The appellate decision clumsily sidestepped this fatal defect by discarding Reyes and diluting “notoriously offensive” into “causes someone to feel resentful, upset or annoyed” in the ordinary sense. It astonishingly added, “whether he is a member of the particular religion concerned or not; whether he is present or absent thereat.” Not only does this contradict freshman criminal law classes, it rewrites free speech: The question of whether an idea is protected now depends on whether it upsets the audience. This rewrite destroys free speech because everything down to “The Earth is round” is potentially upsetting. Constitutional law prohibits the “heckler’s veto,” where an audience member claims to be provoked into a violent response, thus censoring the speaker when authorities ask him to stop to restore order.
via Human rights rewritten to jail Celdran | Inquirer Opinion.
Giancarlo Angulo's Blog