MANILA, Philippines – Human rights and media watchdogs are defending a Filipino journalist facing an “unjust vexation” case filed by a minister of the Iglesia ni Cristo (INC), a powerful independent Christian church in this predominantly Catholic country.
Journalist Marchel Espina, 39, was sued for unjust vexation for publishing an opinion piece against the INC in the local newspaper SunStar Cebu in Dec. 2024. She was the newspaper’s editor-in-chief when the article, titled “Demonic Church Meddling in Politics,” was published.
Pedro Castillo, a district supervising minister of the INC in Batangas province, filed the case against Espina. The INC spokesperson has declined Crux Now‘s request for comment.
Under the law in the Philippines, the charge of unjust vexation means causing “annoyance, irritation, torment, distress, or disturbance to the mind,” and is a criminal offense.
If Espina is convicted, she faces up to 30 days’ imprisonment and fines of up to US$650.
However, even if the Batangas court is still hearing her case, the journalist will need to pay US$500 for each court appearance. This is because Espina is based in the central Philippine city of Bacolod, about 400 miles from Batangas, which means she needs to allocate money for airfare and lodging despite her already “difficult” finances.
Support from rights monitors
Human Rights Watch told Crux Now on Saturday that the Batangas court should drop the charges against Espina.
Espina is the 41st Filipino journalist since July 2022 “to face prosecution or charges over their work,” said HRW, citing data from the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines.
“This tells us that the terrible legacy of criminalizing critical journalism is alive in the Philippines, and people in power will be emboldened to chill the press with these judicial attacks if we let them,” said Lian Buan, Southeast Asia researcher of HRW, in a statement sent to Crux Now.
“The court should drop the charges, and Filipino journalists should be able to continue their critical reporting on public interest cases without being threatened with arrest, detention, and the crippling financial costs that come with it,” Buan said.
The New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists, a 45-year-old nonprofit organization dedicated to press freedom, also condemned the case against the Filipino journalist.
“The unjust vexation case against journalist Marchel Espina is frivolous, a threat to press freedom, and should be dropped immediately,” said CPJ senior Southeast Asia representative Shawn Crispin in a statement on July 24.
“This is exactly the kind of legal harassment CPJ has documented again and again in the Philippines — vague, spurious charges used to wear down journalists and chill critical reporting. It should stop here and now,” said the CPJ.
The World Association of News Publishers (WAN-IFRA), the largest international press organization, also condemned the charges against Espina.
“WAN-IFRA denounces spurious claims of ‘unjust vexation’ targeting colleague Marchel Espina and calls for all charges against the journalist to be dropped,” the organization said in a statement, noting that Espina is a prominent member of WAN-IFRA’s Women In News and SaferMedia program teams.
Harassment against journalists
Lawyer Pachico Seares, executive director of the Cebu Citizens-Press Council, criticized the case against Espina as a form of harassment.
Seares noted that Espina was initially charged with the more serious crime of cyber libel, which was eventually dismissed. He said that the complainants, unable to pin down Espina and her co-accused for cyber libel, “settled for unjust vexation.”
“Unjust vexation is often resorted to when the act does not squarely fall under another defined crime that is bigger and with stiffer penalty and more costly bail,” Seares said in an article for SunStar Cebu.
The lawyer said the complaint against Espina is “utterly weak,” because “the publication was not directed at the complainant and it was not malicious.” Therefore, “generally, it is not a case for major worry and alarm.”
However, Seares said that any court case — even if considered “small and baseless” — “can come down as harassment against the news media outlet and its practitioners.”
“Court litigation, even if the charge is only unjust vexation, more than annoys or vexes. It could be among a hundred cuts, ostensibly lawful, against free press and free speech,” the lawyer said.
