Dra. Carandang not involved in Willing Willie Case: MTRCB Statement

Macho Dancer
Official Statement of the Board
(regarding non-involvement of Dra. Ma. Lourdes A. Carandang in the filing
of the “Willing Willie” case pending before
the Board’s Hearing and Adjudication Committee)
The Board wishes to clarify erroneous news reports that Dra. Ma. Lourdes A. Carandang is the complainant in the case filed against the television program “Willing Willie” of TV5, which case is now pending resolution in the Board’s Hearing and Adjudication Committee.
The records of the Board’s Hearing and Adjudication Committee showed that the Board’s Legal Counsel is the complainant in the administrative case against the television program “Willing Willie” of TV5 for probable violation of Section 3 (c) of P.D. 1986 in connection with the questioned scene of a gyrating dance by a six-year old boy named Jan Jan Suan.
Nowhere in the complaint filed by the Board’s Legal Counsel or in any public pronouncement by the Board where the name of Dra. Carandang was ever mentioned.  The complaint by the Board’s Legal Counsel was filed on 28 March 2011 while the letter of Dra. Carandang expressing her views on the questioned scene was received by the Board on 03 April 2011.
In the determination of what constitutes contemporary Filipino cultural values, the Board always listens to the sentiments of the Filipino public.  It has always been the policy of the Board to encourage the public to register with the Board their complaints, sentiments or opinions regarding any matter seen on television.  On some occasions, the Board even sought guidance from persons of known probity and expertise in their given field.
In the subject gyrating dance of six-year old Jan Jan Suan, the Board solicits the views of Dra. Carandang because the scene deemed offensive involves the participation of a child.  Though the Board recognizes the unquestionable expertise of Dra. Carandang on matters pertaining to child psychology, her views as well as the views of other concerned agencies of the government (DSWD, NYC, NCCT and CHR) and of the public (through voluminous e-mail complaints) do not in any way bind the Board but only to aid in the independent and impartial determination of the case.
(Sgd) MARY GRACE POE LLAMANZARES
Chairperson