Republic of the Philippines)
Meycauayan City )s.s.
x------------------------------x
COMPLAINT-AFFIDAVIT
I, HENRY R. VILLARICA, of legal age, married, Filipino
and resident of Meycauayan City Hall, Meycauayan City, Bulacan
under oath, hereby depose and say, that:
1. I am the incumbent Mayor of the City of Meycauayan,
Bulacan.
2. As such, I hereby formally charge MARICRIZ
OLIVEROZ (hereinafter referred to as the
“Respondent”), a resident of ___________ for the
crime of Libel under Section 4, paragraph (c), sub-
paragraph (4) of Republic Act 10175 also known as the
Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012.
3. Sometime on January 2o18, the respondent, malign my
person, character and honor, caused the publication and
circulation, through an online platform, specifically the
City of Meycauayan Facebook Page for the consumption of
all its followers, likers, and the public in general. A
screenshot of the said post is hereto attached and made an
integral part hereof as Annex "A".
4. Ostensibly, the said post contained malicious imputations
with bad intentions and unjustifiable motives, purposely
to malign, dishonor, discredit, insult and assassinate my
character and reputation to the public as well as to my
constituents.
5. The afore-quoted portion of the post written by
respondent Maricriz Oliveroz created in the minds of
the readers that I am greedy, resentful and incompetent in
my work as a mayor of the City of Meycauayan.
6. Respondent’s post has no factual basis, is highly
speculative and was all false statements made to destroy
my reputation as a government official and as a public
servant of the City of Meycauayan.
7. Respondents were motivated by bad faith in the
publishing of the said post online to defame, embarrass
and discredit me to my colleagues, friends, family and to
the general public.
8. Due to the said malicious public allegations by the
respondent, I suffered and continue to suffer serious
anxiety, besmirched reputation, mental anguish, sleepless
nights, not to mention the damage they have caused to my
career, reputation and honor among the readers and the
general public;
9. Section 4, paragraph (c), sub-paragraph (4) of Republic
Act No. 10175 (RA 10175), also known as the Cybercrime
Prevention Act of 2017 defines “cyberlibel” as follows:
“(4) Libel – The unlawful or prohibited acts of libel as
defined in Article 355 of the Revised Penal Code, as
amended, committed through a computer system or
any other similar means which may be devised in the
future.”
10. Under RA 10175, the crime of libel, when committed
through a computer system, is considered a cybercrime
offense, specifically, a content-related offense.
11. The elements of libel are present based on the facts
presented. The said post contains malicious imputations
of crime, vices and defects, which tarnish my good and
clean reputation with the public. These are serious
allegations, which would heavily affect my character as a
private person an as a public servant as well.
12. There is a presumption that these imputations are
malicious, even if they be true, if no good intention and
justifiable motive for making it is shown with the
exception of true and fair reports. The elements of this
exception are listed by Justice Reyes1 as follows:
“1. That it is a fair and true of a judicial, legislative, or
other official proceedings of which are not of
confidential nature or of a statement, report, or speech
delivered in said proceedings, or of any other act
performed by a public officer in the exercise of his
functions;
2. That it is made in good faith; and
3. That it is without any comments or remarks.”
13. Furthermore, the Supreme Court ruled in the case of
Jose Jesus M. Disini, Jr., et. al. vs. The Secretary of
Justice, et. al.2, that the person who may be held liable for
“cyberlibel” is only the author of the defamatory
imputation. In the said case, the court’s acquiescence goes
insofar as the cybercrime law penalizes the author of
the libelous statement. In addition, the court also
stated that:
1
Reyes, Luis B. The Revised Penal Code 858 (13th Ed. 1993).
2
G.R. No. 203335, 11 February 2014.
“Nevertheless, it should be stressed that if the
“comment” made on an original post does not only
serve as a reaction but creates an altogether new
defamatory story, then that will be considered as an
original posting published on the Internet by its creator
and may be penalized accordingly.3
14. Notably, the subject remark was posted and published in
the online platform and page of the City of Meycauayan,
which is open and available for public consumption since
the date it was posted. Thus, the provision on
cyberlibel under RA 10175 is applicable to the
instant case.
15. I am executing this Complaint-Affidavit to attest to the
truth of the forgoing facts, for the purpose of instituting a
complaint for Cyberlibel under Section 4, paragraph (c),
sup-paragraph (4) of Republic Act No. 10175 also known
as the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 against
Respondent Maricriz Oliveros.
FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT
City of Meycauayan for Makati City. June 2018
Affiant
3
G.R. No. 203335, 11 February 2014. supra.
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this 14th day
of March 2016 at Meycauayan City, Philippines the following
affiant ATTY. HENRY R. VILLARICA exhibiting to me his
Government issued _____________________________
being sufficient and competent evidence of his/her identity in
pursuant to the 2004 Rules of Notarial Practice.
Doc. No. ____;
Page No.____;
Book No. 13;
Series of 2019
