Barangay councilman charged with libel

CEBU, Philippines — The Cebu City Prosecutor's Office has charged a councilman of Barangay Calamba, Cebu City, before the court for allegedly placing Calamba barangay chairman in public contempt.

Maria Yvonne Feliciano alleged that Richard Buscaino accused her as the mastermind behind the strafing incident and threats on his life.

Prosecutor II Jill Ann Paculba-Gealon held Buscaino for trial for libel.

"It is even noteworthy that Buscaino uttered such defamatory remarks against Feliciano before several members of the media whom he very well knew would publish or air his statements. To the undersigned, such is indicative of malice or bad faith. At the very least, the defenses and matters put forward by the respondent are evidentiary matters which can be better threshed out in court," read the resolution.

Gealon recommended P30,000 bail for Buscaino's temporary liberty.

On March 6, 2018, Feliciano alleged there was an article published in three local newspapers wherein she was accused to be responsible for and the mastermind behind the strafing incident and the death threats of Buscaino.

Also, Buscaino's interview was aired in the television program, Maayong Buntag Kapamilya.

In his counter affidavit, Buscaino admitted that he named Feliciano the one behind the strafing incident and the threats against his life in a newspaper and television.

However, he claimed that he did not cause the publication of his interview in the newspaper. His utterances were mere expression of his opinion or personal belief, he added.

Buscaino said the libel complaint filed against him is nothing but a "harassment suit", an offshoot of the anti-graft case he filed earlier against Feliciano.

With the foregoing, Gealon found probable cause against Buscaino.

"...this office is not persuaded by Buscaino's assertion that such statements were merely an expression of his opinions or personal beliefs and that he has no hand in it's publication. To the mind of this Office, the defenses propounded by the respondent cannot be construed as justifiable motive and does not rebut the presumption of malice provided by law," read the resolution. (FREEMAN)