Danguilan v. CA
Danguilan v. CA
40
Same; Same; The petition is not the appropriate vehicle for the
arguments. They are properly to be considered in the trial on the
merits.—In view of the above considerations, we rule that this
petition is not the appropriate vehicle for the arguments raised by
De Jesus, et al. and Atty. Perfecto V. Fernandez. They are
properly to be considered in the trial on the merits of this case.
_______________
* THIRD DIVISION.
461
for contempt.
ROMERO, J.:
462
“x x x x x x x x x
In a meeting with the President in Malacañang, a group of
traders from Zamboanga City complained about her sisterinlaw,
Tingting Cojuangco and her dominant role in the barter trade.
She was referred to, in that meeting, as the “barter trade queen.’
Cory Aquino listened and asked for evidence.
A Malacañang aide observes: “She’s faced with a dilemma. She
has contradicted herself. ‘The decision to dismiss Maceda and
Mercado on the basis of soft evidence has been overturned by the
strong push for proof in the case of her sisterinlaw and those of
other officials, too.
In the instance of Tingting Cojuangco, claims the aide, the
most the President has done—with a lot of pain on her part—has
been to keep a distance from her sisterinlaw, ‘almost ostracizing
her.’ She has not shown up in events important to Tingting, such
as the latter’s graduation from the National Defense College,
among others. Yet, this has meant little to the public who seeks
due process for the accused.
1
x x x x x x x x x.”
_______________
1 Rollo, p. 34.
463
“I
II
III
IV
______________
2 Rollo, p. 31.
3 Rollo, pp. 1516.
464
“I
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000150053d66110f56a4d9000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG549/?username=Guest 5/15
9/26/2015 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 232
II
III
4
Vitug’s article is not defamatory.”
_______________
4 Rollo, p. 216.
5 Said article runs as follows:
“TINGTING Cojuangco, who is now governor of Tarlac but was a private citizen at
the time, sued for libel on Nov. 4 that year. Though Ms. Cojuangco failed to prove
that Vitug’s article
465
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000150053d66110f56a4d9000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG549/?username=Guest 6/15
9/26/2015 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 232
_______________
was false and written with malice, the prosecutor ruled that the article was
malicious.
On April 10, 1990, the Department of Justice reversed the prosecutor and
directed him to withdraw the Information, finding that ‘There is no evidence to
prove that the questioned publication was prompted by illwill or spite . . .’
But a year or so later, on March 19, 1991, the DOJ, on the same evidence,
reversed itself and directed the prosecutor to file an Information for libel against
Vitug, holding that Vitug and her corespondents should ‘prove their innocence’ at
the trial.
Vitug’s motion to quash the information was denied by Judge Mabutas, which
decision was later upheld by the Court of Appeals. Vitug has appealed the CA’s
ruling to the Supreme Court.
In our (De Jesus et al) brief, we expressed our belief that ‘to require Vitug and
her coaccused ‘to prove their innocence’ at the trial, as ruled by DOJ, abridges the
freedom of expression and the right of the people to information on matters of
public concern. It also violates the constitutional right of an accused to be
presumed innocent.’
***
THE Vitug case, which is now ready for resolution before the Supreme Court,
will, it is hoped, challenge the ‘presumption of malice’ contained in current libel
law.
In the brief, we said that, as practicing journalists, we have an interest in the
case because if Vitug is forced to go to trial, it would have a ‘chilling effect’ on the
journalistic community.
Ms. Cojuangco’s suit against Vitug, for your information, is not the only one she
has filed against a journalist who has offended her. After she became the target of
media scrutiny owing to her prominent role in Mindanao politics and the barter
trade, Ms. Cojuangco slapped multimillion peso libel suits against everyone
writing disparagingly about her (including the INQUIRER). The tactic apparently
worked because she soon faded from the media spotlight.
Sylvia Mayuga, who was sued for two columns she wrote in the Globe and in
the INQUIRER, and who is now facing trial, points out that ever since the suits
were filed, she has been ‘prevented from writing another line about her or her
activities while the case awaits decision.’
466
_______________
But another columnist, Jarius Bondoc of the Manila Times, revealed that Ms. Cojuangco
agreed to drop her suit against him upon the intercession of a high government official who
happens to be related (by marriage) to Bondoc.
This just shows that though libel is deemed the ordinary citizen’s defense against the all
powerful media, it is much too often used as a tool by the even more powerful to intimidate,
silence and coopt an otherwise free and responsible media.”
467
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000150053d66110f56a4d9000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG549/?username=Guest 8/15
9/26/2015 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 232
We find no7
reason to depart from said conclusion. Section 3,
Rule 117 of the Revised Rules of Court enumerates the
grounds for quashing an information. Specifically,
paragraph (g) of said provision states that the accused may
move to quash the complaint or information where it
contains averments which, if true, would constitute a legal
excuse or justification. Hence, for the alleged privilege to be
a ground for quashing the information, the same should
have been averred in the information itself and secondly,
8
the privilege should be absolute, not only qualified. Where,
however, these circumstances are not alleged in the
information, quashal is 9not proper as they should be raised
and proved as defenses. With more reason is it true in the
case of merely qualifiedly privileged communications
because such cases remain actionable since the defamatory
communication is simply presumed to be not malicious,
thereby relieving the defendant of
_______________
6 Rollo, p. 30.
7 Sec. 2. Motion to Quash—Grounds.—The defendant may move to
quash the complaint or information on any of the following grounds.
468
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000150053d66110f56a4d9000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG549/?username=Guest 9/15
9/26/2015 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 232
_______________
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000150053d66110f56a4d9000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG549/?username=Guest 10/15
9/26/2015 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 232
469
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000150053d66110f56a4d9000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG549/?username=Guest 11/15
9/26/2015 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 232
_______________
470
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000150053d66110f56a4d9000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG549/?username=Guest 12/15
9/26/2015 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 232
_______________
471
SEPARATE OPINION
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000150053d66110f56a4d9000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG549/?username=Guest 13/15
9/26/2015 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 232
VITUG, J.:
“x x x x x x x x x
“In a meeting with the President in Malacañang, a group of
traders from Zamboanga City complained about her sisterinlaw,
Tingting Cojuangco and her dominant role in the barter trade.
She was referred to, in that meeting, as the ‘barter trade queen.’
Cory Aquino listened and asked for evidence.
“A Malacañang aide observes: “She’s faced with a dilemma. She
has contradicted herself. The decision to dismiss Maceda and
Mercado on the basis of soft evidence has been overturned by the
strong push for proof in the case of her sisterinlaw and those of
other officials, too.
“In the instance of Tingting Cojuangco, claims the aide, the
most the President has done—with a lot of pain on her part—has
been to keep a distance from her sisterinlaw, ‘almost ostracizing
her.’ She has not shown up in events important to Tingting, such
as the latter’s graduation from the National Defense College,
among others. Yet, this has meant little to the public who seeks
due process for the accused.”
472
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000150053d66110f56a4d9000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG549/?username=Guest 14/15
9/26/2015 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 232
——o0o——
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000150053d66110f56a4d9000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG549/?username=Guest 15/15