HEADLINES

Who sued whom this week?

‘GMA Network is pursuing legal action to hold the responsible officers accountable and to recover the misappropriated amount.’

Danny Vibas

It’s suddenly a week of suing in some quarters of Pinoy showbiz. Or is it just the heat of summer that’s squeezing some personalities to lose their cool? 

The Kapuso network has sued Television and Production Exponents Inc. (TAPE) for its alleged estafa of about P39 million in advertising revenue that it contractually committed to GMA Network for the use of its airtime for the noontime show Pinakamasayang Tahanan a year ago.  

In its official statement released at about 2 p.m. on Thursday (22 May), GMA said the funds amounting to ₱37,941,352.56 were not remitted despite repeated demands and were instead used for TAPE’s operating expenses, allegedly violating the terms of the trust arrangement.

“GMA Network is pursuing legal action to hold the responsible officers accountable and to recover the misappropriated amount,” the network’s statement further read. The case was reportedly filed at the Office of the City Prosecutor in Quezon City.

GAEL Garcia Bernal in ‘Magellan.’

Named in the complaint are former TAPE president and CEO Romeo Jalosjos Jr., chairman Romeo Jalosjos Sr., treasurer Seth Frederick “Bullet” Jalosjos, current CEO Malou Choa-Fagar, former SVP for Finance Michaela Magtoto and finance consultant Zenaida Buenavista.

By about 5 p.m. on the same day, TAPE legal counsel Maggie Abraham-Garduque told the media that there was no official complaint filed before the Prosecutor’s office in Quezon City against the alleged respondents.

“I called TAPE about the article published at GMA, but they did not know anything about it. I directed one of the alleged respondents in said case to go to the office of the city prosecutor of Quezon City to check on the case but she was informed that no case was filed against them by GMA,” the lawyer told the media via Facebook Messenger.

Garduque said they were shocked by the news, as she assured that TAPE would respect the legal proceedings once they had reached them through official filing.

The National Museum of the Philippines officially inaugurated the restored Lapulapu Monument at its new location on Maria Orosa St. at Rizal Park.

“They were surprised by the news article. Anyway, TAPE has not received any copy of the complaint filed against them. They will issue a statement as soon as they receive a copy of the complaint, if indeed there is. Rest assured that they will follow and respect the legal proceedings,” added the lawyer.

In its official statement, GMA accused TAPE’s top executives of estafa through abuse of confidence, alleging that the funds amounting to P37,941,352.56 were not remitted and were instead used for TAPE’s operating expenses.

“The complaint stems from respondents’ failure to remit advertising revenues collected from clients, which had been contractually assigned to GMA Network under a 2023 Assignment Agreement,” read the statement in part.

By the time you are reading this, things may have cleared up about this suing mess. 

Or could have worsened if TAPE counter-sued the Kapuso network.

* * *

Can the National Historical Commission of the Philippines (NHCP) sue celebrated Pinoy filmmaker Lav Diaz for asserting to both international and local media that the Filipino hero Lapulapu is only a myth and no one has ever seen or met the supposed chieftain of Mactan?

Well, maybe yes. The assertion practically puts the country to shame for honoring as hero a man whose actual existence is labeled to be just a figment of imagination.

But, no, the government agency has no plans to take any legal action against Diaz.

The government agency has practically ignored Diaz’s claim about Lapulapu’s non-existence, which he blurted out to media just a few days before his latest film Magellan was screened at the ongoing Cannes International Film Festival in France on 18 May. 

On the same date, but in Manila, the National Museum of the Philippines officially inaugurated the restored Lapulapu Monument at its new location on Maria Orosa St. at Rizal Park. Officials from NHC attended the inauguration. The monument used to stand at the Agripina Circle in Manila.

The government media arm Philippine Information Agency recently posted a poetic description of the Lapulapu Monument at its new location:

 “Against the backdrop of Manila’s verdant Rizal Park, a powerful figure has found a new perch from which to inspire the nation. 

“The 11.14-meter-tall (36.5-foot) Sentinel of Freedom — the iconic figure of Datu Lapu-Lapu--now stands proudly within the National Museum of the Philippines (NMP) Complex, along Maria Orosa Street in Manila, commanding attention from passersby and reminding Filipinos of their enduring spirit of independence.”

The ceremony held at 8:30 a.m., coincided with International Museum Day during which the National Museum officially unveiled the NHC’s historical marker, Pambansang Museo ng Pilipinas, at the main entrance of the National Museum Complex in Rizal Park. 

The “Magellan” in Diaz’s film refers to the Portuguese explorer who reached some islands of the still unnamed Philippine archipelago in 1521 under the sponsorship of the Spanish government since his own country did not want to fund his expedition to the Moluccas Islands which was known for its costly spices. 

As Spain has become the leading Catholic country at that time, Magellan’s men included priests, including his chronicler Antonio Pigaffeta. Magellan was killed in a skirmish in the waters of Mactan by a chieftain whom the chronicler named to be Lapulapu. Pigaffeta never wrote that he ever saw the chieftain at all. 

“I do not consider Pigaffeta reliable,” Diaz variously told the media when talking about the existence of the Mactan chieftain. He said he conducted seven years of research in Spain, Portugal, in the Moluccas Islands and in the Philippines before shooting the film.

Among his findings was Lapulapu was a chieftain fabricated by Humabon, an island ruler himself. Humabon reported Lapulapu to Magellan as refusing to be Christianized along with his people. Humabon, according to Diaz, was baiting Magellan and his men to invade Lapulapu’s territory island so native warriors could gang up on Magellan and kill him. 

And those warriors succeeded reportedly on 27 April 1521. But Lapulapu never turned up anywhere and was never heard of again. Pigaffeta himself never wrote about sighting Lapulapu. 

Diaz has not spoken on his research findings about Pigaffeta that led him to dismiss Magellan’s chronicler as “unreliable.”

The movie is mainly about Magellan. It seems to have been extracted from a longer one that deals equally with Magellan and his wife, Beatrice Barbosa. The extracted Magellan movie runs 160 minutes, just 20 minutes short of three hours. The longer films that equally highlights Magellan’s wife runs for nine hours, and Diaz seriously plans to release it later but most likely in another festival.

Magellan isn’t in competition at Cannes, but featured in the Cannes Premiere section — a showcase for the works of established filmmakers.

Mexican actor Gael Garcia Bernal stars in Magellan. The cast of the film, produced by Black Cap Pictures, Rosa Filmes and Andergraun Films, includes Dario Yazbek as Duarte, Angela Ramos (Beatriz), Amado Arjay Babon (the interpreter Enrique), Ronnie Lazaro (Raja Humabon), Bong Cabrera (Raja Kulambo) and Hazel Orencio (Juana).

Babon was in Diaz’s Phantosmia, which premiered at the Venice Film Festival last year.

Orencia, who also served as the Magellan production manager in the Philippines, has shared with media: “Amado’s role is really big. He shot scenes in Europe and the Philippines. It was an overwhelming experience for him acting alongside Gael. He’s a theater actor.”

Magellan is the Filipino auteur’s third film in the world’s most prestigious film festival. Diaz’s The Halt (Ang Hupa) was screened in the Directors’ Fortnight in 2019, while Norte, the End of History (Norte, Hangganan ng Kasaysayan) in the Un Certain Regard section was shown in 2013.

Magellan has received positive reviews in international media. The film is mainly described as “hypnotic.”