Republic of the Philippines
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR
NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION
Taguig City
MAY DELAON DELA PENA
Complainant,
-versus- NPS Docket No. XV-12-INV
-21-H-1003
FOR: LIBEL
CHRISTINE PNAUNGOIN ALVARADO,
et. al.,
Respondents.
x-------------------------x
COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT
I, BENILDA STA. ANA, of legal age, Filipino, Married
and with residence at ________________________, after being
duly sworn into in accordance with law hereby depose and
say:
1. I am one of the respondents in the above-entitled
case;
2. I vehemently and categorically deny all the
allegations of the complainant for being false,
baseless, and mere fabrications.
3. I did not nor have ever imputed anyone in a bad
light, moreso from social media as facebook. It is incumbent
upon the complainant to prove that I am the one who
allegedly posted libelous remarks against her person.
Further, that the strength of her evidence should be from its
own merits.
4. A cursory reading of the instant complaint that
complainant had no other evidence, aside from her bare
Page 1 of 4
allegations, that it was I who posted the alleged malicious
post against her. What was merely shown is a print out of a
series of replies in which, my name was included as among
those who allegedly replied and posted what she claims to
be malicious.
5. It is basic in law that mere allegations do not
equate to proof or evidence. Thus, considering that
complainant has not propounded anything that would show
that it was I who replied the malicious post, then everything
are just based on assumptions and surmises.
ARGUENDO
6. For an imputation to be libelous under Art. 353 of
the Revised Penal Code (RPC), the following requisites must
be present: (a) it must be defamatory; (b) it must be
malicious; (c) it must be given publicity; and (d) the victim
must be identifiable. 1
7. An allegation is considered defamatory if it
ascribes to a person the commission of a crime, the
possession of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act,
omission, condition, status or circumstance which tends to
dishonor or discredit or put him in contempt, or which tends
to blacken the memory of one who is dead.2
8. In determining whether a statement is
defamatory, the words used are to be construed in their
entirety and should be taken in their plain, natural, and
ordinary meaning as they would naturally be understood by
persons reading them, unless it appears that they were used
and understood in another sense. Moreover, a charge is
sufficient if the words are calculated to induce the hearers to
suppose and understand that the person or persons against
whom they were uttered were guilty of certain offenses or
are sufficient to impeach the honesty, virtue or reputation or
to hold the person or persons up to public ridicule. 3
9. Malice connotes ill will or spite and speaks not in
response to duty but merely to injure the reputation of the
person defamed, and implies an intention to do ulterior and
1
G.R. No. 170341, Manila Bulletin Publishing Corporation et. al., v. Domingo and the People of the
Philippines
2
id
3
id
Page 2 of 4
unjustifiable harm. Malice is bad faith or bad motive. It is the
essence of the crime of libel.4
10. In determining whether certain utterances are
defamatory, the words used are to be construed in their
entirety and taken in their plain and ordinary meaning. It
should also be understood by other persons reading them .
11. Considering the circumstances present in the
case, it is clear as day that albeit the complainant is easily
identifiable, however the elements of defamation and
malice are totally lacking in this case.
12. As for the element of defamation, it was was
admitted by the complainant herself in her complaint
affidavit that she had an extramarital relation with Mckay
Sta. Ana. Mckay and respondent Benilda Sta. Ana are
husband and wife. In short, herein complainant is the
paramour of Mckay. In layman’s term, she is known as
“kabit” in the vernacular.
13. Thus, with respondent Sta. Ana’s exchange of
messages with the other co-respondent is not an imputation
of discredit against herein complainant but rather, just an
observation coming from Benilda Sta. Ana, being Mckay’s
wife.
14. While the complainant may not be pleased with
what has been communicated between the respondents,
personal hurt or embarrassment, even if real, is not
automatically equivalent to defamation. Words which are
insulting are not actionable as libel per se. Mere words,
however vexing it may be, do not constitute as basis for
defamation to prosper, absent of an allegation for special
damages. Such is the case at hand right now. The fact that
the complainant finds the words offensive does not make it
actionable by itself.
15. At this juncture, I was informed by my counsel that
it is only the determination of probable cause which is
important at this stage. Considering that not all the elements
of the crime being imputed against me are present, the
instant complaint must fail against me.
16. Prosecuting officers under the power vested in
them by law, not only have the authority but also the duty of
4
id
Page 3 of 4
prosecuting persons who, according to the evidence
received from the complainant, are shown to be guilty of a
crime committed within the jurisdiction of their office. They
have equally the duty not to prosecute when the evidence is
not sufficient to establish a prima facie case. This broad
prosecutorial power is, however, not unfettered, because
just as public prosecutors are obliged to bring forth before
the law those who have transgressed it, they are also
constrained to be circumspect in filing criminal charges
against the innocent5.
17. Finally, I am executing this Counter-Affidavit to
confirm and affirm the truth of all the foregoing statements
based on my own knowledge and available documents.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my
signature this __________________.
BENILDA STA. ANA
Affiant
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this
_________________ respondents personally appeared and
declared that they fully understood the contents of their Joint
Counter Affidavit which they have voluntarily prepared and
executed before this Honorable Office.
INVESTIGATING PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
5
Crespo vs Mogul as Cited in People vs Yecyec G.R. 183551, November 12, 2014.
Page 4 of 4
