Imposing a penalty of 90 days in prison and a P30,000 fine, a regional trial court here has cited the Bicol Mail editor, Jose B. Perez, in indirect contempt on July 20.

In an unprecedented case here, Judge Felimon Montenegro of the RTC Branch 26, heard the side of Perez in the witness stand for more than one hour and immediately made the guilty verdict in an open court decision.

Montenegro absolved two other respondents, BM Publisher Nilo Aureus and BM Editorial Consultant Levi Aureus, after Perez took full responsibility of the news item that was the subject of the contempt charge.

The judge took offense on the banner story of the BM on July 14 with headline: “Witness vs. Judge Montenegro—Money changed hands in Naga ejectment case”.

The controversial BM banner headline came a day before he handed down the decision of the three motions filed in his sala that denied the motions for reconsideration, inhibition and new trial.

Perez explained in the witness stand that he only lifted the story from a copy of motion for reconsideration that he obtained from the office of the City Legal Officer.

He said the motion for reconsideration is a public document that can be used as material of story with great public interest.

Perez said he did not validate the story that were part of a poisoned letter against the judge which had been made part of the public document because his story had no intention of including other things.

In his order, Montenegro was not convinced with Perez’s explanation that the publication of the subject news item was not for the purpose of maligning his integrity as judge and the judiciary as well.

He was not also convinced that the July 14 BM’s banner headline and the accompanying story does not constitute improper conduct tending directly or indirectly to impede, obstruct or degrade the administration of justice.

Furthermore, Montenegro took note that “only the side of the defendant without considering the arguments of the plaintiffs and the rulings of the Court, such is a blatant irresponsible reporting since the same are pending consideration before his Court”.

Lawyer Rolando Carandang, counsel of the three respondents, was surprised at the speed of handing down the decision and issuance of the order.

Carandang also took note of the absence of bail bond in Montenegro’s order that cited the contempt even as he was able to file a motion to fix bail.

He was also surprised at the high fine imposed which according to him could be a Supreme Court standard and not for the lower court.

Carandang said they would also file a motion for reconsideration aside from the motion to fix bail bond.

While in jail, Perez said the judge’s order, without giving him chance to file a motion for reconsideration is an assault against press freedom in the highest order.


TIMELINE of contempt charge

July 14 (Thursday)—The Bicol Mail came out with the banner story with the headline: Witness vs. Judge Montenegro: Money changed hands in Naga ejectment case.

July 15 (Friday)—Judge Felimon Montenegro handed the order that denied Naga City local government unit of their motions for reconsideration, inhibition and new trial.

July 18 (Monday)—Judge Montenegro ordered Jose Perez, Nilo and Levi Aureus to explain why they must not be charged with indirect contempt on the subject news item. They were given 24 hours to comply upon receipt of the order. The order was received at 2:00 p.m.

July 19 (Tuesday) — Perez and the Areuses complied with the order.

July 20 (Wednesday)— Case heard and Perez took full responsibility of the controversial story and Montenegro absolved the two other respondents and cited him for contempt. Perez was fined P30,000 and committed to the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology in Del Rosario, Naga City to start his 90 days imprisonment.