Republic of the Philippines
Department of Justice
OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR
Kalibo, Aklan
THERESE I. NAGAMOS,
MELCHIE I. NAGAMOS,
and, PEDRITO I. NAGAMOS II,
Complainants,
NPS DOC. NO: _______________
-versus- For: CYBER LIBEL under Section
4(c)(4) of RA 10175 in relation to
KAY ANN I. MAGALIT Art. 353 and 355 of the RPC
alias “K-ann Magalit”,
Respondent.
X-----------------------------------------------X
JOINT-COMPLAINT AFFIDAVIT
We, THERESE I. NAGAMOS, MELCHIE I. NAGAMOS, and PEDRITO I. NAGAMOS II,
all Filipinos, of legal ages, and residents of Kalibo, Aklan, after having been sworn
to in accordance with law, do hereby depose and state under oath THAT:
1. We personally know herein Respondent KAY ANN I. MAGALIT alias K-ann
Magalit, Filipino, of legal age, and a resident of New Washington, Aklan,
where she may be served with subpoena or other processes of this
Honorable Office;
2. Sometime in the month of April 2022, Respondent posted in facebook and
categorically tagged private complainants MELCHIE NAGAMOS with
facebook profile Gnip Eihc Po and PEDRITO I. NAGAMOS II, the following:
K-ann Magalit is with Gnip Eihc Po and 2 others.
“Blind item no. 1
Hindi iinum sa basong nainuman na ayaw ng pda khit kiss sa cheeks dhil
wat sanidad ( nga’a haw nanabdus ka man?)
Blind item no. 2
Gym addict
(bitch u gay)
Blind item no. 3
And quote,, hold my hand where’ever u go I’ll go. You are my love, you
are my life, I love you both
(mahimbing nang tulog ni asawa my motor gahueat sa guwa girl,, bitch
pleasssseee, boo u whore)
Blind item no. 4
Businesswoman
(edukada ako)”1
SUBSTANTIAL TRANSLATION:
Blind item no. 1
Will never drink in the cup who dislikes pda [public display of affection]
even kissed in the cheeks because of lack of sanity (why did you get
pregnant?).
Blind item no. 2
Gym addict,
(bitch you gay [homosexual])
Blind item no. 3
And quote, hold my hand wherever you go, I’ll go. You are my love, you
are my life, I love you both.
(Your husband is in deep sleep. There is a motor [bike] waiting outside
girl, bitch please, boo you whore)
Blind item no. 4
Businesswoman
(I am educated)
3. After the said post, Respondent then posted a second time in her facebook
threatening private complainants, to wit:
K-ann Magalit
“I don’t do this type of shit here,, but the occasion falls for it then so be
it,, wala akong screenshot but I have facts,, I don’t mean to brag but,, I
can ruin you all in just a single click [emoticons] its not a promise nor a
threat,, it’s the future,, tanan kamo actually”2
SUBSTANTIAL TRANSLATION:
K-ann Magalit
I do not do this type of shit here, but the occasion falls for it then so be
it, I do not have screenshot but I have facts, I do not mean to brag but, I
can ruin you all in just a single click [emoticons] it is not a promise nor a
threat, it is the future, all of you actually.
1
SEE ANNEX “A” – Screenshot of the Facebook post by Respondent
2
SEE ANNEX “A-1” – Screenshot from the Facebook post by Respondent
2
4. The facebook post by the Respondent in item no. 2 refers to all the private
complainants herein;
5. In the series of blind items posted in allegation number two (2), Blind item
no. 1 refers to private complainant THERESE I. NAGAMOS which is a false
aspersion of circumstance;
6. Blind item no. 2 refers to private complainant PEDRITO I. NAGAMOS II,
which is likewise false;
7. Blind item no. 3 refers to private complainant MELCHIE I. NAGAMOS which
is likewise false;
8. Blind item no. 4 refers to a certain relative by the Complainants who is now
residing in Bacolod;
9. In allegation number three (3), Respondent categorically pointed to private
complainants about the post when she referred to them as “tanan kamo
actually” (all of you actually);
-CASE AT LAW-
[Link] 353 and Article 355 of the Revised Penal Code provides:
“Article 353. Definition of libel. - A libel is public and
malicious imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect,
real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status,
or circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, discredit,
or contempt of a natural or juridical person, or to
blacken the memory of one who is dead.”
-xxx-
“Article 355. Libel means by writings or similar means. -
A libel committed by means of writing, printing,
lithography, engraving, radio, phonograph, painting,
theatrical exhibition, cinematographic exhibition, or any
similar means, shall be punished by prision correccional
in its minimum and medium periods or a fine ranging
from 200 to 6,000 pesos, or both, in addition to the civil
action which may be brought by the offended party.”
-xxx-
11. Section 4(c)(4) of the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, which punishes
the crime of Cyber Libel, makes reference to Article 355 of the Revised
3
Penal Code and punishes the same set of acts defined under the Revised
Penal Code, but outlines its commission, through a computer system or any
other similar means which may be devised in the future. The law provides:
-xxx-
“(4) Libel. – The unlawful or prohibited acts of libel as
defined in Art. 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.”
-xxx-;
[Link] from the definition of libel under Article 353 of the Revised
Penal Code, Cyber Libel is defined as a public and malicious imputation of a
crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission,
condition, status, or circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, discredit,
or contempt of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the memory of
one who is dead, and committed through a computer system or any other
similar means which may be devised in the future;
[Link] following are the elements of Cyber Libel, based on Section 4(c)(4) of
R.A. 10175, in relation to Articles 353 and Article 355 of the Revised Penal
Code:
a. There must be an imputation of a crime, or of a vice or
defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition,
status, or circumstance;
b. The imputation must be made publicly, which
requires that at least one other person must have seen
the libelous post, in addition to the author and the
person defamed or alluded to in the post;
c. The imputation must be malicious, which means that
the author of the libelous post made such post with
knowledge that it was false, or with reckless disregard as
to the truth or falsity thereof. 3;
d. The imputation must be directed at a natural or
juridical person, or one who is dead, which requires that
the post must identify the person defamed, or at the
very least, the person defamed is identifiable by a third
person;
3
Yunchengco vs. The Manila Chronicle Publishing Corporation, G.R. No. 184315, 25 November 2009
4
e. The imputation must tend to cause the dishonor,
discredit or contempt of the person defamed. (Reyes,
Luis B., Revised Penal Code, Fifteenth Edition, 2001, page
932.);
f. The imputation was done through the use of a
computer system or any other similar means which may
be devised in the future. (Sec. 4(c)(4) of R.A. 10175);
DISCUSSIONS
14. Herein Respondent imputed a vice, defect, or crime by referring to Private
Complainant MELCHIE I. NAGAMOS as whore. A whore is “a person who engages
in sexual intercourse for pay, a prostitute”4, which is false. Respondent likewise
casted aspersion as to Private Complainant THERESE I. NAGAMOS by stating that
she lost her sanity, which is false. Likewise, to Private Complainant PEDRITO I.
NAGAMOS II as gay. Gay means “of, relating to, or characterized by sexual or
romantic attraction to people of one's same sex 5, which likewise false because
PEDRITO I. NAGAMOS II is truly a heterosexual person;
15. The imputation was made public as it was posted in Facebook, which a
the name of a website where you can show information about yourself,
and communicate with groups of friends6;
16. The imputation was malicious as the Facebook posts were false and the
connotation of their meanings impale the good character of the Private
Complainants, evident of bad faith;
17. The imputation was directed to the Private Complainants as the Respondent,
cited circumstances which categorically point to them as the ones being defamed,
and even tagged the Private Complainants;
19. The imputation was to discredit or dishonor the Private Complainants because
the statements made by herein Respondent in Facebook posts tend to cause
degradation or discredit of the reputation of the Private Complainants in the
minds of others who may see or may have seen the same, thereby fulfilling the
fifth requisite of the crime, and;
20. The imputation was done through the use of a computer system by accessing
Facebook through the use of mobile device which requires internet, thereby
satisfying and completing all the requisites for Cyber Libel;
PRAYER
4
[Link]
5
[Link]
6
[Link]
5
We have executed this foregoing Joint Complaint-Affidavit to attest to the
truth of the foregoing facts and for the purpose of charging Respondent for
THREE (3) COUNTS of the crime of Cyber Libel under Section 4(c)(4)
of RA 10175 in relation to Art. 353 and Art. 355 of the Revised Penal
Code which carries with it the penalty of imprisonment of Prision
Correccional in its maximum period to Prision Mayor in its minimum period
or 2 years 4 months and 1 day to 8 years of imprisonment.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we hereby affix our signatures this ___ day of
______________ in Kalibo, Aklan, Philippines.
Complainant-Affiants:
THERESE I. NAGAMOS MELCHIE I. NAGAMOS
ID No. ______________ ID No. ______________
PEDRITO I. NAGAMOS II
ID No. ______________
OATH AND CERTIFICATION
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this ___ day of ____________ in
Kalibo, Aklan. Affiants exhibiting to me competent evidence of identity indicated
by their ID Number above and I hereby certify that I have personally examined the
affiants and that I am convinced that they voluntarily executed the foregoing
affidavit and that they fully understood the contents thereof.
