The Department of Justice (DOJ) has approved the filing in court of a libel case against Manibela transport group leader Mario Balbuena based on a complaint lodged by Department of Transportation Secretary Jaime Bautista.
In a 17-page resolution, Assistant State Prosecutor Maria Kristhina Paat-Salumbides endorsed that Balbuena be charged with libel under Article 353 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC) in relation to Section 4(c)(4) of Republic Act (RA) 10175, the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012.
But the prosecutor recommended the dismissal of the grave threats complaint filed against Balbuena.
Prosecutor General Benedicto A. Malcontento and Deputy State Prosecutor Olivia I. Laroza-Torrevillas approved the resolution.
The case stemmed from statements made by Balbuena against Bautista during an interview that was televised on Oct. 10, 2023 on the news program “24 Oras” and the Oct. 11, 2023 video posted on Manibela’s (Samahang Manibela Mananakay at Nagkaisang Terminal ng Transportasyon) official Facebook page.
In the video post and during the television interview, Bautista was accused of collecting money from Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) Chairman Teofilo Guadiz III every month to be delivered to Malacanang and two members of Congress. Each LTFRB regional director were asked to hand over at least P2 million to Guadiz every month, it was alleged.
“The words used were designed to make the viewers think that complainant (Bautista) was illegally receiving money which he in turn delivers to Malacanang to guarantee that he, and other government officials, would be retained in their respective government positions,” the resolution stated.
“The words used are libelous because this is a malicious imputation of a criminal act punishable under the Revised Penal Code and special laws, such as RA 3019 (the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act), which tends to cause dishonor, discredit and contempt of the complainant,” it said.
As to the video posted on Manibela’s Facebook page, the resolution pointed out “the words used by respondent (Balbuena) during his entire ‘update’ shows respondent’s intention to mock, malign and injure the reputation, credit and virtue of complainant, with the intention of exposing him to public hatred, discredit, contempt and ridicule; hence, malice exists.”
Editor’s Note: This is an updated article. Originally posted with the headline DOJ files libel suit vs Balbuena following a complaint from DOTr chief