Darryl Yap with his legal counsel Atty. Raymond Fortun and his son Raymond Wilhelm Fortun. Facebook/Darryl Yap

MANILA — Filmmaker Darryl Yap, through his legal counsel Fortun and Santos law offices, is requesting the Muntinlupa City Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 205 to issue a gag order against veteran actor Vic Sotto's camp as the former responds to the petition within five days upon receipt.

A gag order is issued by courts preventing parties, including their lawyers, to publicly disclose any information about a pending lawsuit. This includes talking to media or discussing the case online.

Yap's camp argued that since the director of the controversial film will give his verified return involving the movie that isn't out yet, Sotto or any person acting on his behalf should be prevented in "disclosing the contents of the verified return to the public".

"Further considering that the verified return shall involve an unreleased film by a prominent director, any disclosure of the verified return would not only violate the Respondent’s freedom of expression, but it shall also cause grave and irreparable damage to the Respondent’s artistic license and outcome of the film," the motion for issuance of the gag order stated.

Vic Sotto files complaint vs Darryl Yap over Pepsi Paloma movie

The complaint for 19 counts of cyber libel, filed by Sotto on Thursday and includes a prayer for damages worth P35 million in total, was due to the supposed  "malicious and defamatory statements" involved in the first teaser of Yap's film "The Rapists of Pepsi Paloma".

It was posted January 1 and immediately went viral after mentioning Sotto and connecting him to the late '80s star Pepsi Paloma.

The filmmaker's legal counsel emphasized that the case involves showbiz personalities and has already caught the media's attention.

Yap appealed to Muntinlupa RTC that the gag order is necessary in compliance with the "sub-judice rule" or a judicial rule that restricts any public disclosure or comments about the case.

In a Facebook post, Yap expressed gratitude to Fortun legal team, attaching a photo with Atty. Raymond Fortun and his son Raymond Wilhelm Fortun.

"Thank you Fortuns," his caption reads.

COURT HAS NO TAKEDOWN ORDER YET ON YAP'S TRAILER

The Muntinlupa RTC Branch 205 only ordered the issuance of a Writ of Habeas Data, on the basis of director's failure to seek Sotto's consent, which isn't a privilege yet involving the deletion of any material related to the case.

The decision on whether the trailer and other promotional materials must be deleted will depend on the judge's decision over the summary hearing for the petition which is happening January 15, 8:30 a.m.

Sotto's lawyer Enrique dela Cruz and Yap's lawyer Fortun have disagreements on the court's order, with the former saying the issuance of the writ involves the takedown of the trailer. 

The latter, on the other hand, argued that Yap is only requested to make a "return" and no final decision yet was made regarding any content deletion.

The controversial director has claimed online that the film's defense is the "truth".

"Dahil sa huli, Katotohanan lang ang depensa sa lahat ng Katanungan," Yap wrote. "Alam nang mga nakakaalam noon, at alam na ng mga nagtatanong ngayon. Delia, Pepsi — Babalik tayo sa Korte."

However, Atty. Cecilio Duka, an assistant dean of the University of Makati College of Law Atty. Cecilio Duka, said in an interview that one's freedom of expression "ends" when it can ruin someone's reputation.

'Res judicata': Assistant dean reacts to Vic Sotto lawsuit vs Darryl Yap

“Sa batas natin at sa mga desisyon ng korte, kahit nagsasabi ka ng katotohanan pero ang paraan ng pagsasabi mo ay may malisya, hindi po dépensa ito laban sa libel o cyberlibel. Sa paraan ng pagpapahayag, ito ho ay may malisya o makakasira sa kapwa, may pananagutan ito sa ating batas,” he stressed on Teleradyo Serbisyo.

Dela Cruz also argued that a filmmaker's creative license is not a pass to make libelous remarks.

"Walang proteksyon na binibigay ang batas sa libel. So hindi mo pwedeng gamitin ang creative license bilang depensa sa libel. Good intentions, hindi mo pwedeng gamitin sa libel. Malaya tayo magpahayag, malaya tayo gumawa ng pelikula. Ang exemption lang, huwag kang gagawa ng libelous statements," he said.

RELATED VIDEOS: