Court Reverses Ruling Against Rappler, A Win for Press Freedom
A Philippine court has made a groundbreaking decision by reversing a previous ruling against the independent news platform Rappler, leading to the restoration of the company’s business license. This ruling, announced on Friday, marks a significant victory for press freedom in Southeast Asia, a region where media outlets often face intense scrutiny and hostility.
The case against Rappler is one of numerous criminal and civil complaints filed by the administration of former President Rodrigo Duterte. These allegations targeted not only Rappler but also its co-founder, Maria Ressa, who is a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, along with other board members and staff. The charges have ranged from tax evasion and violations of foreign ownership regulations to accusations of cyber libel.
Rappler’s critical reporting on Duterte’s controversial war on drugs has drawn the ire of the former president. In an interview with The New York Times in 2022, Ressa described the various legal actions against her and the news organization as forms of “harassment and intimidation.”
The most recent court decision pertains to the significant case involving the revocation of Rappler’s operating license in 2018. This revocation was initiated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which claimed that an investment from Omidyar Network, founded by eBay’s creator Pierre Omidyar, breached restrictions on foreign ownership in domestic media. The Philippine Constitution explicitly prohibits foreign entities from holding ownership stakes in local media organizations.
Despite the SEC’s revocation, Rappler continued its operations while awaiting the final resolution of the case, although the legal conflict compounded the difficulties the organization faced. In 2020, the SEC reaffirmed its earlier decision. Rappler maintained that the investment from Omidyar Network did not equate to ownership of shares, did not grant control over its operations, and therefore was not in violation of the law. The company pledged to escalate the matter to the Court of Appeals.
