Competing Values Regarding Internet Use in “Free” Philippine Social Institutions
125
between then-president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and a commissioner for elections
regarding vote manipulations in the presidential election. The Supreme Court threw
out the petition to remove the recordings in October that year and said the constitutional right to free expression was paramount, even if it was just in a blog.
29
The second case involved Pacifi c Plans, Inc. (PPI), an educational savings fi rm that
offers educational plans to families. In 2005 the company was in near collapse and
applied for rehabilitation with the Makati Regional Trial Court in 2005. The court
issued a stay order on April 12, 2005, that allowed PPI to stop payment of tuition fee
benefi ts to the traditional, open-ended plan holders and unilaterally substitute what
its educational plan holders considered a patently disadvantageous scheme without
any consultation with them. As an immediate reaction to this unexpected and unconscionable move of PPI, parents (plan holders) who converged at Kamagong Street in
Makati on April 14, 2005, began to mobilize to be heard, and the Parents Enabling
Parents (PEP) Coalition was born.
As a result, the Yuchengco group of companies and Pacifi c Plan holders are locked
in a legal battle in connection with the savings fi rm ’ s admission of fi nancial diffi culty,
making it hard pressed to honor its commitment to fund the education of its 34,000
plan holders.
The Yuchengcos fi led the libel case on October 18, 2005, before the city prosecutor
of Makati City in connection with the alleged “ highly defamatory ” article posted by
PEP members on its PEP Coalition blog alleging mismanagement and mishandling of
their fund.
30 The case was later dismissed by a Makati court and by the court of appeals.
Blogging-related controversies are of course not just a concern among private corporations, but also a problem in public institutions as well as schools. In a public high
school in the Philippines, for instance, a principal handed a ten-day suspension to
four students as a penalty for posting a blog critical of her and other school offi cials.
The principal argued that the blog postings were damaging to her role as principal
and to the school and that they caused alarm to the school ’ s alumni. She then imposed
a penalty that she said was based on the school ’ s rules and regulations.
31
Student editors ’ guilds protested, calling the suspension a form of campus repression that undermined students ’ rights to freedom of speech and expression. The Commission on Human Rights chairman was also of the opinion that the students ’ rights
may have been violated. The Department of Education eventually stepped in to
rescind the order and transferred the principal.
32
In these three cases, it is apparent that legal measures and harassment are being
implemented to curtail freedom of expression. Even though the fi rst two cases were
dismissed from court, from an organizational perspective, legal costs of employee
postings are very real concerns. Posting on an internal corporate blog, for instance,
can be sensitive and potentially damaging because it has an institutional name
attached to it. Likewise, external blogs of consumer groups can also become a public
125
between then-president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and a commissioner for elections
regarding vote manipulations in the presidential election. The Supreme Court threw
out the petition to remove the recordings in October that year and said the constitutional right to free expression was paramount, even if it was just in a blog.
29
The second case involved Pacifi c Plans, Inc. (PPI), an educational savings fi rm that
offers educational plans to families. In 2005 the company was in near collapse and
applied for rehabilitation with the Makati Regional Trial Court in 2005. The court
issued a stay order on April 12, 2005, that allowed PPI to stop payment of tuition fee
benefi ts to the traditional, open-ended plan holders and unilaterally substitute what
its educational plan holders considered a patently disadvantageous scheme without
any consultation with them. As an immediate reaction to this unexpected and unconscionable move of PPI, parents (plan holders) who converged at Kamagong Street in
Makati on April 14, 2005, began to mobilize to be heard, and the Parents Enabling
Parents (PEP) Coalition was born.
As a result, the Yuchengco group of companies and Pacifi c Plan holders are locked
in a legal battle in connection with the savings fi rm ’ s admission of fi nancial diffi culty,
making it hard pressed to honor its commitment to fund the education of its 34,000
plan holders.
The Yuchengcos fi led the libel case on October 18, 2005, before the city prosecutor
of Makati City in connection with the alleged “ highly defamatory ” article posted by
PEP members on its PEP Coalition blog alleging mismanagement and mishandling of
their fund.
30 The case was later dismissed by a Makati court and by the court of appeals.
Blogging-related controversies are of course not just a concern among private corporations, but also a problem in public institutions as well as schools. In a public high
school in the Philippines, for instance, a principal handed a ten-day suspension to
four students as a penalty for posting a blog critical of her and other school offi cials.
The principal argued that the blog postings were damaging to her role as principal
and to the school and that they caused alarm to the school ’ s alumni. She then imposed
a penalty that she said was based on the school ’ s rules and regulations.
31
Student editors ’ guilds protested, calling the suspension a form of campus repression that undermined students ’ rights to freedom of speech and expression. The Commission on Human Rights chairman was also of the opinion that the students ’ rights
may have been violated. The Department of Education eventually stepped in to
rescind the order and transferred the principal.
32
In these three cases, it is apparent that legal measures and harassment are being
implemented to curtail freedom of expression. Even though the fi rst two cases were
dismissed from court, from an organizational perspective, legal costs of employee
postings are very real concerns. Posting on an internal corporate blog, for instance,
can be sensitive and potentially damaging because it has an institutional name
attached to it. Likewise, external blogs of consumer groups can also become a public