Muntinlupa court issues gag order in Vic Sotto vs. Darryl Yap case

The Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court (RTC) has issued a gag order on Vic Sotto and his representatives, prohibiting them from publicly disclosing or discussing a case filed over the teaser of “The Rapists of Pepsi Paloma.”

This came upon the request of Director Darryl Yap, who is the respondent in the petition for a writ of habeas data filed by Sotto before the Muntinlupa RTC Branch 205.

Yap’s camp has said that their verified return or response to the petition will include an unreleased film and he sought to prevent its public disclosure to preserve the sub judice rule, his freedom of expression, and the artistic integrity of the work.

“The Petitioner and any person acting for and on behalf of the petitioner are enjoined from publicly disclosing or discussing the contents of the verified return to be submitted by the respondent in this case, as well as any matters learned from the proceedings of this case,” the court said in a 3-page order.

“All parties are directed to observe strict confidentiality in compliance with the sub judice rule, ensuring that the case proceedings and any related matters remain undisclosed to the public until resolved,” it added.

The court also directed Sotto to file his comment to the motion for consolidation filed by Yap’s camp earlier. Yap asked the Court to consolidate the present case with the 19 counts of cyber libel that Sotto filed before the Office of the Prosecutor in Muntinlupa.

Sotto’s camp has declined to comment. 

In his petition for a writ, Sotto asked the court to compel Yap to remove and take down all promotional materials, teaser video, and other content relative to the film, which depict Sotto’s personal information. 

He also asked the court to prohibit Yap from further disseminating any materials relative to the film on all platforms.

The court has clarified that while it granted the writ, it only directed Yap’s camp to submit their response.

Sotto’s lawyer, Atty. Enrique Dela Cruz, previously said the Muntinlupa court temporarily issued a writ of habeas data. He said this meant Yap had been directed to take down his content.

“The petitioner mistakenly believed that the issuance of the writ already constituted the granting of the relief sought in their Petition for a writ of habeas data. This Court emphasizes that the issuance of the writ merely serves as a procedural directive requiring the respondent to submit a verified return,” it said.

The court rescheduled the hearing to January 17, 2025. —NB, GMA Integrated News