CEBU - For lack of evidence, the Regional Trial Court cleared from libel charges former Minglanilla Mayor Marlo Cañada and four other employees of the municipal government.
RTC Branch 13 Judge Generosa Labra said the prosecution failed to prove that Cañada maliciously issued statements that formed part of a news article, which the complainants said defamed them. Likewise, the prosecution also reportedly failed to prove that Marilou Nacario, Benito Prangos, Rene Secuya and Jigger Jose Prajes were the ones who photocopied and distributed the article to the employees of the Minglanilla City Hall.
The article published in Bandera bore the headline “Politika sa Minglanilla, Konseho masuko kay wala paliti ug sakyanan, laptop.”
The complaint was filed by incumbent Mayor Eduardo Selma and the members of the Minglanilla Municipal Council.
The complainants alleged Cañada maliciously told the Bandera that the town council became mad at him when he opposed the supplemental budget allegedly because it was only a wasting of funds.
Cañada was quoted as saying that the budget allegedly included a request for two cars made by Selma and the council, costing P1 million each. A town councilor also allegedly requested for a laptop worth P100,000, which was also included in the supplemental budget.
Cañada was also quoted, as saying that the council engaged in certain questionable endeavors such as the Lakbay Aral Program, which allegedly had each councilor up to P15,000 as share.
But the court said that Cañada only made the utterances if he was not interviewed by the media about the administrative and criminal cases the complainants had filed against him.
Labra said Cañada could not be held liable unless proven that there is actual malice on his part in uttering the alleged statements.
“Instead of proving actual malice on the part of Cañada, the prosecution relied upon proof of the publication of the defamatory utterances of the accused. It failed to present evidence demonstrating that the accused was demonstrated by personal ill will or spite that he did not act in response to duty but acted merely to cause harm to the complainants,” Labra said in her decision. – Jasmin R. Uy/JMO (THE FREEMAN)