Reaction's on Cayetano's libel and disbarment case....

[tackielarla]

---

who harrased who?? mike harassed cayetano or the other way around?

Exactly!

[samsungster]

is allegation true?

[budmendz]

Why did he make a privilege speech before the public? media? Ibig mong sabihin mag comment ka lang sa tanong tungkol sa privilege speech mo in Congress, outside of its hall ay libel na.

Si Istoryador aka mosimos nag tinagalog na gyud! Lisod ra ba nang bisaya nga magtinagalog kay madugay ma-aan nga tagalogarta diay!

That is too literal an interpretation. How about me? If I will comment that Big Mike has bank account in Germany as reaction to the news can I now be accused of libel?

Here is the meaning of libel:

LIBEL - Published material meeting three conditions: The material is defamatory either on its face or indirectly; The defamatory statement is about someone who is identifiable to one or more persons; and, The material must be distributed to someone other than the offended party; i.e. published; distinguished from slander.

Criminal Law. A malicious defamation expressed either in printing or writing or by signs or pictures, tending to blacken the memory of one who is dead, with intent to provoke the living; or the reputation of one who is alive and to expose him to public hatred, contempt or ridicule. It has been defined perhaps with more precision to be a censorious or ridiculous writing, picture or sign, made with a malicious or mischievous intent.

So para madali ta, try to ask yourself if your "intent" is malicious or not.
Besides, if you are saying something about Mike's account in Germany, Mike for sure will ignore you in his radar. Why? Because you are just a but a "small fry" trying to be a shark. Matalino yan si Mike and he knows who are the real sharks -dilis ka lang baby kaya sabihin mo man si Mike ay merong sang daan na acccount sa Germany, tuloy ang ligay ni Mike and he wouldn't bother you. In short, you are nothing to be of importance to him. Unless if you say you are Francis Escudero in person carrying the name of istoryador, that will make a different story.

Pero karon gani morag nibahag naman ang ikog ni Francis when Mike started suing the big mouths from the opposition.

[budmendz]

In my opinion Rep. Cayetano's actuation is still within the bounds of his duty. The accusations he made against the FG might be "grave" and really needed to be proven. Even if he made such comments in front of the media hence, outside the halls of Congress, still he is protected by his parliamentary immunity if such words uttered by him were only reiteration of what he said in the floor of Congress.

Here from abogadomo.com:

Further, an official’s absolute immunity extends only to acts in performance of particular functions of his office. The doctrine of immunity finds no application and cannot be invoked in cases where the public official is being sued in his private capacity or as an ordinary citizen. The mantle of protection afforded public officers is removed the moment they are sued in their individual capacity.

This usually arises where the government official acts without authority or in excess of the powers vested in him or his office such as when he has acted with malice and in bad faith, or beyond the scope of his authority or jurisdiction.

I'm not a lawyer so try to understand the current situation where Cayetano is in.

[fingolfin]

... there you go Mr. Cayetano. See, where your loud-mouth has brought you. A libel slapped on your face. Now he's trying to get the sympathy from people. tsk tsk tsk.

i have a line i can suggest to him:

if you don't know the whole context about a certain issue, it's better for you to shut up

[iloveyou4ever]

Kill Him!

https://www.istorya.net/forums/index.php?topic=1959.0

read rule number 1 and 2

Grabe ka. Give Cayetano a chance to say sorry, hehe.

[FK]

what's new? everytime a person accuse Mike A, he files a libel case against them.

[talsik]

Here from abogadomo.com:

Further, an official’s absolute immunity extends only to acts in performance of particular functions of his office. The doctrine of immunity finds no application and cannot be invoked in cases where the public official is being sued in his private capacity or as an ordinary citizen. The mantle of protection afforded public officers is removed the moment they are sued in their individual capacity.

This usually arises where the government official acts without authority or in excess of the powers vested in him or his office such as when he has acted with malice and in bad faith, or beyond the scope of his authority or jurisdiction.

I'm not a lawyer so try to understand the current situation where Cayetano is in.

Well quoted!

THE 1987 Constitution has provided for parliamentary immunity for members of Congress. Section 11 of Article VI states which I will quote in part, "no member shall be questioned nor be held liable in any other place for any speech or debate in the Congress or in any committee thereof."

Parliamentary immunity in a privileged speech is afforded to members of Congress to shield them against government pressure and "dirty ploy" in exposing anomalies such as graft and corruption and irregularities in government. In addition, this ensured that a congressman/woman while in the performance of his/her public duty is afforded absolute freedom of expression and speech.

Malice and badfaith I believe is a jury question and for the court to decide. It is something that must be conclusively proven in court. Meanwhile, I still believe that Cayetano must be commended for standing by his allegations and this political reprisal against him will not prosper because his expose is covered by the parliamentary immunity..

[wanderlust]

In my opinion Rep. Cayetano's actuation is still within the bounds of his duty. The accusations he made against the FG might be "grave" and really needed to be proven. Even if he made such comments in front of the media hence, outside the halls of Congress, still he is protected by his parliamentary immunity if such words uttered by him were only reiteration of what he said in the floor of Congress. That to my mind will not warrant Cayetano's disbarment and much more a libel case. I will salute the young Rep. if he can prove his allegations because, seldom we can find a man with such courage.
On the other hand, the action of the FG Arroyo is premature they should use this opportunity to clear thier already tainted names in the public. The freedom of expression although not absolute must not be curtailed by means of filing premature cases like what the FG did.

The FG is a private citizen and is the one being harrassed here. He has the right to use all legal means to protect the honor of his family which is being assailed by Cayetano. Cayetano should have known better than to make allegations without first verifying them, being a lawyer and a member of Congress.

[istoryador]

Si Istoryador aka mosimos nag tinagalog na gyud! Lisod ra ba nang bisaya nga magtinagalog kay madugay ma-aan nga tagalogarta diay!

Here is the meaning of libel:

LIBEL - Published material meeting three conditions: The material is defamatory either on its face or indirectly; The defamatory statement is about someone who is identifiable to one or more persons; and, The material must be distributed to someone other than the offended party; i.e. published; distinguished from slander.

Criminal Law. A malicious defamation expressed either in printing or writing or by signs or pictures, tending to blacken the memory of one who is dead, with intent to provoke the living; or the reputation of one who is alive and to expose him to public hatred, contempt or ridicule. It has been defined perhaps with more precision to be a censorious or ridiculous writing, picture or sign, made with a malicious or mischievous intent.

So para madali ta, try to ask yourself if your "intent" is malicious or not.
Besides, if you are saying something about Mike's account in Germany, Mike for sure will ignore you in his radar. Why? Because you are just a but a "small fry" trying to be a shark. Matalino yan si Mike and he knows who are the real sharks -dilis ka lang baby kaya sabihin mo man si Mike ay merong sang daan na acccount sa Germany, tuloy ang ligay ni Mike and he wouldn't bother you. In short, you are nothing to be of importance to him. Unless if you say you are Francis Escudero in person carrying the name of istoryador, that will make a different story.

Pero karon gani morag nibahag naman ang ikog ni Francis when Mike started suing the big mouths from the opposition.

From the Revised Penal Code

Art. 353. Definition of libel. — A libel is public and malicious imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status, or circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, discredit, or contempt of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who is dead.

Art. 354. Requirement for publicity. — Every defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious, even if it be true, if no good intention and justifiable motive for making it is shown, except in the following cases:

1A private communication made by any person to another in the performance of any legal, moral or social duty; and

2. A fair and true report, made in good faith, without any comments or remarks, of any judicial, legislative or other official proceedings which are not of confidential nature, or of any statement, report or speech delivered in said proceedings, or of any other act performed by public officers in the exercise of their functions

The question is whether or not the statement of Cayetano is malicious. Art. 354 states the presumption and the exceptions. Second paragaph of number two states, "any statement, report or speech delivered in said proceedings or of any other act performed by public officers in the exercise of their functions."

Thus, Rep. cayetano's mentioning of the bank accounts is privileged. He cannot be prosecuted for libel.

Sorry na lang kay Big Mike.