PEP Ka-Loveteam Quiz Banner
×

PEP files counter-affidavit to Liza Dino's cyberlibel complaint

"Two elements of the crime of cyberlibel are lacking."—Atty. Alexandra Castro
by PEP team
Published Jul 26, 2024
PEP editor in chief Jo-Ann Maglipon (center), deputy managing editor Rachelle Siazon (leftmost) and Atty. Ana Alexandra Castro (rightmost)
PEP Editor In Chief Jo-Ann Q. Maglipon (center) holds a copy of the signed and sworn counter-affidavit filed before the Quezon City Prosecutor's Office. She is seen here with Deputy Managing Editor Rachelle Siazon (leftmost) and their Legal Counsel Ana Alexandra Castro (rightmost) at the Justice Cecilia Munoz Palma Hall.
PHOTO/S: Noel Orsal

The Philippine Entertainment Portal's (PEP.ph) Editor In Chief Jo-Ann Q. Maglipon and Deputy Managing Editor Rachelle Siazon submitted their joint counter-affidavit before the Quezon City Prosecutor's Office this Friday afternoon, July 26, 2024.

They were accompanied by their legal counsel Ana Alexandra Castro of Yorac Sarmiento Arroyo Chua Coronel Reyes Law Firm.

It was past one in the afternoon when Maglipon and Siazon swore by their affidavits before Assistant City Prosecutor David Anthony Aranas.

This was in response to the cyberlibel complaint filed by Liza Diño, former chair of Film Development Council of the Philippines (FDCP).

In an official statement issued by Atty. Castro, she underlined that there was "no malice" in the publication of PEP's nine-part report on issues involving the FDCP and its former chair.

PEP, Jo-Ann Maglipon, Rachelle Siazon, Liza Dino, FDCP, cyber-libel complaint, Atty. Ana Alexandra Castro, Yorac Law Firm
Photo/s: Noel Orsal. Rachelle Siazon, Jo-Ann Maglipon, Atty. ana Alexandra castro
ADVERTISEMENT - CONTINUE READING BELOW ↓

Here is the official statement of Atty. Castro in full:

"In their Counter-Affidavit filed on 26 July 2024, the PEP editors argued that the complaint should be dismissed because two elements of the crime of cyberlibel are lacking – (1) the allegation by the respondent of a discreditable act or condition concerning the complainant, and (2) the existence of malice on the part of the respondent.

"In particular, element (1) is not present, as the PEP editors did not personally ascribe a discreditable act or condition against the complainant.

"Rather, they merely reported on the information provided by their sources, sans any personal comments or opinions.

"As for element (2), there was no malice in the publication of the subject article, as the same was but a fair and true report, made in good faith, on the issues surrounding the FDCP.

"The said report was also duly supported by relevant documents."

ADVERTISEMENT - CONTINUE READING BELOW ↓
Read Next
PEP Live
Featured
Latest Stories
Trending in Summit Media Network

Featured Searches:

Read the Story →
PEP Editor In Chief Jo-Ann Q. Maglipon (center) holds a copy of the signed and sworn counter-affidavit filed before the Quezon City Prosecutor's Office. She is seen here with Deputy Managing Editor Rachelle Siazon (leftmost) and their Legal Counsel Ana Alexandra Castro (rightmost) at the Justice Cecilia Munoz Palma Hall.
PHOTO/S: Noel Orsal
  • This article was created by . Edits have been made by the PEP.ph editors.
    Poll

    View Results
    Total Votes: 12,184
  • 50%
  • View Results