PRESS freedom scored a victory when the libel complaint filed by the Citystate Savings Bank against eight staff members of The SUNDAY Punch led by editor publisher Ermin Garcia Jr. was dismissed for insufficiency of evidence by the Office of the City Prosecutor of Pasig.

The resolution, dated December 27, 2013 and promulgated by Assistant Prosecutor Rodney Magbanua, also the investigating prosecutor, dismissed the complaint stating: “After a careful evaluation of the evidence on hand, this Office finds that there is insufficient ground to engender a well founded belief that the crime of libel was committed within the jurisdiction of this Office.”

Magbanua also wrote that without delving into the elements of the crime, The SUNDAY PUNCH newspaper is published and circulated in Dagupan City while the complainant’s branch subject of the alleged libelous article is also located in the same city.

“It is the opinion of this Office that a complainant’s right to file in his place of residence applies only to natural persons with fixed domicile,” the resolution reads, adding that considering that the object of the alleged libelous article is the Citystate branch in Dagupan, “the same should be filed in that city.”

NO INTERNET LIBEL

As to the same story posted in the online edition of The SUNDAY Punch, Magbanua quoted a reading of the  Supreme Court decision in Bonifacio et al vs. RTC Makati, which states in part “(t)he Justice Secretary opined that the crime of internet libel was non-existent, hence, the accused could not be charged with libel under Article 353 of the RPC (Revised Penal Code)”.

Magbanua ruled that up to this time, “no reversal of said SOJ (Secretary of Justice) opinion has been issued, hence this Office must rely on the same”.

Aside from Garcia, the other respondent in the libel complaint was Dominador Liwag Jr., retail service manager of the Dagupan Electric Corporation (Decorp).

The other respondents  in this case were Marifi Jara, associate editor; Jun Velasco, editorial consultant consultant; Jesus Garcia Jr., columnist; Johanne Macob, correspondent; Julie Ann Arrogante, online manager; Jocelyn de la Cruz, production chief; and Virgilio Biagtan, cartoonist.

Garcia and his staff were represented pro bono by the Roque-Butuyan & Associates firm led by Atty. Harry Roque. The firms is also known as Centerlaw, an affiliate of the Media Defense Initiative.

Citystate bank was represented by Atty. Roger Diaz and Atty. Ferdinand Topacio.

Another respondent in the libel complaint was Dominador Liwag Jr., retail service manager of the Dagupan Electric Corporation (Decorp).

COMPLAINT

The bank’s complaint was on the supposed defamatory statements published  in the August 26, 2013 issue of The Punch  and afterwards in the newspaper’s internet website on September 1, 2013 that made it appear that it was the Dagupan City government that was paying for the bank’s electric consumption using the electric meter under the name of the city government.

The Citystate claimed that the news article attributed to the respondent claiming the bank did not pay its electric bill and instead the same was charged to the city “is a malicious imputation and outright false”.

COUNTER AFFIDAVIT

In his counter-affidavit, Garcia denied the allegations, maintaining that criticisms against the complainant bank, as a “public figure”, is privileged.

At the same time, he let off members of his newspaper’s staff, the other co-respondents, as having no responsibility in the writing and publication of the article.

In his rejoinder to the counter-rejoinder of the complainant, Garcia reiterated the defenses made by him and his staff and also went to assail the constitutionality of the libel provision of the revised Penal Code.

Liwag, meanwhile, also denied in his counter-affidavit the allegations against him, claiming that there was no disclosure on his part as Decorp Retail Service Manager directly to the media.

He claimed that information relating to the article was not fed by him to The Punch but rather to Mayor Belen Fernandez whom he informed of the status of the complainant bank’s electric meter.

At the same time, Liwag asserted that he cannot see any reason why Decorp can be charged with libel when it was doing valid corporate acts.

Back to Homepage

Share your Comments or Reactions

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments