While administration presidential candidate Gibo Teodoro is being accused of violating Intellectual Property Rights, it is of my humble opinion that his second cousin, co-presidential aspirant Noynoy Aquino may have violated R.A. 8491, otherwise known as the Flag and Heraldic Code of the Philippines.
Since I just had my much delayed midterm exam in Criminal Law, I still have a hang-over of memorizing codals and analyzing jurisprudence, so expect a more serious tone, absent of the glitzy-and-glamory showbiz intonation.
The Flag and Heraldic Code was enacted on February 12, 1998. Its purpose is to give respect and reverence to “the flag, the anthem, and other national symbols which embody the national ideals and traditions and which express the principles of sovereignty and national solidarity.” In this respect, heraldic items including the flag, inter alia, shall be accorded with highest respect.
Noynoy Aquino, in his most recent ad, the same ad where he tries to rap and Baby James appears on the last part, made use of the Philippine flag. While rap music was on, a man waved the flag of the Philippines.
The issue is whether or not the waving of the Philippine flag on Noynoy Aquino’s TV advertisement is violative of R.A. No. 8491.
The law is clear on this matter.
According to section 34 paragraph i of R.A. No. 8491, it is prohibited to “use, display or be part of any advertisement or infomercial.”
It is an elementary rule in statutory construction that when the words and phrases when the words and phrases of the statute are clear and unequivocal, their meaning must be determined from the language employed and the statute must be taken to mean exactly what it says. Absoluta sententia expositore non indiget. When the language of the law is clear, no explanation of it is required [Agpalo, Staturtory Construction (2003) p. 127].
The screenshot above, taken from Noynoy Aquino’s political ad campaign, clearly shows that the Philippine flag was used therein. The photo above constitutes a prima facie evidence.
Of course, Noynoy Aquino might use the defense of good faith. But then again, the law is clear on this matter. It is explicitly stated in the Republic Act that such is is prohibited. There was no mention that bad faith must be proven first.
It is quite disappointing that a person vying for the highest position in the land does not show respect to heraldic items. The presumption of the law is that when the flag is used in a manner prohibited by the act, it is tantamount to disrespect.
I just wonder that if a person, without pointing to anyone, cannot respect a simple law on flag and heraldic items, how can we expect him or her to respect other laws such as the Constitution and the Bill of Rights?
Posted simultaneously at Pinoy Gossip Boy.
aha!
Oh come on! Nahirapan na ba talaga kayong hanapan ng mali si Noy?
which do you prefer? politicians who accidentally did not show respect to the national symbols? or people who respect the national symbols but do not respect the Filipino citizens?
Anti-Noynoy, all the way!
maybe noynoy is just exercising his right to freedom of expression?
Uh…Didn’t Francis Magalona rap while brandishing the Philippine flag as well?
So many laws are being broken why quibble over something like this? What is the impact of rapping with the flag in the background?
[...] 3000); }); }); }); /*body * { margin:0 !important; padding:0 !important; }*/ 3 Likes Noynoy Aquino’s TV ad violated R.A. No. 8491 3 Likes A Filipina Mom Blogger- Parenting, Health, Wellness, Family & New Media [...]
oh come on this is not a big issue!!,tama si joanna ang hanapan mo ng mali yong mga magnanakaw sa kaban ng bayan.
[...] Noynoy Aquino’s TV ad violated R.A. No. 8491 [...]
This is perhaps why law students are generally not judges.
The Omnibus Election Code, Section 2 states: “This Code shall govern all elections of public officers and, to the extent appropriate, all referenda and plebiscites.”
Sec. 82(d): “All other forms of election propoganda not prohibited by this Code as the Commission may authorize after due notice to all interested parties and hearing where all the interested parties were given an equal opportunity to be heard[.]”
Section 6.4 of RA 9006 directs COMELEC to supervise the use and employment of press, radio and television facilities insofar as the placement of political advertisements is concerned so as to give candidates equal opportunities under equal circumstances to make known their qualifications and stand on public issues.
Another pillar of statutory construction is the old and familiar rule that where there is a particular enactment and also a general one, which, in its most comprehensive sense would include what is embraced in the former, the particular enactment must be operative, and the general enactment must be taken to affect only such cases within its general language as are not within the provisions of the particular enactment. (United States v. Chase, 135 U. S. 255 (1890)
Then, there is the issue of the statute being used against a political candidate for a content specific purpose in purely political speech. This triggers another pillar of statutory construction that a court must not pass on the constitutionality of an Act of Congress if a construction of the statute is fairly possible by which the question may be avoided and the case can be disposed of upon some other ground. Ashwander v. TVA, 297 US 288 (Brandeis concurring)
I am not a fan of Noynoy in any respect, but I’m also not a fan of half-baked legal opinions. One of the biggest hurdles to the rule of law in the Philippines, is its unnecessary politicization — as was done in this blog entry. If you want people to respect the rule of law, it is very important not to foreclose legitimate political discourse. The political process must be respected and purely political speech, such as an ad, is not a proper subject for courts — which is why courts are reluctant to allow claims that are content specific against purely political speech.
Kamakaylan ko lang naramdaman na parang masgusto ko na si Many V. kesa ka P. Noy kasi parang mas layunin ni Many V. ang gusto ko.. pero ok nadin si P. Noy..