CA dismiss Rappler's appela to revoke SEC's ruling

CA dismiss Rappler's appela to revoke SEC's ruling




Rappler’s woes still continues.

The Court of Appeals (CA) dismissed the appeal of Rappler and its holding company, Rappler Holdings Corporation (RHC), against the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) move to revoke its business registration for violating the 1987 Constitution and foreign equity restrictions in mass media.

Associate Justice Rafael Antonio Santos penned the 25-page resolution, dated February 21 and released to media Monday. Associate Justices Germano D. Legaspi and Apolinario D. Bruselas concurred in the decision. The CA said it saw no merit on the motion for partial reconsideration filed by Rappler on the case.

Court of Appeals (photo credit to owner)



"In summary, a motion for reconsideration grounded on arguments already submitted to the court and found to be without merit may be denied summarily, as it would be a useless ritual for this court to reiterate itself. Here, petitioners did not raise any new matter or issue in its motion. Accordingly, this court finds no cogent justification to reconsider its motion decision dated July 26," the CA said.

The Court of Appeals, however said it will not preempt the evaluation and  subsequent finding and conclusion of the SEC which will investigate the legal effect of the alleged donation of foreign funds by Omidyar into Rappler's operations.

Rappler claims the 1987 Constitutional provisions regarding limitations on foreign investments does not apply to it since it is not a mass media entity as defined by a 1976 law, Presidential Decree No. 1018, limiting the ownership and management of mass media to citizens of the Philippines.

The Court of Appeals said that Rappler is a media entity, since under a later law, Republic Act No. 9211 "the definition of mass media was expanded to include electronic media such as the internet".
This definition of mass media was used by the SEC, the CA pointed it out in the decision.
The appellate court said that Rapper itself in a case before the Supreme Court asserted that it is a mass media entity.
The case involved the firm's petition seeking to be allowed access to live coverage of the 2016 presidential and vice-presidential debates.
It was in this case where, the CA explained "the Supreme Court agreed with Rappler and ruled that it is an online mass media entity and should be granted equal right with traditional forms of mass media to broadcast the debates via online live streaming,"
"The actions and actuations of Rappler, militate against its claim that it is not engaged in the business of mass media and thus, not covered by the foreign equity restriction applicable to mass media entities," the CA highlighted in its decision.
The Court of Appeals said that applying the full beneficial ownership test, Rappler cannot claim to be 100-percent Filipino owned.
"RHC cannot claim that it fully owns the Rappler shares since it does not exclusively exercise the right to vote on the Rappler shares. By virtue of clause 12.2.2 (in its agreement) Omidyar Network is granted the power to direct the voting on the Rappler shares," the CA said.
"(T)he grant of control to a foreign entity over a mass media entity, regardless of the actual exercise of such foreign control, is already considered a violation," the court added. 

What can you say about this?



Share us your thoughts by simply leaving on the comment section below. For more news, updates, feel free to visit our site often.



Stay updated with today's relevant news and trends by hitting the LIKE button.



Thanks for dropping by and reading the post



Report from PNA

Post a comment

0 Comments