Republic of the Philippines

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR
City of Bacolod

CRISTINA SANCHEZ,
Complainant,
I.S. NO: ________________

-versus- FOR:
GRAVE ORAL DEFAMATION
TERESITA DE GUZMAN, Under Article 353 in relation to
Respondent. Article 358, Revised Penal Code

x----------------------------------------x

COMPLAINT-AFFIDAVIT

Complainant Cristina Sanchez most respectfully files this Complaint

for Grave Oral Defamation against Teresita De Guzman, and in support
thereof, states: THAT –

1. I am the complainant in this complaint for grave oral defamation. I am

a Filipino citizen, of legal age, married, and with residence at Brgy.
Tawang-Tawa, Bacolod City.

2. That I am currently the Municipal Mayor of the City of Bacolod,

serving on my last term.

3. Respondent is also a Filipino citizen, of legal age, with address

located at Brgy. Tinud-unan, Bacolod City where he may be served
with summons and other processes of this Honorable City Prosecutor.

4. That on September 7, 2021 at around 1pm, in the City of Bacolod,

Philippines, within the jurisdiction of this court, the said accused,
while the complainant was delivering her speech for all the City Hall
employees who were gathered inside the session hall of the Bacolod
City Hall, unlawfully, maliciously and feloniously shouted in a
serious and insulting manner the following:

“HAY GRABE!!! ANG KAPAL NG MUKHA, ANAK NG

BUWAYA! WALA KAY KWENTA NGA PAGKA MAYOR!
KALA MO KUNG SINONG MAGALING NA MAYOR,
AKALA MO SINONG MATINO AT TAPAT SA MGA TAO,
SUPER CORRUPT NAMAN! AS IN!! TIGNAN MO ANG
 ITSURA, CORRUPT NA CORRUPT, BOOO! ALIS NA!
MAGNANAKAW KA!! MAGNANAKAW!”

(“That thick-faced person! You, useless and corrupt Mayor!

Pretending to be a good Mayor, pretending to be honest to her
people, but in truth, she is super corrupt, As in! Look at her, she
looks so corrupt! Booo! Get out, You thief!!”).

5. That such statement was uttered few times and was heard by all of the
City Hall employees, including the Vice-Mayor and City Councilors
inside the session hall.

6. I was informed by my lawyer that the respondent committed the

crime of Grave Oral Defamation. According to her, the crime of
Grave Oral Defamation is defined as follows:

Article 358 of the RPC defines and penalizes the crimes of

Serious Oral Defamation and Slight Oral Defamation, to
wit:

Article 358. Slander. - Oral defamation shall be punished

by arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
correccional in its minimum period if it is of a serious and
insulting nature; otherwise, the penalty shall be arresto
menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos.

7. In Amelia Larobis vs. Court of Appeals and People of the

Philippines1, the accused was held to be guilty beyond reasonable
doubt of the crime of grave oral defamation. The Court of Appeals
and two trial courts found that petitioner had shouted, within hearing
distance of several persons, the following words calculated to
humiliate and to cast aspersion on the complainant:

LIMBONGAN, MARO NGA MAGTUTUDLO, PATAY GUTOM,

TIGULANG GIUBAN NA, BOGOK, HUGAWAN, IPASALBIDS
KA NAKO NI DODONG AMORA. ("You are a cheat, a dishonest
teacher, you are dead hungry, an old person with gray hair, dull, dirty,
I will have you salvage(d) by Dodong Amora.") (Rollo, pp. 16 & 18)

As reiterated in the case of Noel Villanueva vs. People of the

Philippines2 and Yolanda Castro. There is grave slander when it is of a
serious and insulting nature. The gravity of the oral defamation
depends not only upon the expressions used, but also on the personal
relations of the accused and the offended party, and the circumstances
surrounding the case. Indeed, it is a doctrine of ancient respectability
that defamatory words will fall under one or the other, depending not
only upon their sense, grammatical significance, and accepted
1
G.R. No. 104189. March 30, 1993

2
G.R. No. 160351. April 10, 2006

2
 ordinary meaning judging them separately, but also upon the special
circumstances of the case, antecedents or relationship between the
offended party and the offender, which might tend to prove the
intention of the offender at the time.

8. Also, according to my lawyer, the Supreme Court in the case of De

Leon v. People, GR. No. 212623, thoroughly discussed the nature of
Oral Defamation and the parameters for classifying the same as either
Grave or Slight:

“Oral Defamation or Slander is libel committed by oral

(spoken) means, instead of in writing. It is defined as "the
speaking of base and defamatory words which tend to
prejudice another in his reputation, office, trade, business
or means of livelihood." The elements of oral defamation
are: (1) there must be an imputation of a crime, or of a vice
or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, status or
circumstances; (2) made orally; (3) publicly; (4) and
maliciously; (5) directed to a natural or juridical person,
or one who is dead; (6) which tends to cause dishonor,
discredit or contempt of the person defamed. Oral
defamation may either be simple or grave. It becomes
grave when it is of a serious and insulting nature.

An allegation is considered defamatory if it ascribes to a

person the commission of a crime, the possession of a vice
or defect, real or imaginary or any act, omission,
condition, status or circumstance which tends to dishonor
or discredit or put him in contempt or which tends to
blacken the memory of one who is dead. To determine
whether a statement is defamatory, the words used in the
statement must be construed in their entirety and should be
taken in their plain, natural and ordinary meaning as they
would naturally be understood by persons reading them,
unless it appears that they were used and understood in
another sense. It must be stressed that words which are
merely insulting are not actionable as libel or slander per
se, and mere words of general abuse however opprobrious,
ill-natured, or vexatious, whether written or spoken, do not
constitute a basis for an action for defamation in the
absence of an allegation for special damages. The fact that
the language is offensive to the plaintiff does not make it
actionable by itself.

xxxx

Whether the offense committed is serious or slight oral

defamation, depends not only upon the sense and
grammatical meaning of the utterances but also upon the
special circumstances of the case, like the social standing

3
 or the advanced age of the offended party. "The gravity
depends upon: (1) the expressions used; (2) the personal
relations of the accused and the offended party; and (3) the
special circumstances of the case, the antecedents or
relationship between the offended party and the offender,
which may tend to prove the intention of the offender at the
time. In particular, it is a rule that uttering defamatory
words in the heat of anger, with some provocation on the
part of the offended party constitutes only a light felony."

9. The following facts and circumstances based on the personal

knowledge of the witnesses show that there was probable cause to
believe that respondent Teresita De Guzman had just committed a
crime, viz.:

1. Cristina Sanchez's statement which the people in the session hall

overheard the utterances made by respondent.

2. The Vice Mayor and councilor's statements proving such

defamatory utterances was made.

10. That because of this incident, when I heard all of the defamatory
statements and insulting words, the people in the session hall had
thought of my position as being useless and could really destroy my
political career.

11. I executed this Complaint-Affidavit to attest to the truth of all the

foregoing.

Further Affiant Sayeth Naught.

CRISTINA SANCHEZ
Complainant/Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this

_________________ at _____________. I hereby certify that I have
personally examined the affiant and I am fully satisfied that he has
voluntarily executed and understood the contents of this Complaint-
Affidavit