Court’s Final Decision Favors Rappler in 2018 SEC Shutdown Case

The Supreme Court has officially closed the long-running case over the Securities and Exchange Commission’s shutdown order against Rappler, marking a decisive legal victory for the independent news outlet and reinforcing the protection of press freedom in the Philippines.

Maria Ressa, Rappler CEO and Nobel Peace Prize winner, addresses a press conference on August 9, 2024, celebrating the Court of Appeals’ ruling directing the Securities and Exchange Commission / Photo File Rappler news

MANILA, Philippines – The Supreme Court (SC) has officially ended the case surrounding the controversial Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) shutdown order against Rappler, affirming a significant victory for the digital news organization. This decision marks the culmination of one of the most high-profile cases in Rappler’s history, solidifying its position as a resilient force in Philippine journalism.

READ MORE ARTICLES:

“The Court further…declares this case closed and terminated and the parties informed accordingly,” the SC Third Division stated in a resolution dated January 20, 2026, effectively putting a definitive end to months of legal wrangling.

The closure came after the Supreme Court granted the Office of the Solicitor General’s (OSG) request to withdraw its motion for extension. The motion had sought additional time for the OSG to file a legal challenge against a prior Court of Appeals (CA) ruling, which had previously nullified the SEC’s attempt to shut down Rappler. With the withdrawal accepted, the path was cleared for a final resolution, cementing Rappler’s triumph in a case that has drawn intense scrutiny and public attention for years.

This decision not only reinforces Rappler’s legal standing but also underscores the enduring importance of press freedom and the protection of independent media in the country.

The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), under the leadership of Solicitor General Darlene Marie Berberabe, acted as the government’s chief legal counsel, representing the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in its high-profile case against Rappler.

In a landmark turn of events in 2024, Rappler emerged victorious when the Court of Appeals nullified the SEC’s controversial shutdown order, a ruling that sent ripples through the Philippine media landscape. The following year, the appellate court reinforced its decision, officially recognizing Rappler as a Filipino-owned media organization and rejecting the SEC’s motion for reconsideration, which had sought to overturn the 2024 verdict.

“This represents a crucial victory not only for Maria Ressa but for journalists throughout the Philippines,” said internationally renowned human rights lawyer and Lebanese-British barrister Amal Clooney, who represents Rappler CEO and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Maria Ressa. “I applaud the stance taken by the Solicitor General in this matter and the court’s decisions, which underscore the fundamental role of a free press in a democratic society. It is my hope that the remaining legal challenges faced by Maria will be resolved in alignment with these same principles.”

The rulings mark a significant affirmation of press freedom in the Philippines, setting a legal precedent for media organizations nationwide.

This marks a landmark and much-celebrated triumph for our client, Maria Ressa, and for Rappler, concluding a legal struggle that has spanned nearly ten years,” said Caoilfhionn Gallagher KC, one of Ressa’s legal representatives. “This victory should serve as a turning point not only for Maria and the Rappler team but also for the broader cause of press freedom and the rule of law in the Philippines. We are hopeful that this momentum will continue as the remaining cases against Maria move toward their resolution.

Rappler Triumphs in Landmark Court Victory as SEC Shutdown Order Overturned, Restoring Press Freedom in the Philippines

In a significant legal and symbolic win for press freedom, the Court of Appeals (CA) has decisively overturned the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) 2018 decision to revoke Rappler’s certificate of incorporation, a ruling that had loomed over the digital media company for nearly six years.

The controversy began under the administration of former President Rodrigo Duterte, when the SEC argued that Rappler’s issuance of Philippine Depositary Receipts (PDRs) to foreign investor Pierre Omidyar was unconstitutional. In January 2018, the agency moved to revoke Rappler’s legal registration, effectively threatening the news organization’s operations.

In a strategic response, Omidyar transferred ownership of the PDRs to Rappler’s Filipino managers, aiming to neutralize the SEC’s constitutional concern. This action prompted the Court of Appeals to urge the SEC to reevaluate its ruling. Despite this, the SEC upheld its shutdown order just days before the end of Duterte’s presidency in 2022, leaving the organization in legal limbo.

The protracted battle came to a turning point in August 2024, when the CA ruled in favor of Rappler’s challenge. The appellate court ordered the full restoration of Rappler and Rappler Holdings Corporation’s certificates of incorporation, noting that the SEC had unfairly subjected the digital news company to “preferential treatment — a negative one.” The court also reaffirmed that Omidyar’s donation of the PDRs had already addressed the SEC’s constitutional objections, vindicating Rappler’s earlier argument.

Legal experts and press freedom advocates have hailed the decision as a pivotal moment not just for Rappler, but for the broader landscape of independent journalism in the Philippines. The ruling underscores the judiciary’s role in upholding the rule of law and ensuring that regulatory authorities act fairly, even amid politically charged pressures.

“This is a landmark victory for Maria Ressa, Rappler, and for press freedom in the Philippines,” said Caoilfhionn Gallagher, one of Ressa’s lead legal counsels. “It sets a crucial precedent that regulatory power cannot be wielded arbitrarily to silence independent media.”

With Rappler’s corporate status now restored, the digital news outlet can continue its investigative reporting and journalistic work without the looming threat of legal suppression, marking a new chapter in the ongoing struggle for press freedom and accountability in the country.

The Court of Appeals (CA) underscored its earlier ruling, highlighting that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) had overlooked a previous directive to examine the legal ramifications of Pierre Omidyar’s donation to Rappler. The appellate court’s decision, delivered in 2025, served as a decisive reminder to regulatory authorities about adhering to judicial instructions and respecting the rule of law.

Over the past decade, Rappler and its key figures have weathered a slew of legal challenges, a relentless barrage that has tested the boundaries of press freedom in the Philippines. Remarkably, after years of litigation, only a single case remains unresolved. The appeal of Maria Ressa, Rappler’s co-founder, and former researcher Reynaldo Santos against their June 2020 cyber libel conviction continues to await resolution at the Supreme Court.

The momentum in the case took a notable turn earlier this year. In March, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) submitted a formal manifestation to the High Court, advocating for the acquittal of both Ressa and Santos. This development signals a potential pivot in one of the country’s most closely watched legal battles, with implications not only for the journalists involved but for press freedom and accountability in the Philippines at large.

As the legal saga unfolds, the spotlight remains on how the judiciary balances long-standing convictions with emerging interpretations of the law, particularly in cases that intersect with journalism, governance, and public interest. For Maria Ressa, Reynaldo Santos, and Rappler, the path ahead could well redefine the contours of media freedom and set a precedent for the protection of investigative reporting in the digital age.

Philippines Faces Global Scrutiny Over SEC Order Threatening Press Freedom

The order of the Philippine Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that will effectively shut down the operations of Rappler, Inc., an independent digital media company that has been critical of the government, deviates from national jurisprudence and violates the internationally recognized right to freedom of expression by the media, said the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) today.

Founded by Maria Ressa, one of two journalists awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for their efforts to safeguard freedom of expression, Rappler Inc. earned the ire of former President Rodrigo Duterte because of its critical reporting on his administration’s grave and systemic human rights violations.

“The SEC ruling is just the most recent effort to harass and silence Rappler and its founder, Maria Ressa,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Secretary General. “The weaponization of law to curb opposing views results in the shrinking of democratic space and leads to an authoritarian rule which allows governments to abuse power with impunity, and undermines the rule of law, transparency and accountability.”

The SEC released an order on 28 June 2022 affirming its 2018 decision to revoke the certificate of incorporation of Rappler Holdings Corporation (RHC) – owner of Rappler, Inc. The SEC based its decision on a supposed violation of the foreign ownership restriction in the Constitution when RHC issued Philippine Depositary Receipts (PDR) to Omidyar Network Fund, LLC. (Omidyar), a foreign entity.

PDRs are government-approved financial instruments that allow foreigners to invest in industries with ownership restrictions, such as mass media. PDRs entitle holders to receive dividends from the stocks they represent, but do not evidence ownership of shares in a corporation. The SEC has previously approved the PDR offerings of other mass media networks. RHC had issued PDRs to two foreign companies, but the SEC only assailed the validity of the PDRs issued to Omidyar, as the terms of the agreement between the two entities which included a clause requiring a “good faith discussion” before any amendments can be made to Rappler’s articles of incorporation or by-laws.

The SEC found that this clause gave Omidyar control over RHC and Rappler Inc.’s operations. The Supreme Court has held, and prevailing jurisprudence shows, that corporations that are deficient in their nationality compliance requirements under the Constitution and the Foreign Investments Act can resolve the defect prior to the start of an administrative case or investigation. In a similar resolution promulgated by the Supreme Court in 2012, a telecommunications company was allowed to “cure” its structure to comply with the foreign ownership requirement. The SEC should have applied the same principle when RHC submitted a document in 2017 waiving the contentious “good faith clause” in the agreement with Omidyar.

Instead, the waiver was disregarded by the SEC due to a technicality, and proceeded to terminate RHC’s very existence. This is particularly troubling given that the operations of RHC and Rappler Inc. are imbued with much public interest.

Even if the original agreement did give Omidyar control over Rappler Inc., the subsequent donation of the PDRs to Rappler officials who are all Filipinos should have cured the defect and resolved any issues of foreign ownership.

In fact, the Court of Appeals ordered the SEC to reevaluate its 2018 decision in light of this donation. “The revocation of Rappler’s certificate of incorporation is essentially an order to cease the delivery of news and information. It seems that the SEC is abusing the law and giving an overly-restrictive interpretation to stifle dissent.

The ICJ is particularly concerned at the chilling effect the ruling is likely to bring to the exercise of free expression by independent media in the Philippines,” said Zarifi. Rappler has until 13 July to appeal the SEC decision with the Court of Appeals. As a State party to the International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Philippines has an obligation to respect and ensure the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers. The ICJ will be monitoring the case to ensure the protection of human rights.

Philippines Faces Global Scrutiny Over SEC Order Threatening Press Freedom

The Philippine Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) recent order effectively threatening to shut down Rappler, Inc., an independent digital media outlet renowned for its investigative reporting, has sparked widespread concern among international human rights and press freedom advocates. The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) has condemned the move, stating that it departs from established national jurisprudence and infringes upon the internationally recognized right to freedom of expression.

Founded by Maria Ressa, one of two journalists awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for her courageous defense of free expression, Rappler has long stood as a bulwark of independent journalism in the Philippines. Its fearless reporting, particularly during the presidency of Rodrigo Duterte, exposed systemic human rights abuses and corruption, earning both accolades and the ire of political leaders. The SEC’s June 28, 2022 order, reaffirming its 2018 decision to revoke the certificate of incorporation of Rappler Holdings Corporation (RHC)—the parent company of Rappler, Inc.—thus reads as a direct challenge to the media’s role in holding power to account.

At the heart of the SEC’s ruling is the alleged violation of the Philippine Constitution’s foreign ownership restrictions. RHC had issued Philippine Depositary Receipts (PDRs) to Omidyar Network Fund, LLC, a foreign entity. PDRs are government-approved instruments that permit foreign investment in sectors like mass media while safeguarding Filipino control. They allow investors to receive dividends without conferring ownership rights. Historically, such arrangements have been routinely approved for other media networks, making the SEC’s selective scrutiny of Omidyar’s PDRs particularly striking.

The SEC’s argument hinges on a “good faith discussion” clause within the PDR agreement, which it claims granted Omidyar undue influence over Rappler’s operations. Yet, national jurisprudence clearly demonstrates that corporations with minor nationality compliance issues are permitted to rectify them before or during administrative proceedings. The Supreme Court’s 2012 decision regarding a telecommunications company affirmed that structural defects could be cured to meet constitutional requirements—a remedy that Rappler attempted in 2017 by formally waiving the contentious clause. Despite this, the SEC dismissed the waiver on a technicality and proceeded to terminate RHC’s corporate existence, a decision that critics argue is disproportionate and detrimental to public interest.

Even if Omidyar’s original agreement had temporarily granted control, the subsequent donation of the PDRs to Filipino Rappler officials should have resolved any foreign ownership concerns. The Court of Appeals itself ordered the SEC to reassess its 2018 decision in light of this corrective measure, underscoring that the regulatory body’s current stance lacks both legal and logical grounding.

ICJ Secretary-General Sam Zarifi decried the move as part of a broader campaign to intimidate and silence dissenting voices. “The weaponization of law to curb opposing views results in the shrinking of democratic space and leads to an authoritarian rule which allows governments to abuse power with impunity, and undermines the rule of law, transparency, and accountability,” Zarifi said. The revocation of Rappler’s certificate is, in essence, an order to halt the delivery of news, representing not just an administrative act, but a chilling signal to all independent media in the Philippines.

Rappler now faces a narrow window—until July 13—to appeal the SEC ruling before the Court of Appeals. As a State Party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Philippines is obligated to protect freedom of expression, including the right to seek, receive, and impart information freely. Failure to uphold these principles risks not only stifling independent journalism but also drawing international scrutiny over the country’s commitment to human rights and democratic norms.

This case, while centered on the legal technicalities of corporate law, transcends administrative procedure. It is a litmus test for the resilience of press freedom in the Philippines, the independence of its institutions, and the ability of its civil society to challenge overreach. The world watches closely, as the treatment of Rappler and Maria Ressa signals whether the Philippines will honor its democratic commitments or continue down a path where legal instruments become tools for silencing critical voices.

In defending Rappler, the Philippines is not merely safeguarding a single news organization; it is upholding the very principles of transparency, accountability, and the free flow of information that sustain a functioning democracy. The outcome of this battle will resonate far beyond Manila, serving as a precedent for how emerging democracies balance regulation with the fundamental human right to free expression.

Petition against Rappler Ban

Patricia Marie I. Ranada, et al. v. Office of the President, et al.; Florangel Braid, et al., Bartholome T. Guingona, et al. and Pagbabago @ Pilipinas Foundation, Inc., petitioners-in-intervention

G.R. No. 246126

Rappler Triumphs in Landmark Court Victory as SEC Shutdown Order Overturned, Restoring Press Freedom in the Philippines

Philippines Faces Global Scrutiny Over SEC Order Threatening Press Freedom

Philippines Faces Global Scrutiny Over SEC Order Threatening Press Freedom

Leave a Reply Cancel reply