In the Philippines: Freedom of speech is not freedom

A Socio-political issue

In the Philippines: Freedom of speech is not freedom

A normal person speaks approximately thousands of words per day or simply a hundred of words are used in just mere minutes. With words coming from our mouths, a series of different topics start to externalize. Each person wants to be vocal about their individual knowledge, thoughts and ideas without having the bother of people shutting them off. Every person living in this world has human rights-- one of which is having the freedom of speech.

Human rights defined as rights intrinsic to all human beings, with whatever our nationality, sex, ethnicity, colour, religion, language, or any other status, we are all equally authorized to our human rights without discernment and exceptions. These rights are all interconnected and indivisible among itself to protect and preserve the meaning of humanity. Specifically in this discussion, freedom of speech is defined as the ability to say something without fear of oppression. This right gives people the opportunity to express their mind and heart to give their opinion of what they think should or should not happen. Having this so-called individual freedom of views, perspective, and speech is the most important type of interaction whereas, without sharing, there would be no magnificent ideas at all like a history to study for or a science to explain the universe. Although, when one has stepped on the yellow lane, there are certain limitations. When President Duterte sat on the chair and became the leader of the Philippines, the human rights of the Filipino countrymen began to decline. He targeted journalists, drug users and communists because of his personal grudge against them and using his power to politically condemn all personality or faction that would dare or be of threat to his reigns. Among those that the president tried to thwart, was Rappler (a broadcasting media to all current international events) and ABS-CBN News (a Filipino media and entertainment group). Pres. Duterte attacked Rappler with his words of “Since you are a fake news outlet, then I am not surprised that your articles are also fake,” he said. “We can debate now. Tell me where is our lies and I’ll tell you where are yours.” It signifies that the President imposed Rappler is not welcome in the Malacanang and is no longer certified by the local government as a factual source of news and information. He said that he will block ABS-CBN franchise renewal because of the fact that he personally does not like the news that the media is spreading about him. He also attacked the Philippine Daily Inquirer for issuing punitive editorials against him, and said that Pres. Duterte will fight the Inquirer’s owners over the Mile Long property in Makati (ABS-CBN News, 2017). Or when Ms. Agot Isidro intentionally attacked the president by calling him a psychopath--does this show a libelous act? In President’s perception he sees the Press Media as an opponent like a person taking cocaine that needs to be imprisoned or worse be killed.

To conclude, it is certain that the Philippine government have failed to serve its people into expressing their individuality but instead made its countrymen slaves and pawns that governed by malicious and inhuman laws. Freedom of speech is misunderstood in the Philippines, where hundreds of people thought it was merely just voicing the unheard people in the back, but turns out it was just some careless talks to attack one’s personal viewpoint or a person itself. Although, the time when President Duterte wanted to shut down some news site was off the edge, it violates the freedom of the press to voice out on one’s individual opinions. Ultimately, did the Philippines really understand the meaning of freedom of speech?

Reviews

[The Daisy]

Some parts need editting, but I like it.