Video Transcript / Subtitles:( AI generated. About AI subtitles » )

* AI ("Artificial Intelligence") subtitles on Tagalog.com are generated using "Whisper" by OpenAI (the same company that created ChatGPT and DallE2). Results and accuracy may vary.
* The subtitles do include errors occasionally and should only be used as a tool to help with your listening practice.
* You can request this website to create a transcript for a video if one doesn't already exist by clicking the "Request AI Subtitles" button below a video. Transcribing usually takes 30-40% of the length of a video to complete if there are no other videos in the queue. For example, a 21 minute video will take 7-8 minutes to transcribe.
* Running a super fast cloud GPU server to do these transcriptions does cost money. If you have the desire and financial ability, consider becoming a patron to support these video transcriptions, and the other tools and apps built by Tagalog.com

Mayroon ng maraming nagsasabi at nag-issue na yata ng statements si dating Yusek Badoy

na pinapaliit niya ang halaga nitong desisyon.

Sabi niya, pabor pa raw ang kanyang Supreme Court sa kanya

at ang binigay lamang is 30,000.

Hindi ito, hindi ito minamesure as to the amount that she had been fined to pay.

Ito yung kahalagahan because the Supreme Court gave us the guideposts,

the judicial guideposts para sabihin natin kung ano ang ating mga parameters

para let's hold people accountable in a similar situation.

Ah, yung palang spin niya dyan, 30,000 lang.

Sabi niya, nanalo ako. Wala naman akong imprisonment, sabi ng batas.

Pero hindi niya nakikita ang kahalagahan nitong desisyon na ito,

ang presidential document.

Ito yung value of this decision of the court.

Landmark ito, Christian. This is a landmark case.

Yung mga nakita ko nagtatanong po kanina online, sinasabi nila,

bakit daw 30,000 lang yung fine na ipinakatao sa kanya?

Ano po bang ano? Medyo luma ba talaga yung batas dyan?

Luma yung batas.

Sa opinion niyo ba masyado maliit yun, 30,000?

Well, we have to revise the rules of court.

We have to revise it.

Pero ang pinaka mataas na penalty na bibigay is 30,000.

Plus 30 days of imprisonment.

Yung sa kanya, ano po ba? Kasama ba imprisonment or yung fine lang?

May fine at saka stern warning that further similar acts or similar utterances

of the respondent, Badoy Partosa, would be treated sternly, more sternly,

and that a higher penalty will be in the office.

Pag ganun po ba, kunwari, inulit?

Kunwari, kasi kung marami ka naman pera, ano ba naman yung 30,000 sa'yo?

Pag inulit ba yun, ano ba yung nasa range ng tinatawag na more stern na penalties?

More stern is one, is imprisonment, 30 days.

At saka meron tayong tinatawag na Article 19 of the Civil Code of the Philippines

that pwedeng gawing basis yun ng anyone who would be affected

by the utterances of similar utterances of Badoy Partosa, so may she does,

then meron tayong mga remedies sa ibang batas naman, hindi lang dito sa Rules of Court.

Okay. Ano naman po yung ano? Pag-usapan po natin yung importansya nitong ruling na ito

ng Korte Suprema at sabi nyo nga po, moto proprio, hindi kailangang may lumapit sa Supreme Court.

Sila mismo, umaksyo na po. Tama po ba? Yan po yung ibig sabihin nun, di ba?

Tama po.

Okay.

Tama po.

Tama po.

Tama po.

Tama po.

Tama po.

Tama po.

Tama po.

Tama po.

Tama po.

Tama po.

Tama po.

Ang importansya nito, anong kahalagahan nitong ruling na ito in the context of judges

performing their responsibilities? Kasi ito, kulang na lang yata murahin yung judge, no?

Actually, mas masakit pa sa mura yung mga sinabi sa kanya.

So, ano yung implication nun sa ganyang konteksto po?

Ang konteksto nito ay pinapangalagaan ng Supreme Court ang independensya ng mga juez, ng mga judges.

In other words,

hindi dapat silang matakot na mag-render ng desisyon ayon sa kanilang pagpanaw sa kanyang mga kaso na kanilang hinaharap, no?

Because when you adjudicate, when you decide or render decisions, you're actually functioning as an officer of the court, no?

Part of the judicial system.

And the hierarchy of courts, kasama ng RTC, kasama ng Court of Appeals, kasama ng Supreme Court, ang pinakamatasa ng Supreme Court.

Therefore,

dapat walang, walang, walang iniisip ang judges.

Kung hindi, kung anong tama sa kanyang sapantaha sa mga ebidensyang inilahag sa kanya.

At huwag siyang matatakot ng outside influences, at hindi siya tatakutin mga parties sa litigation,

at dapat ay malaya siyang magbibigay ng desisyon.

Iyan ang independence of judiciary.

Okay.

Dito po, di ba, ang punente po o yung sumulat ng desisyon ay si Justice Marvick.

Leonin.

And I think a significant portion of that decision focused on freedom of expression in the context of this so-called marketplace of ideas.

Gano'n po kahalaga yung sinabi niya tungkol doon, no?

Kasi nga, sinasabi ng, alam naman ng marami yung ibig sabihin ng marketplace of ideas, no?

Magtutuwang galean yung mga opinion, idea.

And meron tayong, tawag dito,

confidence sa tao because of our human faculties para piliin kung ano yung tama.

Pero maganda yung discussion doon ni Justice Leonin po, no?

Siguro ang tanong ko sa inyo, hindi ba ito, ano, parang attack naman on free expression

kung ganito naman niya ipinataw against someone like Lorraine Badoy?

Well, ang masusing, you know, and explain ni Justice Leonin ang ibig sabihin ng freedom of expression

and the...

the press, no?

Sabi niya na talagang unfettered dapat siyan, no?

The general rule is that it's not supposed to be, there should be no law abridging the press freedom

and expression.

In fact, in our 1987 Constitution, lilagyan pa nga nila ng freedom of expression.

Hindi lang yung freedom of the press, no?

And speech.

Kaya ang sinasabi ni Justice Leonin at mahaba niyang tinanakay at in genesis ng freedom of expression

and...

and freedom of speech,

tinanakay niya ang anong kahalagahan ng freedom of speech dito sa ating bansa, sa democratic polity.

But ang sabi niya, hindi ito unfettered.

In other words, merong hangganan to.

Hindi maaaring makamumurahin mo, for example, ng judge in that particular context

and then sasabihin mo freedom of the press yan, freedom of expression.

In other words, it impacts on the integrity of the judge.

So, based on falsehood, for example, as in this case, as found by the Supreme Court,

then hindi pwede natin po protection ng so-called freedom of the press ng respondent.

May hangganan, no?

Tsaka tulad nung binabanggit ko po lagi dyan, yung marketplace of ideas concept, dapat i-update yan eh.

Kasi sa panahon ng disinformation, at kung saan yung platforms ng social media ay nakokontrol,

kumbaga, it applies kung yung free market of ideas.

Level yung playing field. May equal opportunity sa mga tao to express themselves.

Sa panahon niya yan kasi, yung mismong tindahan, yung mismong merkado, kontralado ng mga manipulators.

So, yan ang medyo nakakatakot dyan.

Ito ba, gusto kong puntahan yung mismong kaso, yung prescription case.

Doon yata nagputok yung butsi nitong serial red tiger na si Lorraine Badoy.

Ano po ba yung kasong hinawakan ni Judge Malagar sa Manila?

Briefly.

Ang issue doon is whether you should proscribe the CPP, NPA, NDF, and other so-called communist organizations as terrorist groups.

Yung nakalagay sa Human Security Act.

So, ang tinasabi ni Judge, dinismiss ni Judge yan.

Nawala daw basis ang petition ng Department of Justice in that respect.

That was during the time of Duterte.

So, dinismiss niya yan.

Kaya, yun ang nagputok ang butsi ni Respondent Badoy-Partosa.

At she went through a rampage of those utterances that are subject of this petition for indirect contempt.

So, ibig sabihin yan, kunwari, may gumawa niyan, kunwari, in another instance, meron ng malinaw na ruling ang Supreme Court.

Kunwari, dito, sa decision mismo ng Supreme Court,

ang punente si Justice Leon,

kunwari, may nagmura naman sa kanya, sinabi, bayaran ka, siguro, NPA ka.

This can also apply to that person. Tama po ba?

Yes, tama yun.

This is a presidential value.

In fact, ang sabi po namin, this is a landmark case.

Because, number one, sabi ng Supreme Court, dalawang issues po ang sinabi ng Supreme Court dito.

The first issue is the locus standi or the standing to sue of the petitioners who are all lawyers.

Yes.

Kaya yun po ang standing to sue ng mga lawyers. Kasama na na ang inyong lingkod.

At sabi ng Court, you are officers of the Court, and therefore you are the guardian of the rule of law,

and therefore you have the duty to act as guardians of the independence of the judiciary.

So, itong kontekstong yun, yun ang sinabi ng Supreme Court.

Kaya, inacknowledge ng Supreme Court ang aming standing.

O yun, ang tanong dito,

Bakit kami pumuntang diretsyo sa Supreme Court?

Sinabi nga namin, ito ay of transcendental importance.

Kaya kami lumahag mismo sa Supreme Court diretsyo.

Because under the rules of law, rules of court rather,

dapat final namin ang petition doon kay Judge Malagari herself sa kanyang korte.

Ang ginawa namin, no.

Pumunta kami sa itaas.

At diretsyo kami pumunta sa Supreme Court on this petition for indirect contempt.

At the Court,

the Court recognized that.

Thankfully, the Court recognized that.

And this is a presidential procedure of presidential value for all of us.

Sa ganyan po ba, sir?

Kaya, anyone who would be similarly attacked by anyone,

pwedeng lumahag na ngayon using this as a presidential case.

Kung nagustuhan nyo po itong video na ito,

pakilike at share na lang po.

Para mas paraya pong makakita at makapanood.

Kung gusto nyo pong makibalita,

follow nyo na rin po ako sa aking mga social media accounts na nakasulat po sa screen.

Pwede rin po kayo magpadala ng super thanks, super likes, super chat,

at super stickers sa YouTube, saka Facebook stars po.

Alam nyo po, malayo pong mararating ito

para makagawa po kami ng mas maraming video

na makatutulong po sa pagpapakalat ng tamang impormasyon para sa bawat Pilipino.

Kada like, subscribe, follow, at share ay pagsuporta po

sa tunay na independent journalism.

Maraming maraming salamat po.