GEAD Code Provisions Related to the Media

The Baguio City Council passed Ordinance Number 333, otherwise known as the Baguio City Gender Equality and Development Code (GEAD Code), in October 2005. For those of us who aren't familiar with this landmark ordinance, it has two important provisions (under Chapter II. Penal Provisions) that affect the practice of journalism in Baguio City.

Here they are:

ARTICLE III. JUSTICE, PEACE AND ORDER

Section 54. Non-disclosure of Victims’ and Offenders’ Identities. – The confidentiality of the real names, aliases, personal circumstances, or any other information tending to establish the identities of offenders and victims shall be preserved and shall not be disclosed to the public in any manner to protect their privacy and integrity unless authorized by law or for a lawful purpose. Any purpose who violates this provision shall be penalized with 15 days’ imprisonment or payment of P5,000, or both, at the discretion of the Court. (The offenders may also be prosecuted for Revelation for Secrets under Articles 229 and 230, as the case may be, of the Revised Penal Code.)

ARTICLE V. CULTURAL IDENTITY OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLE<

Section 58. Prohibition Against Degrading Programs or Publication. – It shall be unlawful for any person or entity to produce or present media reports, programs or advertisements in print, broadcast, electronic, film, or other forms of media, including stage shows or presentations, that degrade or treat indigenous women, minors and children as inferior beings, or which in any manner subject them to humiliation and ridicule. Publishers, reporters, station or program mangers, producers, directors, advertisers, actors, or other persons responsible for the production or presentation of such reports, programs, or advertisements shall be penalized with a fine of P5,000.00 or imprisonment of one (1) month, or both, at the discretion of the Court. The Court may also impose suspension or revocation of the business permit or franchise to operate of the guilty party, in appropriate cases.

It seems that under Section 54, it would now be difficult for journalists to mention the personal circumstances of both victims and offenders. But who would determine that the publication of their names are for a "lawful purpose"?

For me, this provision is particularly important if the victims or offenders are minors. Although I noticed that some broadsheets do not mention the names of minor offenders, I'm disturbed that a few local dailies identify these minor offenders in their articles.

As for Section 58, I wish it included "indigenous peoples" and not just "indigenous women, minors and children" from being presented as "inferior beings, or which in any manner subject them to humiliation and ridicule." Despite this flaw, at least we have this section that would warn people involved in the media to be more careful on how they present indigenous women, minors and children.

Almost two years after its passage, the code's implementing rules and regulations are now being refined. I hope that the IRR will set out clear guidelines that will make these two sections truly effective.