Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

US v. FELIPE BUSTOS ET AL.

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 205728 2015-01-21	DIOCESE OF BACOLOD v. COMELEC LEONEN, J.
In this jurisdiction, this court held that "[t]he interest of society and the maintenance of good government demand a full discussion of public affairs."[163] This court has, thus, adopted the principle that "debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide open . . . [including even] unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials."[164]
	AM No. 10-10-4-SC 2011-03-08	UP LAW FACULTY'S STATEMENT ON PLAGIARISM ALLEGATIONS LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
Christian J. Tams[31]
	GR NO. 146848 2006-10-17	GMA NETWORK v. JESUS G. BUSTOS GARCIA, J.
We close this ponencia with the following oft-quoted excerpts from an old but still very much applicable holding of the Court on how public men should deport themselves in the face of criticism: The interest of society and the maintenance of good government demand a full discussion of public affairs. Complete liberty to comment on the conduct of public men is a scalpel in the case of free speech. The sharp incision of its probe relieves the abscesses of officialdom. Men in public life may suffer under a hostile and unjust accusation; the wound can be assuaged by the balm of clear conscience. A public officer must not be too thin-skinned with reference to comment upon his officials acts. Only thus can the intelligence and dignity of the individual be exalted. xxx.[27] IN VIEW WHEREOF, the petition is GRANTED. Accordingly, the assailed decision dated January 25, 2001 of the appellate court in CA-G.R. CV No. 52240 is REVERSED and SET ASIDE and that of the trial court is REINSTATED and AFFIRMED in toto.