I think that. It's been like watching a train wreck in slow motion," Ressa told me last week, reflecting on her predicament. Author. “It manipulates the worst of human nature. It has been a massive enabler," Ressa said. If you have if you are a public segure with the Republic official Ranver you have less of uh less explaation of privacy and there we should be more open to issued the more open to criticism 'no and and therefore in that case they're their needs be proof of knowledge this time by the public officer but in the Philippines will also expanded that that uh doctrine not only include public officers public serious and a public secure definition of a public figure is quite a lastic and I think this was explained in a year ah involving former Senator and Bill ah where in a even if a private we have persons a private person but ah the some reason which is out 'no these name is involved in some that is real to the public interest then he comes a public story that has written in the first cyber letter case the one in Manila involved a public fake news ah and a public official it avolved also any in matter not to talk of the public interest because it's hope of a possible protection within private secure and a public official and so and thereforce this is a public the burden is back where he longed 'no on the part of the prosecution and they have to prove actual knowledge rather than the line on the presusion of maltes and recoring the accused to prove absence so that's that's how this it that it's a very stra it's a very set of ah because again this are very old loss and they really haven't been updated that you know since things are Sir just to follow up to that is the fact the propler did not issue a ah well ah subsequent article correcting it for verifying it can that becating as proof of knowledge is not the kind of manage that we're looking up under the law ah because that comes after the fact of publication sorry sir they catched that sir the fact that the rockler did not issue as a seatment article clarifying or publishing the sign of Mister Keng after the solve publish is that's the kind of malis ah that the law is continuting and you say that this is malicious because they did not publishes of sequent particular that comes after the van and the article the publics second that we taken has proof that there's malas here well in that publish this right this is this Maria i mean we are fair to the Sec this second I was referred actually to the first one sir the first libra sorry i would try to the first life okay and the first time that Rappler did not oblish supposedly the recent approved that there was knowledge is that proper did not published the side of king that issue any price the fact that you know they reach out ah can that be taken as the malis that's confilated under the law i don't ah malas view with the simil because it's a felony managey would have to be interpreters criminal intent meaning ah intent to defay the person right and so intended the fame the person has to be shown actual acts meaning the ah there was a there was a knowledge that the this was not this was not true at this is soft accurate and therefore these five that they problem What what wrapple there in the first sideline case what's wrapler published a i-report ah based on and intelligence report and again putting in the second bar colding from a Philippine Star part 'tol again and in both instances the publications were reference meaning ah it means on a report it means of the Philippine Star and so the base this was the question as to show drop or for example have uh determined uh that the fidential report was true and actually before public shipment right and that constitute policy that they did not didn't not do that i don't think so Rattler did not as uh Mister Cain forcide uh well their information expresss that mutual in fact was called up and he dead reply and so that part sacter he isn't isn't accurate and so uh it's i think it's pretty dangerous to say that uh for the court for coming to say that if a reporter uh if are report their fails to get the side of the other person or public itself is mali i think something more has to be added there and what is what needs to be other is committal intent meaning uh that is not just simply attacks this was not just implied other side not allowing the report to push through because he did not want to say anything on record because those are those are implications on journalism right if the other side simp is says i don't want to say anything about that with therefore that not mean that you cannot constituent publishing it because the other side hasn't as in commented manage with here would have to be recon from criminal invent did did did that post criminally in ten to defain this person no because if there is a good motive jone and what is a good motive shown here if there was if the matter was a matter of public interest public it was public information with that to be put out then that is defe against the proof Malece so I think that's time and of course that's two in the in their certain libel kings the first the first one in Manila right and therefore that's of one of the points that will raise in the in appeal when we file the sir thank you sir excite sir ultimately are you looking at the possibility that this could which the Supreme Court and the court may have to revisit the libel laws and uh the cyber crime law again and be you welcome the chance to scrutinize the cy once again four for Maria and Rey Santos of mind i hope we don't have to go to the Supreme Court right because if we do after go to the Supreme Court that means that we would have lost the appeal in the appeals right as a lawyer of course 'no I don't want to have to go to Supreme Court to arguit again but uh of course 'yong that possibility is always there meaning if god of appeals uh uh uh the eyes the appeal may uh affirms the RTC decision then of course you know that option is there we would have to or expose all options and including going up to the Supreme Court uh for review and of course peaceing raising the question now of the of cyber little this time as a specific instance right uh this would be this would be seeming again but this time more focus on cyber libel and this time no longer official challenge but this time ah as applied challenge because there is no specific games were someone as now the instructor cyber libel and in fact convicted and now being review so yeah i mean i wouldn't go but i were prepared to go up if it necess sorry sorry somehow discuss press freedom and the context of the government official yes I I agree it's a it's it's a and so yeah I mean that's what I am saying hopefully hopefully right Gordo of Appeals We we we get to reverse our luck the managed to manage to anyone right and so again, but there's a lot of conditions in the court of Appeals.