MANILA, Philippines – The Muntinlupa City court handling the writ of habeas petition filed by Eat Bulaga host Vic Sotto against director Darryl Yap has ordered the to deletion of the teaser for the controversial film, “The Rapists of Pepsi Paloma.”
“Respondent DARRYL RAY SPYKE B. YAP and any person or entity acting on his behalf, including the production team of Vin Centiments, are ORDERED to delete, take down and remove the 26-second teaser video from online platforms, social media, or any other medium for having misused the collected data/information by presenting a conversation between two deceased individuals, which cannot be verified as having actually occurred,” the decision dated January 24, but was made public on Monday, January 27, read.
Although the assailed teaser was ordered taken down, Muntinlupa City Regional Trial Court Branch 205 Presiding Judge Liezel Aquiatan allowed the continuation of the film’s production and the film’s eventual release.
“The respondent, however, is ALLOWED to proceed with the production and eventual release of the film ‘The Rapists of Pepsi Paloma’,” Judge Aquiatan added.
![[OPINION] Legal showdown over Pepsi Paloma story is more than a subplot from a film](http://www.rappler.com/tachyon/2025/01/pepsi-paloma-habeas-debate-january-24-2025.jpg?fit=449%2C449)
Habeas data is an extraordinary legal remedy used by a party to compel another party to destroy or delete information that could cause harm to them. This writ may be filed by a person “whose right to privacy in life, liberty or security is violated or threatened by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private individual or entity engaged in the gathering, collecting or storing of data or information regarding the person, family, home and correspondence of the aggrieved party.”
“Sana ay alisin na agad ang teaser video na ginamit ang pangalan ni Mr. Vic Sotto, at tanggalin na din ang anumang promo materials na may pangalan at iba pang sensitive personal information ni Mr. Vic Sotto. We are thankful for this decision. (We hope that the teaser video implicating Mr. Vic Sotto’s name will be immediately deleted, including any form of promo materials which bear Mr. Vic Sotto’s name or other sensitive information),” Sotto’s lawyer, Enrique dela Cruz, told reporters.
Sotto filed the petition for the writ shortly after the release of the trailer of the film depicting the life of Paloma, an actress during the 1980s. The contested trailer showed a scene where the actress depicting Paloma answered in affirmative after she was asked by another character if she was allegedly raped by Sotto.
Apart from the protective writ, Sotto also filed a complaint against the director for 19 counts of cyber libel, with a prayer for P35 million in moral and exemplary damages. The complaint is still pending with the prosecutor’s office, and Yap’s camp has yet to respond on the said suit through a counter-affidavit.
“We have asked for the continuance of the gag order issued by the Court, as the decision is not yet final and that, using the Court’s words, will ‘diminish the excitement of moviegoers and risk revealing key aspects of the film’s content,” Raymond Fortun, Yap’s counsel, told Rappler.
Not remedy for reputational harm
In its 20-page ruling, the court took note that actors, like Sotto, have “reduced expectation of privacy” in matters of public interest, but clarified that a writ of habeas data is not the appropriate remedy for reputational harm.
“To the mind of the Court, the filing of a writ of habeas data could draw more attention to the issue, potentially worsening the reputational damage. Defamation laws or other remedies (e.g., filing a civil suit for damages or criminal case for libel or slander) are more suited for addressing false or damaging statements,” the decision read.
Writ of habeas data is often used by activists seeking for the deletion of data that could harm them, but some were unsuccessful, such as young activists Jhed Tamano and Jonila Castro, who were allegedly abducted by the military. One of the known cases where the court granted privileges was when the Court of Appeals ordered the Duterte administration to remove the name of former Leyte 3rd District Representative Vicente Veloso from Duterte’s public “narcolist.”
Nevertheless, the court said it still needed to assess whether Sotto’s petition met the writ’s elements, particularly the relationship between the information in contest and its alleged harm on the comedian’s privacy, life, liberty, or security.
“However, based on the teaser, the film portrays the comedian as a rapist despite the case’s dismissal. While invoking freedom of expression, the director should ensure the film adheres to factual accuracy and ethical storytelling, especially in sensitive matters involving accusations of a crime,” the court said.
“Although the petitioner is a public figure who has a reduced expectation of privacy concerning matters of public interest, however, the portrayal of events must still be accurate and not misleading, especially when it involves allegations of criminal acts. The court also emphasizes the need to avoid unjust harm to individuals based on speculative or unverifiable claims,” it added. – Rappler.com