a fair trial are viewed as a

restraint on media's constitutional freedom of the press.

On the other hand, the unrestrained exercise of media of

their freedom of expression is sometimes perceived as

unwarranted intrusion into the domain of the judiciary or

as an impairment of the rights of the parties litigant to a

fair trial.

3. The judiciary and media are both essential foundations of

a democratic polity. The administration of justice and

freedom of the press, though separate and distinct, are

equally sacred. Stated elsewise, an independent judiciary

is not preferred to free press, nor a free press to an

independent judiciary. Neither has a primacy over theother; both are indispensable to a free society.

4.

Judiciary and media are partners, not adversaries in the

building of a democratic society. There is, therefore, a

need to strike an optimal balance between the need for

judicial independence and respect for media's role as

provider of public information. As important as the

maintenance of a free press and the exercise of the rights

of citizens, is the maintenance of a judiciary unhampered

in its administration of justice and secure in its continuous

enjoyment of public confidence.


4/29

4

CHAPTER I

THE JUDGE IN MEDIA EVENTS

A. Basic Considerations

A judge has the discretion whether or not to participate in

a media event. His options range from : a) non-participation

in which media must cover proceedings, decisions and other

court activities without assistance or input from the judge; b)

participation only to the extent that it is necessary to help

facilitate an accurate and balanced reporting of proceedings,decisions and other court activities; and, c) initiating active

and unconditional participation in media events in which the

judge seeks media coverage of court proceedings, decisions

and other court activities.

This Chapter provides the judge with some guidelines to

help him decide which of the foregoing alternatives should be

taken by him under certain situations and conditions.

B. Pertinent Rules under the New Code of Judicial Conduct

for the Philippine Judiciary

The following rules constitute effective limitations upon a

judge's discretion to participate in a media event:

1. Canon 3, Sec. 4. Judges shall not knowingly, while a

proceeding is before, or could come before, them make

any comment that might reasonably be expected to affect

the outcome of such proceeding or impair the manifest

fairness of the process. Nor shall judges make any

comment in public or otherwise that might affect the fair

trial of any person or issue.

2. Canon 4, Sec. 2. As a subject of constant public

scrutiny, judges must accept personal restrictions that

might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen


5/29

5

and should do so freely and willingly. In particular, judges

shall conduct themselves in a way that is consistent with

the dignity of the judicial office.

3. Canon 4, Sec. 6. - Judges, like any other citizen, are

entitled to freedom of expression, belief, association and

assembly, but in exercising such rights, they shall always

conduct themselves in such a manner as to preserve the

dignity of the judicial office and the impartiality and

independence of the judiciary.

4. Canon 4, Sec. 9. - Confidential information acquired byjudges in their judicial capacity shall not be used or

disclosed for any other purpose not related to their

judicial duties.

C. Matters to be Considered by the Judge in Deciding on

Which of the Three Alternatives to Take in Dealing with

the Media

1. An effective administration of justice requires the public's

strong faith in the integrity and competence of the courts.

This public confidence depends on the availability of

accurate and balanced information about the courts and

their decisions, issuances and other activities.

2. The general public relies upon the media as its primary

sources of information about the courts. By the nature of

their functions, media exert a considerable influence over

how courts and decisions are perceived and understood

by the public.

3. The adequacy of the publics understanding of the system

of justice, the courts, their role and their

accomplishments, promote trust and confidence that is

essential to maintain an independent judiciary.


6/29

6

4. There are, however, risks associated with the unregulated

participation of the courts in media events. These include

the risk of:

4.1 denigrating its dignity if judges are perceived to be

engaging in a popularity campaign;

4.2 being criticized for not treating the courts cases

with equal importance since only a few cases may

merit coverage by the media;

4.3 violating the sub-judicerule;

4.4 increasing the power and influence of media in

shaping perceptions of the judicial system with the

concomitant result that the authentic and

authoritative voice of the courts will have less

significance in the public eye; and

4.5 misquoting the judge or misinterpreting his

statements.

D. Guidelines

1. There is merit in the proposition that the judges should

participate in media events only to the extent that it is

necessary to help facilitate an accurate and balanced

reporting of proceedings, decisions and other court

activities. Sometimes, because of media deadlines, space

constraints, demands of newsworthiness, the tendency to

sensationalize, personalize and trivialize, and the fact that

many media reporters on judiciary activities do not have

legal background (note: it is not required that reporters

should be educated in law, only some backgroundknowledge is needed), the reporting of judiciary activities

may be inaccurate. The judge is, therefore, fully justified

in giving media an explanation of said court decisions,

issuances or activities.


7/29

7

2. Judges should, whenever practicable, avoid extemporizing

or making impromptu statements to the media, and

therefore, should carefully prepare a truthful and accurate

statement ahead of the media event.

3. Judges may find it necessary to explain some decisions

which are difficult for non-lawyers to understand, in a

manner that is more easily comprehensible to the general

public.

4. Unless the judge grants express authority or permission,

no court official or employee shall presume to speak orwrite for the court and they shall respect office

confidentiality at all times.

CHAPTER II

UNDERSTANDING THE CULTURE

AND VALUES OF MEDIA6

A.Basic Considerations

Like any other profession, media has its own culture andvalues. The most important of these values are completelycompatible with the Judiciarys, namely, the pursuit of the truthand a staunch commitment to the public interest, among

others.

To enhance their working relationship with media, thisChapter acquaints judges with the tenets and constraintsgoverning the work of media.

B.

The Seven Tenets of the Press

1.

The first obligation is to truth and accuracy.This can only be achieved through thediscipline of verification.

6Adapted from the letter, dated July 1, 2004, of the Asian Institute ofJournalism and Communication to the PHILJA Chancellor.


8/29

8

2.

Stories should be balanced and fair,highlighting only the significant and excisingwhat is irrelevant and superfluous.

3.

In getting a story, media practitioners shouldexercise initiative and industry without violatingthe boundaries drawn by legal restrictionsconcerning confidentiality, privacy, prejudicialpublicity, libel, slander, sedition, among others.

4.

Medias loyalty should only be to the publicinterest. To this end it should maintain itsindependence and impartiality.

5. Consistent with its public responsibility, itshould serve as a check and monitor to thepowers-that-be.

6.

Media should also serve as a public forum fordiscussion and debate on important issues.

7.

In confronting ethical dilemmas, media

practitioners should be guided by their personalconscience consistent with their commitment totruth, fair play, and the public good.

C.

Factors in Determining Newsworthiness

In determining the newsworthiness of people, places, orevents, media considers the following factors:

1.

Timeliness. This concerns not only the date ofoccurrence but also the relevance to publicinterest;

2.

Interest to the audience. The audience may benational or regional depending on the mediaentitys reach;

3.

Involvement of public figures or celebrities;

4.

Whether it is unusual or out of the ordinary;

5.

Involvement of conflict or controversy;


9/29


10/29

10

incidents. These proceedings are open to the public

except in those instances when the law or the rules allow

the court to exclude the public.

To satisfy the constitutional requirement of a public

trial, a courtroom should have enough facilities to

accommodate a reasonable number of observers, not too

small as to render the transparency of judicial

proceedings meaningless, and not too large as to distract

the trial participants from their proper functions and

responsibilities.

2. Prejudicial Publicity

Prejudicial publicity means publicity that may

adversely affect a persons right to fair trial by inducing a

prejudgment of an issue upon which admissible evidence

has not been adduced.

Prejudicial publicity may be induced by unwarranted

public attention where conclusions formed are reached

and induced by extraneous forces or unhealthy influences

generated by excessive media intrusion in the judicial

process as indicated by sensationalized news reporting,

slanted television reporting and radio commentaries that

focus on the victim and divert attention from the suspect.

A public trial is not synonymous with publicized trial.

The requirements of due process guarantee the rights of

the litigants to a fair trial. In criminal cases, the

presumption of innocence in favor of the accused may be

overcome only by evidence of guilt beyond reasonable

doubt.


11/29

11

C. Guidelines in Television and Broadcast Coverage of

Court Proceedings

1. The television camera is a powerful weapon whichintentionally or inadvertently can destroy a litigant and his

case in the eyes of the public. Experience likewise has

established the prejudicial effect of telecasting on

witnesses. Witnesses might be nervous or play up to the

public. They are subject to extraordinary out-of-court

influences which may affect the credibility of their

testimony. Consequently, live television and radio

coverage of court proceedings may cause prejudice to fair

and orderly administration of justice as well as the

litigant's right to due process.

2. The freedom of the press and the right of the people to

information may be served by less distracting and

prejudicial means. Consequently, the interest of due

process and orderly, dignified court proceeding requirethat television and radio coverage of a court proceeding

may be regulated, restricted and even prohibited.

3. Video footages of court hearings for news purposes shall

be limited to shots of the courtroom, the judicial officers,

the parties and their counsel taken prior to the

commencement and after termination of official

proceedings. No video shots or photographs shall be

permitted during the trial proper, except for record

purposes as may be permitted ad casum by the Supreme

Court.

CHAPTER IV

MEDIA ACCESS TO COURT RECORDS



12/29

12

The people's right to know is enshrined in Section 7,

Article III of the 1987 Constitution which states:

"The right of the people to information on

matters of public concern shall be recognized.

Access to official records, and to documents, and

papers pertaining to official acts, transactions or

decisions, as well as to government research, data

used as basis for policy development, shall be

afforded the citizen, subject to such limitations as

may be provided by law."

Additionally, Section 28, Article II (Declaration of

Principles and State Policies) provides:

"Subject to reasonable conditions prescribed by

law, the State adopts a policy of full public disclosure

of all its transactions involving public interest".

Thus, it is clear from the foregoing provisions, that the

publics right to information must not result in the transgression

of other equally paramount individual rights. Congress may

properly prescribe acceptable or practical limitations, or even

proscribe the disclosure of certain information through

appropriate legislation. Similarly, the Supreme Court may also

prescribe limitations on the public's access to court records,

including evidentiary matters in its custody.

B. Concept of "Matters of Public Concern"

There is no specific law which defines "matters of public

concern." Its interpretation is, therefore, largely left to the

sound discretion of the courts. As can be gleaned from the

decisions of the Supreme Court, this term can embrace a broadspectrum of subjects which the public may want to know,

either because these directly affect their lives, or simply

because such matters should arouse the interest of an ordinary

citizen.


13/29

13

This "interest" can conceivably run the full gamut of

official activity which may or may not impact on the lives of all

citizens. A cursory review of Supreme Court rulings shows that

it considers as mandatorily disclosable such subjects as laws of

general application, information on the civil service eligibilities

of some officials or employees of the government, loans

extended by the GSIS, applications for the installation of a

chemical plant filed with the Department of Trade and Industry

or even voting slips submitted by MTRCB (Movie and Television

Review and Classification Board) in arriving at decisions in its

board meetings.

C. Guidelines

1. Access to all information and records in the official

custody, possession or control of members of the

judiciary shall be made available to media, except

such information or records that may not be

disclosed, as provided hereunder.

2. There shall be a presumption in favor of the public's

right of access to information and any justifiable

restriction or condition imposed for its release or

disclosure must not be unreasonable.

3. As a rule, requests for information or records shall

be acted upon as expeditiously as possible without

betraying those aspects of a judge's decision-

making process which require utmost

confidentiality. In this connection, judges should be

mindful of the provisions of Republic Act 67131and

1 Section 5 (a), RA 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards forPublic Officials and Employees). In the performance of their duties,all public officials and employees are under obligation to:

(a) Act promptly on letters and requests. All publicofficials and employees shall, within fifteen (15)working days from receipt thereof, respond to letters,telegrams or other means of communications sent by thepublic. The reply must contain the action taken on therequest.


14/29

14

Administrative Circular No. 08-992 dated July 2,

1999.

4. Judges and officials of the court should refrain from

making public comments on the merits of any case

pending in their respective salas or in other courts.

It is incumbent upon them to demand similar

restraint on the part of their personnel.

D. Information or Records to which Access may be Denied

1. The identity of parties in child and family cases and such

other restrictions as contained in R.A. No. 8369 (Act

establishing Family Courts, granting them exclusive

jurisdiction over Child and Family Cases, amending Batas

2SUPREME COURT ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR NO. 08-99 dated July 2, 1999

TO : All Officials and Personnel of the JudiciaryRE : Prompt Action on Letters and Requests and Public's

Personal Transaction

It has been observed by, and brought to the attention of, theChief Justice that in some instances complaints, letters or requestsfrom the public addressed to the officials of the Judiciary arebelatedly answered or not answered at all.

All concerned are reminded of paragraph (a) and (b) of Section 5of R.A. No. 6713, otherwise known as the Code of Conduct and EthicalStandards for Public Officials and Employees, which explicitly mandateas follows:

SEC. 5. Duties of Public Officials and Employees. In theperformance of their duties, all public officials and employees areunder obligation to:

(a) Act promptly on letters and requests. All public officialsand employees shall, within fifteen (15) working days from receiptthereof, respond to letters, telegrams or other means of communicationssent by the public. The reply must contain the action taken on therequest.xxx xxx xxx

(d) Act immediately on the public's personal transaction. Allpublic officials and employees must attend to anyone who wants to availhimself of the service of their offices and must, at all times, actpromptly and expeditiously.

The Presiding Justice of the Court of Appeals and theSandiganbayan, the Court Administrator, the Deputy CourtAdministrators, the Assistant Court Administrators, the Clerk of Courtof the Supreme Court, the Presiding Judge of the Court of Tax Appeals,and all the Executive Judges and clerks of court of all other courtsshall see to it that this Circular is immediately disseminated andobserved.

This Circular shall take effect immediately.

City of Manila, 02 July 1999.(SGD.) HILARIO G. DAVIDE, JR.Chief Justice


15/29

15

Pambansa Blg. 129, as amended, otherwise known as the

Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980, appropriating funds

therefore, and for other purposes), as amended, except

as authorized by the judge;

2. Proceedings and records in adoption cases, as prescribed

under R.A. Nos. 8043 (Act Establishing the Rules to

Govern Inter-country Adoption of Filipino Children, and

for other purposes, otherwise known as the INTER-

COUNTRY ADOPTION ACT OF 1995) and 8552 (Act

Establishing the Rules and Policies on the Domestic

Adoption of Filipino Children and for other purposes,otherwise known as the DOMESTIC ADOPTION ACT OF

1998);

3. Information that must be kept secret in the interest of

national security or defense or the conduct of foreign

affairs;

4. Information, the disclosure of which would put the life

and safety of anyone in danger;

5. Information that falls within the concept of established

privilege3;

6. Information of a personal nature where disclosure would

constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy;

7. Information that would disclose investigatory records

compiled for law enforcement purposes, or would

otherwise prejudice a person's right to a fair trial;

8. Drafts of decisions, rulings, orders or internal memoranda

or internal reports;

3 Established privilege refers to deliberations in closed-door cabinetsessions, executive sessions of Congress, deliberations of the SupremeCourt and other collegiate courts and those privileged communicationenumerated in Rule 130, Sec. 24 of the Revised Rules of Evidence,namely: (a) communication to a public officer made to him in confidencewhen the court finds that public interest might suffer by disclosure;communication between (b) husband and wife (c) attorney and client; (d)doctor and patient and (e) minister or priest and penitent.


16/29


17/29


18/29

18

2.7 Many legal news reporters do not have

legal background so that their reportage

is sometimes inaccurate.

B. Guidelines

1. It is not appropriate for a judge to explain the reasons for

his findings of fact because his personal evaluation and

assessment of the credibility of witnesses and the

probative value of evidence are matters that should have

been dealt with in the decision itself.

2. A judge or court officer should avoid acrimonious debate

with media, bearing in mind that he does not have the

same access to the media as the media practitioners

themselves and therefore, will be on the losing end. A

knee-jerk reaction from the judge or court officer may

only provoke negative follow-up reports and articles.

3. Members of the judiciary should learn to live and deal

with "bad news" because that is a reality.

4. The aloofness of the members of the judiciary to media

purportedly to maintain and protect their independence

and dignity, does not always serve the judiciarys best

interests.

5. Other factors to consider in determining whether a

response to media criticism should be made:

5.1 that a response would serve a public information

purpose and not appear to be "nitpicking";

5.2 that the criticism may adequately be met by a

response from some other appropriate source than

the judge;


19/29

19

5.3 that the criticism substantially and adversely affects

the judiciary and other parts of the legal system;

5.4 that the criticism, although directed at a particular

judge, unjustly reflects on the judiciary or other

elements of the judicial system in a manner that

seriously impairs the administration of justice.

However, if the report or opinion is published in a

tabloid or broadsheet with dubious credibility and

with a minimal or inconsequential circulation in a

small area, a response may not be necessary;

5.5 that a response provides an opportunity to inform

the public about an important aspect of the

administration of justice (e.g. sentencing, bail,

evidence rules, fundamental rights, etc.);

5.6 that a response would merely appear to be

defensive or self- serving;

5.7 whether the critic is so obviously uninformed about

the judicial system that the appropriate response

should be made only on a factual basis;

5.8 whether the criticism or report, although generally

accurate, does not contain all or enough of the facts

of the event or procedure reported so that there isa distortion of the decision, and a response is

needed to be accurate and fair to the judge

concerned;

5.9 that the overall criticism is unjustified or unfair.

6. Cases in which response to criticism is notappropriate:

6.1 that the criticism is a fair comment or opinion;


20/29

20

6.2 when the feud is between the critic and the judge

on a personal level;

6.3 when the criticism is vague or the product of

innuendo;

6.4 when the response would prejudice a matter at

issue in a pending proceeding; and

6.5

when the controversy is insignificant.

7. Official or Office Which Should Give the Response:

7.1 Media Attack Against the Judiciary or the Judicial

System

7.1.1 If the media attack is against the judicial

system, and response is called for, it is

preferable that it be done by the Chief Justice,either personally or through the Public

Information Office of the Supreme Court, at

his discretion, in order to prevent the erosion

of the people's trust in the courts and in the

administration of justice.

7.2 Media Attack Against a Judge or a Court Officer.

7.2.1 If the denunciation is against an individual

judge or court officer, and a response is

necessary, it is preferable that the concerned

person be the one to respond. In such case,

he should always immediately furnish a copy

of his response to the Public Information

Office and the Office of the Court

Administrator not only for record purposes but

also for proper coordination and monitoring of

the incident.


21/29


22/29

22

against the offending media

practitioner;

e. in extreme cases, resort to his (judge's)

contempt power in accordance with the

law and the rules; and,

f.

institute appropriate civil and/or criminal

action against the offending media

practitioner.

8.2

A response to an inaccurate report should addressonly the matter perceived to be erroneous and the

corrective statement or article should not give the

impression that it is an attempt to justify a weak or

incorrect decision.

C. Violation of the Sub-Judice Rule

1.

Definition

Sub-judice rule (literally "under the power of a

judge") is the proscription of any utterance or publication

during the pendency of a case which tends to prejudice

the fair resolution of a case by influencing the courts

conduct of proceedings, impairing its impartiality, and

prejudicing its ability to make a fair determination of theissues in the case. When a case is pending in court, no

one should comment on its merits in a way that may

influence the court in the adjudication of the case except

when done as part of the judicial process by those

directly involved in it.

The sub-judice rule also guards against provoking

public opinion on any pending case in such a way as may

make it difficult for the court to render a fair judgment

Filipino journalist. The Institute promulgates the FilipinoJournalists Code of Ethics.


23/29

23

thereon unfettered by the threat of adverse public

opinion.

2. Test of Liability for Sub-judiceUtterances or Publications

For utterances or publications to constitute violation

of the sub-judice rule and, therefore, punishable as

contempt, it is not necessary to show that they are

actually prejudicial to the trial or that they were

intentionally made for that purpose. The sub-judicerule is

concerned with "tendency". To constitute contempt, the

publication must have a tendency to interfere with the

administration of justice in relation to the hearing. Not all

public discussions or comments and proceedings on

pending cases have that tendency - the question

becomes one of discerning from the nature and

circumstances of the utterance or publications whether

there is a real or definite possibility that it may prejudice

the administration of justice.

3. Factors to Consider in Determining whether Citations

should be issued for Violation of the Sub-judiceRule:

3.1 the nature and extent of the publications;

3.2 the stature of the author of the comment as a

person of public influence;3.3 whether the proceedings are criminal or civil;

3.4 the timing of the publication or utterance; whether

the trial is imminent or not;

3.5 whether the discussion is central or incidental to the

publication;

3.6 the audience to whom publication is addressed;

and,

3.7 the likely durability of the publication in the minds

of the recipients.


24/29

24

4. Sanction Against Violations of the Sub-judice Rule

A person who violates the sub-judice rule may be

punished for indirect contempt under Section (3), (c) and(d) of Rule 71 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, to wit: (c)

Any abuse of or unlawful interference with the processes

of a court not constituting direct contempt under Section

1 of this Rule" and (d) Any improper conduct tending,

directly or indirectly to impede, obstruct or degrade the

administration of justice."

The court should calibrate the imposable penalty for

indirect contempt as provided for under Section 7, Rule

71 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, balancing the

Constitutional guarantee of free speech and the need to

protect the integrity of the adjudicative process.

If the offending media personnel is a lawyer, he can

also be administratively charged for professional

misconduct for which he can be meted the administrative

penalty of suspension.

CHAPTER VI

GUIDELINES FOR COURT OFFICERS

IN DEALING WITH MEDIA


This chapter provides guidelines for court officers in

dealing with media inquiries on court processes. Inquiries


25/29

25

affecting the Supreme Court and its operations may be referred

to the Public Information Office.

B. Definition of Terms

1. Court Officers

They refer to those duly authorized court personnel

who are privy to the conduct of court proceedings and

the handling of court records and documents. They

include the following officers in all levels of courts: all

clerks of courts and their assistants, division or branch

clerks of courts and their assistants, court attorneys,

heads of divisions, units or offices in any court and their

assistants and sheriffs.

2. Court records

They refer to all documents of the court, includingrecords of cases and evidence in its official custody.

C. Guidelines

1. Court officers, as a matter of practice, should always

ascertain from their judges guidance on how to properly

deal with any particular media event or inquiry. Theyshould defer to their judges for such guidance. Where

there is a need to respond to unfair media criticism,

inaccurate reporting and violation of the sub-judice rule,

the judge or the Public Information Office shall assume

such task.

2. It is the duty of the court officers to provide the judge as

soon as possible with the appropriate information on any

matter subject of an inquiry by media personnel in order

to guide the judge in making a decision thereon.


26/29

26

3. In the absence of any specific law, rule or court policy to

the contrary, court officers may provide only factual and

otherwise publicly accessible data or information such as

the following:

3.1 Names of the parties, title of case, and case

number;

3.2 Names of counsel;

3.3 Name of the handling judge;

3.4 Relevant dates and place concerning the

incidents;

3.5 Petitions or Prayer3.6 Laws cited in the complaint or information

3.7 Hearing schedule;

3.8 Status of the case.

4. Requests for specific documents or transcripts of judicial

proceedings shall be governed mainly by Chapter III

(Rules on Access to Court Records) of this Manual. Court

officers should see to it that only properly admitted

documents in court may be the subject of such requests.

Leave of court, whenever necessary, should be applied

for by the requesting media personnel.

5. Where there is strong public and media interest on a

particular case, court officers must avoid discussing the

issues surrounding the case and refrain from respondingto any inquiries which tend to be controversial. In this

regard, court officers must await instructions from the

judge concerning the time and date of delivery of any

judgment, decision, action or order being requested.

6. Court officers may, with the permission of their respective

judges, allow themselves to be interviewed only on

matters that are purely informative in character without

having to express their personal views on the matter.

7. Court officers should immediately coordinate with the

Public Information Office, especially in regard to sensitive


27/29

27

cases subject of media events or inquiries where there is

strong public interest and media coverage.

CHAPTER VII

JUDICIAL COMMUNICATION WITH THE MEDIA

An important aspect of judicial communication with media is,

among others, responding to unfair or inaccurate criticism of the

conduct of a judge or a judicial officer as treated in Chapter V of thisGuide.

Drafting an appropriate response to Media Event

1. Before preparing his response, the judge should seek to

understand the cause of the controversy or motive for the

criticism which may not be readily apparent so that he

may properly address that matter.

2. The response should be:

a) as brief as the nature of the subject and the intelligible

presentation thereof will admit. Verbose and prolix

statements should be avoided.

b) focused on the issues, avoiding any emotional,

inflammatory or subjective language and without

attacking the competence, good faith or motives of the

critic.

c) simple and clear, stating the facts with definiteness,

certainty and clarity by direct and positive averments and

not leave them to be deduced by arguments and

references.


28/29

28

d) devoid of pompous and bombastic language because it

is intrinsically unpersuasive.

e) informative, not argumentative or condescending;

f) corrective of inaccuracies, citing facts and relevant

authorities where appropriate;

g) written in lay terms understandable to the public;

h) inclusive of, where appropriate, the point that the

judge had no choice on the matter as he wasmandatorily required by law to impose the penalty or

decide in a particular manner on that issue;

i) inclusive of, if called for, an explanation of the context

and processes involved (e.g. sentencing, bail,

temporary restraining order);

j) not indicative that the critic has hit a nerve, causing

overreaction; and finally

k) not defending the indefensible.

N O T E

It is hereby acknowledged that adaptations had been made in

this Guide from the Media Management Guideof the Federal Court of

Australia; Model Program to Meet Inaccurate or Unjust Criticism of

the Bench, Courts and Community Committee, American Bar

Association, 1986; ABA Annotated Rules of Professional Conduct,

1992 Edition; Decisions and Resolutions of the Supreme Court

including: Re: Live TV and Radio Coverage of the Hearing of

President Corazon C. Aquino's Libel Case, En Banc, October 22, 1991;


29/29

Chavez vs. PCGG, 299 SCRA 744; Re: Request Radio TV Coverage of

the Trial in the Sandiganbayan of the Plunder Case Against the

Former President Joseph E. Estrada, AM No. 01-4-03, June 29, 2001;

and Handbook of English Grammar.

media manangement guide final2

Documents