The shelving of film “The Rapists of Pepsi Paloma” is in the horizon after the Movie and Television Review and Classification Board rejected the request for review of the film due to failure of its distribute to submit documentary requirements for its approval.

Headed by Chairperson Lala Sotto-Antonio, niece of actor Vic Sotto, the MTRCB revealed in a statement that the board did not accept the materials sought to be reviewed, thus, the film has yet to be classified.

Among the documentary requirements sought from PinoyFlix Films, the controversial film’s distributor, are clearances indicating that there are no pending criminal civil or administrative cases involving the material.

It is public knowledge that Sotto has filed several counts of cyberlibel against the director of the film Darryl Yap. The case remains pending before the Regional Trial Court of Muntinlupa City.

In a press statement released by lawyer Paulino Cases Jr., MTRCB vice chairperson, the board belied claims that the movie that is the object of cyberlibel complaints by Sotto is now undergoing review by the agency.

“Contrary to a false claim, the Movie and Television Review and Classification Board (MTRCB) hereby serves notice that the Pepsi Paloma movie is currently NOT UNDER REVIEW due to incomplete requirements,” said Cases, who also chairs Hearing and Adjudication Committee of the MTRCB.

With Cases issuing the board’s denial, it is believed that Sotto-Antonio will inhibit herself from making a decision with regards the public exhibition of the film.

Cases said the MTRCB Registration Unit did not accept the materials submitted by Pinoyflix, distributor of the film, due to its failure to “provide specific requirements such as Certificate or Clearance of No Pending Criminal, Civil or Administrative Case from the Regional Trial Court, the Department of Justice and the Office of the Prosecutor.

“As part of the standard review process, the MTRCB Legal Affairs Division has formally communicated with the film’s distributor, PinoyFlix Films, and Entertainment Production, with regard to the missing requirements,” Cases explained.

He added: “This is to ensure that there will be no violation of the P.D. 1986 and its Implementing Rules and Regulation (IRR).”

Cases also warned parties attempting to “deliberately mislead the public” about the issue will be dealt with “in accordance with the law.”

“The MTRCB will not tolerate any misinformation or false narrative that seek to discredit

“The MTRCB will not tolerate any misinformation or false narrative that seek to discredit the Agency and undermine its mandate to protect the public interest. Any attempt to deliberately mislead the public will be dealt with in accordance with the law.