With respect to the motion for contempt filed by Margarita Cojuangco against Rina Jimenez-David, we believe that the article written by the latter is not such as to impede, obstruct, or degrade the administration of justice. The allegedly contemptuous article merely restates the history of the case and reiterates the arguments which Rina Jimenez-David, together with some other journalists have raised before this Court in their Brief for Petitioner Vitug. We do not find in this case the contemptuous conduct exhibited by the respondent in In re Torres ¹³ where the respondent, being a newspaper editor, published an article which anticipated the outcome of a case in the Supreme Court, named the author of the decision, and pointed out the probable vote of the members of the Court although in fact, no such action had been taken by the court; and in In re Kelly ¹⁴ where respondent, having been convicted of contempt of court, published a letter during the pendency of his motion for a re-hearing of the contempt charge. In said letter, he severely criticized the court and its action in the proceeding for contempt against him. In contrast to the aforementioned publications, Rina Jimenez-David's article cannot be said to have cast doubt on the integrity of the court or of the administration of justice. If at all, it was a mere criticism of the existing libel law in the country. In view of the above considerations, we are constrained to deny the motion for contempt.

WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, this petition is DENIED for lack of merit. Likewise, the motion for contempt filed by respondent against Rina Jimenez-David is DENIED on the same ground.

G.R. No. 103618 May 20, 1994
MARITES DANGUILAN-VITUG, petitioner,
vs.
THE COURT OF APPEALS, HON. RAMON MABUTAS, JR., Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch XLII, Manila, and MARGARITA R. COJUANGCO, respondents.