7/31/2019 SC Affirms Libel Conviction of Movie Scribe

1/2

SC Affirms Libel Conviction of Movie Scribe

By Jay B. Rempillo

The Supreme Court has affirmed the libel conviction of showbiz columnist Cristinelli

Cristy Fermin and ordered her to pay a Php6,000 fine and Php500,000 each to Annabelle

Rama Gutierrez and her husband, Eddie Gutierrez, for moral damages.

In its 24-page decision penned by Justice Antonio Eduardo Nachura, the Courts ThirdDivision affirmed the Sept. 3, 2002 decision of the Court of Appeals (CA), which had

convicted Fermin of libel while acquitting her co-respondent Bogs Tugas.

Fermin and Tugas were the publisher and editor-in-chief, respectively, ofGossip Tabloid

which had published a derogatory article on June 14, 1995 alleging that the Gutierrezesfled to the Philippines after pocketing the proceeds from the sale of expensive cookware

instead of remitting the money to the manufacturer in the United States. The article also

alleged that Annabelle was a heavy gambler.

To say that the article, in its entirety, is not libelous disturbs ones sensibilities; it wouldcertainly prick ones conscience. There is evident imputation of the crime of malversation;

of vices or defects for being fugitives from the law; and of being a wastrel. The attribution

was made publicly.The victims were identified and identifiable. More importantly, thearticle reeks of malice, as it tends to cause the dishonor, discredit, or contempt of the

complainants, the Court said.

The Court said that Fermin and Tugas failed to adduce evidence to show the truth of the

allegations in the article despite the opportunity to do so. It found Fermins arguments toosimplistic, stressing that as publisher, president, and chairperson ofGossip Tabloid, she

had full control over the publication of articles in the said tabloid.

The Court, however, said it cannot reinstate the ruling of the trial court convicting Tugas

following his acquittal by the CA. Fermin and Tugas were convicted by the Quezon CityRegional Trial Court, Branch 218. Upon appeal, the CA upheld Fermins conviction but

acquitted Tugas. (GR 157643,Fermin v. People, March 20, 2008

SC Clears Way for Prosecution of Romualdez Nephews

By Jay B. Rempillo

In a unanimous vote, the Supreme Court has given the green light for the prosecution for

graft of three distant nephews of former First Lady Imelda Romualdez Marcos inconnection with a loan that they, as former officials of Agretronics, Inc. (Agretronics), had

obtained from the Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP) in 1980.

In a 14-page decision penned by Justice Ruben T. Reyes, the Court En Banc, granting the

petition of the Presidential Ad-Hoc Fact-Finding Committee on Behest Loan (Committee),ordered the Office of the Ombudsman to file in the proper court the necessary information

against private respondents Angel G. Romualdez, Jose G. Romualdez, and Jose Manuel

7/31/2019 SC Affirms Libel Conviction of Movie Scribe

2/2

Romualdez. The Court reversed and set aside the August 18, 1998 resolution of then

Ombudsman Aniano Desierto dismissing the Committees complaint for lack of probable

cause and prescription of the offense against the Romualdezes.

The Court found that probable cause undoubtedly exists against private respondents. It

ruled that while Desierto held that the alleged extraordinary speed in the loan approval wasnot supported by evidence, these questions as to the existence of so-called extraordinaryspeed as a mark of a behest loan and what constitutes extraordinary speed are matters best

left to the trial court to decide.

The Court faulted Ombudsman for basing its dismissal on claims that standard banking

procedures were followed because such claims should be presented and proved before thetrial court. It further noted the conflicting accounts of the Committee and Romualdezes on

whether the subject loan was undercollateralized. Such should be resolved in a full-blown

trial, it added.

The Court also said that the resulting damage to the government of Agretonics transactionwith DBP is clear. As of June 1986, Agretronics total obligation amounted to

Php154,969,000. Upon foreclosure and sale of Agretronics remaining assets, the

government only got PhP1,942,000. The fact that the loan was not paid back is, by itself,enough evidence of damage to the government, the Court said.

Citing its 1999 ruling inPresidential Ad-Hoc Fact-Finding Committee on Behest Loan v.

Desierto which had been echoed in succeeding cases, the Court said that the 10-year

prescriptive period of the offense should be reckoned from the date of the discovery of theoffense, in this case, on June 14, 1996, the date of filing of the complaint with the

Ombudsman after an exhaustive investigation by the Committee. (GR No. 136225,

Presidential Ad-Hoc Fact-Finding Committee on Behest Loanv.Desierto, April 23, 2008