About Uytico’s ‘marka buaya’

By Herbert Vego

AS regional director of the Department of Education (DepEd), Ramir B. Uytico has set his subordinates a bad example by overacting against media critics. As I was writing this yesterday, he was scheduled to come face to face with RMN-Iloilo City broadcaster Henry Lumawag before the Office of the City Prosecutor.

Uytico – a native of Sibonga, Cebu — has charged Lumawag with the crime of libel over “homophobic” and “sexist” commentaries on the latter’s “Palabra de Honor” radio program.

Simply put, the crime of libel is “a public and malicious imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary.”

Let us quote one of Lumawag’s allegedly libelous remarks:

“Diin ang aton regional director? Didto sa Boracay, ga-uyat hal-o.”

In his complaint filed before Prosecutor Noel Siosan Jr., Uytico alleged that Lumawag used the Ilonggo word hal-o, among others, instead of “penis,” thus revealing his sexual orientation.

If hal-o (a wooden rice pounder) were homophobic, it could only be assumed that it was self-discriminatory. There was no specific allegation in that commentary to suggest that he was in Boracay to play somebody else’s “penis”.

If he really thought the pun was “sexist,” Tico could have laughed it off because, as he himself put it, he was in Boracay to perform an official function within his Dep-Ed jurisdiction.

If he is not gay, why not simply say so?

And if he is, is that something to be ashamed of? I don’t think so.  After all, among the most creative people worldwide are gay. We all know some of them.

Lumawag’s pun on Uytico – “Uy tiko!” (Ilonggo for crooked) was probably aimed at reminding him to straighten his ways, since he had been neglecting to act on public complaints against his subordinates, notably against the principal of Laua-an National High School (LNHS) in Laua-an, Antique for “abuse of administrative power.”

Shouldn’t Uytico have listened to the complainants to avoid media censure?

Instead, he listened to figments of his own imagination.  He claimed, for example, that Lumawag had maligned him for wearing a branded crocodile-printed shirt purchased from “proceeds of my corruption.”

Yes, Lumawag called attention to his expensive taste.  But, so what?  Even the poorest teacher may wear a Lacoste shirt.

If I were Ramir Uytico, I would withdraw my accusation against Henry Lumawag.  Unfortunately, on the contrary, he was reported to be accusing other radiomen who have also vowed to amplify similar or more issues against him.

Being only 55 years old, Uytico has a decade to go in his career. It would earn him nothing but public disdain if he continues to cross swords with the critical media.

Once there was a 19^th Century American humorist from the Chicago Evening Post, Finley Peter Dunne, who wrote, “The job of the newspaper is to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.”

Libel cases are no deterrent to critical journalism. I am 74, have been a journalist for 54 years since 1970.  My fingers and toes are no longer enough to count the number of libel cases I have gone through. I spent a night in jail for not paying bail on time; and was fined P4,000 for a conviction.

The irony of it all, however, is that in a democracy, journalists take pride in having been charged with the crime of libel in pursuit of truth and justice. Each case is like a medal of excellence.

It is hard to convict media practitioners of libel, especially if the accuser is a government official, because all four elements must be present – identification, defamation, publication and malice — to obtain conviction. Lacking only one of the four, the case would not prosper.

But, of course, his lawyer would not agree. As to why, your guess is as good as mine.