Marawi city: House trial spokesperson and Lanao del Sur 1st District Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong has filed a cyberlibel complaint before the Office of the City Prosecutor of Marawi City. The complaint targets lawyer Levito Baligod and 18 former aides of dismissed Ako Bicol Party-list Rep. Zaldy Co. The allegations claim lawmakers received cash-filled suitcases from Co.
According to Philippines News Agency, the chairman of the House Committee on Suffrage and Electoral Reforms accused the respondents of orchestrating the public dissemination of what he described as false and malicious allegations. Adiong is seeking at least PHP20 million in moral damages and PHP5 million in exemplary damages, citing severe mental anguish, damage to reputation, and social humiliation resulting from the accusations.
The complaint includes Bernard Tube, Rosebert Waupan, Benny Bulontante, Johnny Buduan, Rodent Orbillo, Reyneboy Julian, Christopher Esquivel, George Villain Jr., Romeo Rommel Bobares, Gil Navidad Jr., Anselmo Tabard, Walter Manalansan, Joel Cadioao, Rommel Galapon, Cecilia Larder Jr., Bernard Guimban, Crisanie Dado, and Fidel Corpuz as respondents. The issue arose from a press conference on February 24, where Baligod announced a joint affidavit alleging a multibillion-peso kickback scheme involving flood-control projects.
Portions of the affidavit circulated online and on social media, naming Adiong among lawmakers allegedly given cash-filled suitcases. In his affidavit, Adiong refuted the claims as absolute fabrications and falsehoods, asserting he had never met the individuals involved or received any suitcase of cash.
The complaint argues that all elements of cyberlibel are present, with allegations imputed as crimes against Adiong, publicly disseminated online, and made with actual malice. It states the respondents published an unverified narrative with reckless disregard for truth, intentionally amplifying the allegations through online platforms.
The widespread online circulation of the allegations, the complaint argues, was a foreseeable result of respondents' actions, making them liable for both the original and subsequent publications. Adiong rejected any claim of qualified privilege, noting the respondents themselves publicized the accusations via press conferences, media interviews, and online distribution.
Adiong stated the controversy severely damaged his reputation and standing as a public official, causing him mental anguish, a besmirched reputation, and social humiliation.
