Prosecutor rules out anew versus vlogger’s complaint
A resolution from the City Prosecution Office in Dagupan City dealt a significant blow to vlogger Jaime Gutierrez Aquino, as it dismissed the complaint he filed against broadcaster Violy Valdez-Ferrer. Aquino had accused Ferrer of perjury, falsification of public documents, libel, and obstruction of justice.
This dismissal follows a previous resolution from the same office that rejected Aquino’s cyber libel complaint against former Fourth District Congressman Christopher de Venecia and Ferrer, who is also the station manager and anchor of Aksyon Radyo Dagupan.
On March 19, 2026, Associate City Prosecutor Gerald Babate issued the resolution, with recommendations for approval from Assistant City Prosecutors Ferdinand Parayno and Olivia Biala-Nudo. City Prosecutor Ma. Victoria Datuin-Cabrera approved the resolution.
According to the resolution, the charges against Ferrer were primarily based on the allegations and documents included in her counter-affidavit, which was filed in a related case titled “Jaime Gutierrez-Aquino vs. Violy Valdez-Ferrer and Christopher ‘Toff’ Perez-De Venecia.”
In his complaint-affidavit, Aquino claimed that Ferrer committed perjury, falsification of public documents, libel, and obstruction of justice by attaching “fake,” “fabricated,” and “libelous” printed documents to her counter-affidavit in a separate case. Aquino argued that these documents falsely portrayed him as being involved in extortion and “fake news” activities.
He further asserted that Ferrer perjured herself and falsified information by declaring under oath that certain reports were true and by claiming that former Congressman de Venecia had been cleared by the Office of the Ombudsman, a claim that Aquino disputed.
In her counter-affidavit, Ferrer sought the dismissal of the complaint, contending that her statements were made in her capacity as a journalist on matters of public interest. She maintained that the term “corrupt” represented an opinion regarding a limited public figure and that the documents she cited were sourced in good faith from public records. Additionally, she argued that statements made during judicial proceedings are considered qualifiedly privileged communication.
After a thorough review of the evidence, the Prosecutor concluded that the complaint lacked merit. The ruling stated that on the libel charges, legal precedent holds that statements made in the course of judicial proceedings, including affidavits submitted to the Prosecutor’s Office, are absolutely or qualifiedly privileged as long as they are relevant to the issues at hand.
The Prosecutor noted that Ferrer included the contested materials in her counter-affidavit as part of her legal defense. The term “corrupt” was deemed appropriate commentary on a public figure involved in controversy.
Regarding the charges of perjury and falsification, the Prosecutor indicated that Article 183 of the Revised Penal Code requires a willful and deliberate assertion of a falsehood; merely disagreeing with the interpretation of documents or a case status (such as clearance from the Ombudsman) does not amount to perjury.
In terms of falsification, the complainant failed to prove that Ferrer forged any documents, as the materials included were public documents and not misrepresented as official government issuances.
Finally, the Prosecutor ruled on the obstruction of justice charge, stating that filing a counter-affidavit is a constitutionally protected right of the respondent. There was also no evidence to suggest that Ferrer intimidated witnesses, destroyed evidence, or used force to impede the investigation.
Leonardo Micua