This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.
Both Sotto and Yap are directed to observe
‘strict confidentiality’ on their ongoing case until it is resolved
MANILA, Philippines – The Muntinlupa City Regional Trial Court (RTC) issued on Monday, January 13, a gag order in the cyberlibel case filed by actor Vic Sotto against The Rapists of Pepsi Paloma filmmaker Darryl Yap on Monday, January 13.
A omnibus order issued by Branch 205 of the Muntinlupa RTC and shared by Yap on his Facebook page, showed that the court said that Sotto’s camp “mistakenly believed” that their petition for a writ of habeas data automatically granted their request of ordering Yap to take down the film’s promotional materials on the film, and also barring him from releasing the film. It added that the court must still assess the merits behind Sotto’s petition for a writ of habeas data.
An individual may petition for a writ of habeas data if the “right to privacy in life, liberty or security is violated or threatened by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private individual or entity engaged in the gathering, collecting or storing of data or information.”
Yap’s camp, meanwhile, argued that the verified return they were asked to submit regarding the writ of habeas data involves a film that has yet to be released. This, Yap’s camp says, would compromise the filmmaker’s freedom of expression, the film’s artistic integrity, and its potential outcome.
Along with the court finding merit in Yap’s argument, it also mentioned the possibility of broadening the gag order’s scope to prohibit both Sotto and the filmmaker’s camps from making public comments about the case, so that they don’t affect the court’s final decision. Doing so will also prohibit their respective lawyers from making statements that would “misrepresent” the court’s orders and “prejudice” the public’s perception.
With the gag order in place, Sotto and his camp were “enjoined from publicly disclosing or discussing the contents of the verified return” Yap has yet to submit, as well as any proceedings of the case. Both Sotto and Yap’s respective camps have also been directed to observe “strict confidentiality” on the case, which means that they cannot disclose any information on the case and its development until it is resolved.
Given this, Sotto has also been given three days to comment on the Motion for Consolidation filed by Yap.
The Muntinlupa RTC also noted that the hearing on the case has been postponed to January 17.
“Ito na po ang huling pagkakataon na magsasalita ako patungkol sa kaso at naway malinaw po ito sa lahat ng sumusubaybay,” Yap wrote.
(This is the last time I’ll be speaking about this case, and hopefully, this clears things up for everyone who’s following it).
Sotto filed 19 counts of violation of Section 4 of Republic Act 10175, also known as the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2022 against Yap. The complaint includes a prayer of P35 million moral and exemplary damages.
In the trailer for The Rapists of Pepsi Paloma, the character of Charito Solis is shown asking the character of Pepsi Paloma to confirm if it was true that Vic Sotto raped her, to which she said yes.
– Rappler.com