Push Admin

'Freedom of expression': Badoy defends 'threat-laden' diatribe vs judge

Article (news)

Mike Navallo, ABS-CBN News

<div class="embed-wrap"><figure data-feedback="fb:likes,fb:comments"><img alt="Former anti-insurgency task force spokesperson Lorraine Badoy cites freedom of expression and press freedom in justifying her statements against Judge Marlo Magdoza-Malagar. Mike Navallo, ABS-CBN News" src="https://sa.kapamilya.com/absnews/abscbnnews/media/2022/news/11/17/11172022-badoy-invokes-press-freedom-in-threat-laden-diatribe-vs-judge.jpg"/><figcaption>Former anti-insurgency task force spokesperson Lorraine Badoy cites freedom of expression and press freedom in justifying her statements against Judge Marlo Magdoza-Malagar. Mike Navallo, ABS-CBN News</figcaption></figure></div><h3>Harry Roque represents Badoy in SC contempt proceedings</h3>MANILA — Former anti-insurgency task force spokesperson Lorraine Badoy has officially responded to the show cause order issued by the Supreme Court by filing on Thursday a 48-page comment explaining why she should not be cited in indirect contempt of court over her statements against a trial court judge.Badoy invoked freedom of expression and press freedom, saying that as a journalist, she was merely commenting on a matter that invokes public interest — whether the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and the New People’s Army (NPA) should be declared terrorist groups.“The use of contempt powers of the Supreme Court against a fair criticism by respondent Dr. Badoy in her exercise of journalistic comment, of an erroneous decision of a lower court judge, constitutes subsequent punishment and thus infringes on respondent’s freedom of expression and freedom of the press,” she said.On September 21, Judge Marlo Magdoza-Malagar of Manila Regional Trial Court Branch 19 junked the proscription case filed by the Department of Justice (DOJ) which sought to declare the CPP-NPA as terrorist groups.<ul class="op-related-articles">	<li><a href="https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/09/22/22/court-junks-ph-govts-plea-to-tag-cpp-npa-as-terrorists">Rebellion is not terrorism: Court junks PH govt’s plea to tag CPP-NPA as terrorists</a></li></ul>Badoy criticized the ruling in a Facebook post as a “judgment straight from the bowels of communist hell” and accused the judge of “lawyering” for the CPP-NPA when she ruled that rebellion and political crimes are not acts of terrorism.In the same post, Badoy posed a hypothetical scenario: “So if I kill this judge and I do so out of my political belief that all allies of the CPP NPA NDF must be killed because there is no difference in my mind between a member of the CPP NPA NDF and their friends, then please be lenient with me.”<ul class="op-related-articles">	<li><a href="https://news.abs-cbn.com/amp/spotlight/09/24/22/badoy-threatens-judge-then-denies-fb-post">Ex-ELCAC spox Badoy threatens judge, then denies Facebook post</a></li></ul>The post generated criticisms from various lawyers,’ human rights and judges’ groups with some of them writing directly to the Supreme Court to appeal for action on what they described as blatant red-tagging and a threat against a member of the bench.The Supreme Court immediately took action by issuing a stern warning against statements inciting violence on judges and their families and initiating, on its own, an administrative case against Badoy.<ul class="op-related-articles">	<li><a href="https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/09/27/22/sc-acts-on-threats-vs-judge-warns-possible-contempt-sanctions">SC acts on threats vs judge, warns of possible contempt sanctions</a></li></ul>It later required required Badoy to explain why she shouldn’t be cited in indirect contempt of the Judiciary and the Supreme Court. <ul class="op-related-articles">	<li><a href="https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/10/04/22/sc-requires-badoy-to-explain-why-she-shouldnt-face-contempt-rap">SC requires Badoy to explain why she shouldn&#x27;t be cited in contempt</a></li></ul>A group of lawyers and law deans also filed an indirect contempt petition against her.<ul class="op-related-articles">	<li><a href="https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/10/04/22/lawyers-file-contempt-plea-vs-badoy-before-sc">Lawyers file contempt petition vs Badoy before SC</a></li></ul><div>NOT A THREAT</div>In her comment, Badoy denied she threatened Judge Magdoza-Malagar, explaining that what she said was an “if-then” statement with no intent to incite violence.“If at all, Respondent Dr. Badoy’s words are a clear example of hyperbole, or a reductio ad absurdum to stress a point. In her own words: she used a &quot;hypothetical syllogism to make her point that her decision to not declare the CPP and NPA as terrorist organizations were ‘absurd and dangerous’,” her comment said.“[T]here is nothing in the language of Respondent Badoy that called on anyone to harm the person of Judge Malagar. It was a mere figure of speech to call attention to a faulty reasoning that led to what is and what she perceived to be a wrong decision,” she added.She said there was no “clear and present danger” that the “public would actually heed her call,” citing the fact that the judge and her family were not harmed after her much-publicized statements.“As a physician, it was farthest from the mind of Respondent Dr. Badoy to incite others to commit acts against the person of Judge Malagar,” she said.<div>FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, PRESS FREEDOM</div>Arguing that her statements were fair commentaries, Badoy cited 8 “palpable errors” which were supposedly her basis for disagreeing with Malagar’s ruling.Among them, Malagar’s ruling that the CPP-NPA cannot be proscribed as a terrorist group because it used violence as a means to achieve a political end and that guerilla warfare cannot constitute terrorism under the Human Security Act because it does not lead to “widespread and extraordinary fear and panic” among Filipinos.“To say that any organization that resorts to the use of force for the purpose of overthrowing the Republic is not a terrorist group is simply wrong given the counter-factuals she has presented, that is Respondent Dr. Badoy’s point,” she said.“And while others may disagree with it, and while she may very well be wrong and others right about it, such disagreement is precisely the reason why public discussion on the matter should be allowed, and not restricted, by this Honorable Court. So let the CPP-NPA-NDF’s defenders present their arguments against Respondent Dr. Badoy’s arguments. For the very purpose of such discussion, according to our legal system’s constitutional theory, is so that the public may determine for themselves what the truth about the matter is, on the basis of the information – of facts and law – made available in such debate,” she added.She urged the Supreme Court to tilt the balance in favor of freedom over the administration of justice, to give leeway to the public to criticize the rulings of judges who are not elected into office.&quot;The public must be allowed to vent their opinions on judicial decisions, particularly in cases involving acts of terrorism and terrorist groups, as these matters directly affect public safety. This is particularly true considering that judges, being appointed officials, are not directly accountable to the public in any other way under our system of appointing members of the judiciary. The people cannot vote judges out of office on account of disagreement. If members of the public disagree with a judge’s decision, what recourse do individuals have if not their social media feeds?,” she asked.Badoy invoked one last card in her defense — her journalistic credentials as a commentator for SMNI News Channel. “By any current definition, her statements cannot be divorced from the fact that she did so in her exercise of her right to fair journalistic comment. As such, her criticisms fall within the ambit of freedom of the press. It is privileged information which should net be liable for subsequent punishment,” she argued.Speaking to the media during the filing of her comment, Badoy vowed to continue speaking out against the communist rebel groups.“Wala na dapat tumatahimik tungkol sa CPP-NPA-NDF…Walang pwedeng magpatahimik sa akin at lahat sa atin wala na dapat nagpapatahimik sa atin,” she said.Badoy is represented by her lawyer, former presidential spokesperson Harry Roque, who has previously argued press freedom and freedom of expression cases before the Supreme Court during his time as a human rights lawyer, before joining the Duterte administration.“Freedom of the press, freedom of expression is neutral. Content-neutral. Para po sa lahat yan. Hindi pwede na ang mag-iiyak lang ng freedom of the press at freedom of expression ay yung mga kalaban ng gobyerno. Kinakailangan yung mga kakamppi din ng gobyerno ay ibigay itong karapatan na ito,” he said.Malagar, as a regional trial court judge, is part of the government.“Lahat po ng taong gobyerno kasama na ang mga huwes ng RTC ay dapat huwag pong nagbabalat-siybuyas. Kinakailangan tumanggap ng pagpupula dahil lahat naman po yan ay garantiyado na ng Saligang Batas,” he said.The Supreme Court had asked Badoy to address the following in her comment:-Whether or not she posted or caused the posting of the statements attacking the September 21, 2022 Resolution rendered by the Regional Trial Court in Civil Case No. R MNL-18-00925-CV in any or all of her social media accounts;-Whether or not her social media post encouraged more violent language against the judge concerned in any or all of her social media platforms;-Whether or not her post, in the context of social media and in the experience of similar incendiary comments here or abroad, was a clear incitement to produce violent actions against a judge and is likely to produce such act; and-Whether or not her statements on her social media accounts, implying violence on a judge, is part of her protected constitutional speech.<div>RELATED VIDEO</div><figure class="op-interactive"><iframe height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/DngqE4LJ2Z0?enablejsapi=1" width="560"></iframe></figure><div class="iwantbar">Watch more News on <a href="https://www.iwanttfc.com/#!/browse/Genres/News/tag_id_genres/id_news" target="_blank">iWantTFC</a></div>

Badoy invoked freedom of expression and press freedom, saying that as a journalist, she was merely commenting on a matter that invokes public interest.

'Freedom of expression': Badoy defends 'threat-laden' diatribe vs judge

News

Entertainment

Lifestyle

Sports

Metro.Style

More

Sudoku

Word of the Day

Lotto

Horoscope

News

'Freedom of expression': Badoy defends 'threat-laden' diatribe vs judge

Mike Navallo,

ABS-CBN News

Published November 17, 2022 06:32 PM PHT

|

Updated November 17, 2022 06:55 PM PHT

Read More:

Lorraine Badoy

NTF-ELCAC

CPP-NPA-NDFP

Supreme Court

press freedom

contempt

ABS-CBN is the leading media and entertainment company in the Philippines, offering quality content across TV, radio, digital, and film. Committed to public service and promoting Filipino values, ABS-CBN continues to inspire and connect audiences worldwide.

Corporate

Investors

Governance

International Distribution

Corporate

Governance

Investors

International Distribution

NPC Seal of Registration

Privacy Policy

AI Policy

Terms of Service

Advertise with Us

© 2026 ABS-CBN Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

NPC Seal of Registration

Privacy Policy

Terms of Service

AI Policy

Advertise with Us

© 2026 ABS-CBN Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

NPC Seal of Registration

Privacy Policy

Terms of Service

AI Policy

Advertise with Us

© 2026 ABS-CBN Corporation. All Rights Reserved.