Court acquits Che-che in wiretap

MANILA, Philippines - Citing lack of evidence, the Pasay City Metropolitan Trial Court (MTC) acquitted yesterday broadcast journalist Cecilia “Che-che” Lazaro of wiretapping charges filed against her by a ranking official of the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS).

In a 28-page decision, Judge Eliza Yu of MTC Branch 47 agreed with the prosecution’s demurrer of evidence, stating that the camp of GSIS vice president Ella Valencerina failed to show strong proof that Lazaro violated Republic Act 4200 by recording their conversation and broadcasting it without the complainant’s knowledge and consent.

“The prosecution failed to discharge its burden in proving the guilt of the said accused beyond reasonable doubt because all the foregoing elements of the offense were not established,” Yu said.

Yu cited three grounds for an act to be considered as wiretapping.She said there must be a third person who will record the conversation without the consent of both parties, the person will record the conversation through the use of wire or cable, or any other device or arrangement during the private communication; and tapping any cable wire or using other device to “secretly overhear, intercept, or record” private conversations through the use of dictograph, detectaphone, walkie-talkie, or tape recorder.

Yu said that based on Valencerina’s court testimony, she had been informed and was aware that Lazaro was recording their conversation.

“The accused will not inform the private complainant at all of the recording if her intention is to wiretap the conversation,” the decision said.Valencerina filed charges against Lazaro after the later allegedly recorded their Nov. 10, 2008 conversation, when the broadcaster sought the agency’s side on its controversial Premium-Based Policy, where more than 500,000 teachers are affected.

Parts of the conversation were later aired over Lazaro’s Probe segment titled “Perwisyong Benepisyo.”

Yu said that based on Valencerina’s testimony, she was “aware” and had been told that their interview was being recorded.

Based on the transcript of their conversation, Lazaro told Valencerina that she was recording the interview “because we want this on record that we are calling you.”

"It bears stressing that recording is not an outright wiretapping. When the accused recorded the phone conversation she had with private complainant Ella Valencerina who has knowledge of this recording, this act was not meant to tap.

It was a simple recording by a reporter of a conversation which is not punishable by law," the decision read.Yu also said that Valencerina could not invoke violation of the wiretapping law because she never discussed any private conversation with Lazaro.

The court also ruled that the airing of the conversation “did not encroach into the private life of the private complainant.”

Yu said Lazaro merely informed the public “the phone conversation she had with private complainant, a GSIS spokesperson, to obtain from her the reason why the GSIS was unwilling to be interviewed about its Premium-Based Policy is a part of the legitimate exercise of a right of free speech which is constitutionally guaranteed and protected.”