A judge of a regional trial court (RTC) in Nueva Vizcaya has reiterated that the constitutional right to free speech “is not absolute” and does not extend to expressions that impede the administration of justice or encourage disobedience to lawful court orders.

While RTC Judge Paul R. Attolba Jr. admitted that courts are not immune from public scrutiny as part of democracy, he pointed out that when an utterance tends to scandalize or disrespect a court or when its administration of justice would be impeded, the court – as a measure of self- preservation – “may exercise its inherent power to contempt.”

With his declaration, Judge Attolba motu proprio (on his own initiative) directed seven persons to explain in 10 days from receipt of the order dated Jan. 28, 2026 why they should not be cited in contempt for blatant disrespect and violation of his order.

Ordered to explain and attend the indirect contempt hearing set on Feb. 12 were Florentino Daynos, Janette Macario, Sonette Nginsayan, Adelia Modi, Crislyn Pocday, Analiza Balliao and Amelia Rabino.

They were arrested by the operatives of the Nueva Vizcaya Philippine National Police (PNP) last Jan. 23 during the enforcement of the RTC’s order to dismantle human barricades along the barangay road leading to the mining explorations of Woggle Corporation in Dupax town.

Court records showed that Woggle was issued on Aug.4, 2025 Exploration Permit No. 00030-II by the Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB) of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). It immediately started its mining exploration activities.

The same records also showed that protesters led by Daynos and his group put up physical barricades to stop the exploration. When physical barricades were ordered dismantled by the RTC, Daynos and his group formed human barricades.

Judge Attolba later issued another order that directed the court sheriff and the PNP to disperse the protesters and to arrest the violators. The court order was enforced last Jan. 23. The enforcement led to the arrest of Daynos and six other protesters.

In his latest order, Judge Attolba said: “The court takes judicial notice also that prior to the scheduled implementation of the writ, Florentino Daynos, one of the respondents in the case filed by Woggle and who is alleged to be the leader of the barricaders, openly invited and encourage other individuals and/or group of individuals or organization in his Facebook account he shared publicly to converge at the subject area and to join in resisting and defying the Writ of Preliminary Injunction issued by this court.”

He also said: “Such postings, which were circulated before the execution of the writ, were apparently intended to muster resistance to a lawful order of this court and embolden others to obstruct its lawful execution.”

He explained that contempt of court “may be committed not only by direct physical acts, but also through acts of instigation, incitement, or encouragement, including those carried out through public statements or social media, when such acts are intended to induce others to defy or obstruct a lawful order of the court.”

At the same time, Judge Attolba said that acts perpetrated by those arrested during the enforcement of the order were duly reported and documented by the court’s sheriff.

“The court opines that the foregoing acts, if proven, constitute disobedience to or resistance against a lawful writ, order, or process of a court, as well as improper conduct tending directly or indirectly to impede, obstruct, or degrade the administration of justice, punishable by indirect contempt under Section 3, Rule 71 of the Rules of Court,” he also said in his order.