Damage suit vs Leila, NBI director, etc for using boy as false witness to murder raps vs father, P'sinan gov, congressman
Damage suit vs Leila, NBI director, etc for
using boy as false witness to murder raps
vs father, P'sinan gov, congressman
Sharing to interested readers a copy of the Complaint for Damages set to be filed for March 15, 2013 at the Manila RTC.
Jaime G. Aquino, the lowly newsman who is the father of the boy being used by the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) and the Department of Justice (DOJ), cannot do against what he called as the arrogance of and the abuses of those who are in power.
"What are we in power for?" is the political statement in the act of using a boy as a tool in a political demolition job in Pangasinan.
READ THE COMPLAINT BELOW.
Republic of the Philippines
National Capital Judicial Region
Regional Trial Court
JAIME G. AQUINO & ESTER I. AQUINO, for
themselves and on behalf of their minor son
JESTIN I. AQUINO,
- versus - Civil Case No. _____________
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE SECRETARY LEILA
DE LIMA, NATIONAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
(NBI) DIRECTOR NONNATUS CAESAR R. ROJAS,
MANUEL “MANNY” TOLENTINO, REVEREND
RUEL D. GARCIA, and AKAP BATA-CARITAS
a.k.a. AKAP SA BATA NG MGA GURO KALINGA
PHILIPPINES, INC. represented by REVEREND
RUEL GARCIA, DSWD-NCR REGIONAL
DIRECTOR MA. ALICIA S. BONOAN,
The plaintiffs, by the undersigned law firm, respectfully file this Complaint for damages against the defendants.
1. First of the plaintiffs are JAIME G. AQUINO and ESTER I. AQUINO, parents of the minor who is involved in this case and they are residents of the municipalities of Mapandan and Bayambang, both in the Province of Pangasinan.
2. Their marriage certificate is attached hereto as ANNEX “A.”
3. The minor here is JESTIN I. AQUINO, whose birth certificate is attached hereto as ANNEX “B,” is also the plaintiff in this case being represented by his parents.
4. The minor is now in the actual custody of defendant AKAP BATA-CARITAS also known as AKAP SA BATA NG MGA GURO KALINGA PHILIPPINES, INC.
5. Defendant LEILA DE LIMA was the incumbent Secretary of Justice at the time of the commission of acts constituting parts of the causes of action and at the time of filing of this complaint and she is being sued here in her personal capacity for acting in grave abuse of discretion of her powers as the Secretary of Justice.
6. Ms. De Lima may be served with summons at the Office of the Secretary, Department of Justice, DOJ Bldg., Padre Faura St., Manila.
7. Defendant NONNATUS CAESAR R. ROJAS was the incumbent Director of National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) at the time of the commission of the acts constituting the causes of action and at the time of filing of this complaint and he is being sued in her personal capacity for acting in grave abuse of discretion of his powers as the Director of the NBI.
8. Rojas may be served a summons at this office at the Office of the Director, NBI Headquarters, Taft Avenue, Manila.
9. Defendant MANUEL “MANNY” TOLENTINO was the standard bearer of Liberal Party for the mayoral contest in the town of Alcala, Province of Pangasinan at the time of the commission of the acts forming part of the causes of action in this complaint and at the time of the filing of this compliant.
10. Tolentino may be served a summons at his residence at Barangay San Nicolas, Alcala, Pangasinan.
11. Defendant REVEREND RUEL D. GARCIA was the executive director of Akap Sa Bata Philippines at the time of the commission of acts forming parts of the causes of action of this complaint and at the time of the filing of this complaint.
12. Garcia may be served a summons at his office at Akap Sa Bata Philippines, at Caritas Compound, Pandacan, Manila.
13. Defendant AKAP BATA-CARITAS a.k.a. AKAP SA BATA NG MGA GURO KALINGA PHILIPPINES, INC. represented by REVEREND RUEL GARCIA, is a legal entity that is accredited by the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD).
14. Akap Bata-Caritas a.k.a. Akap Sa Bata Ng Mga Guro Kalinga Philippines, Inc. may be served a summons at 2002 Jesus St., Caritas Compound, Pandacan, Manila.
15. Defendant MA. ALICIA S. BONOAN was the regional director of DSWD-National Capital Region at the time of the commission of acts of grave abuse of discretion and at the time of the filing of this complaint.
The Causes of Action
16. The defendants conspired with each other to commit acts of persecution and child abuse to cause on the plaintiffs exceedingly disgusting sleepless nights, fears, anxieties, besmirched reputation and causing threats to life, liberty and security of the persons of the plaintiffs and their entire family.
17. The bases of the causes of action are the articles under the Human Relations chapter of the Civil Code of the Philippines.
18. The first of these articles is Article 19, which states:
Art. 19. Every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the performance of his duties, act with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith.
19. Under this article, even if the defendants have the right to exercise their rights or to perform their duties, they will be liable if they abuse that right or abuse their duties to cause damage to another person.
20. It is a right and duty of any person, including private persons, natural and juridical, to act for the achievement of justice.
21. Much more that it is a right and duty of public officers like Secretary of Justice Leila De Lima, NBI Director Nonnatus Caesar R. Rojas, DSWD-NCR Regional Director Ma. Alicia S. Bonoan to act for the achievement of justice.
22. Much more that the right and duty is compelling when the justice being sought to be given effect pertains to a brutal crime of murder.
23. But in so exercising the rights and performing the duties, everybody is required to ACT WITH JUSTICE, GIVE EVERYONE HIS DUE, and OBSERVE HONESTY AND GOOD FAITH.
24. In this case, all the acts of the defendants were done by them deliberately and in conspiracy with each other that they DID NOT ACT WITH JUSTICE, DID NOT GIVE EVERYONE HIS DUE and DID NOT OBSERVE HONESTY AND GOOD FAITH.
25. Looking at their acts putting them together, it is very clear that there was that unanimity in the purpose and the acts were deliberately and consciously done.
26. The acts of the defendants were also contrary to law, done willfully, giving the plaintiffs that cause of action under Article 20 of the Civil Code of the Philippines.
27. The acts of the defendants were also contrary to morals, good customs or public policy under Article 21 of the Civil Code of the Philippines.
28. The particular acts that were done are hereunder narrated.
29. Defendant Manuel “Manny” Tolentino manipulated the vulnerability and the gullibility of the mind of minor Jestin I. Aquino, who was yet 16 years old, and induced the kid into executing affidavits of falsities in order for Manuel “Manny” Tolentino to achieve his ulterior motive of revenge against the father of the kid.
30. Tolentino and his cohorts offered rewards to the minor that the latter would be brought to Canada in exchange for the testimonies that he would sign.
31. Thereafter, Tolentino brought Jestin to Reverend Ruel Garcia, the executive director of Akap Sa Bata Ng Mga Guro Kalinga Philippines, Inc.
32. Defendant Akap Sa Bata Ng Mga Guro Kalinga Philippines, Inc. took custody of Jestin I. Aquino despite the lack of consent from the parents of the minors.
33. Then, DSWD-NCR Regional Director Ma. Alicia S. Bonoan connived with Tolentino, Ruel Garcia and Akap Bata in order to give legality to the custody over the minor.
34. Her participation in the conspiracy was to file a petition for involuntary commitment of the minor to the DSWD as an abandoned, neglected and dependent child.
35. A copy of the petition is attached hereto as ANNEX “C” series.
36. Then NBI Director Nonnatus Caesar R. Rojas took part in the conspiracy by providing NBI agents to do the affidavits and document them as if these were real.
37. To make it appear that the production of affidavits were regular and proper, it was made to appear that on January 7, 2013 defendant Garcia wrote a request from the NBI director to investigate the child’s testimony to ascertain the truth about the stories.
38. A copy of the letter of Garcia to Rojas is attached hereto as ANNEX “D.”
39. The affidavits of falsities executed by the minor are attached hereto as ANNEX “E’ series and ANNEX “F” series.
40. The affidavits of falsities that were made to be executed by the minor made it appear that plaintiff Jaime G. Aquino conspired with incumbent Pangasinan Governor Amado T. Espino and Representative Jesus “Boying” Celeste of the province’s first district.
41. The affidavits of falsities said that the conspiracy was to assassinate or murder Ruperto Martinez, then mayor of the town of Infanta in Pangasinan.
42. The same affidavits stated that the father of the minor, Jaime, had a meeting in November 2011 with Governor Espino and Congressman Celeste at the Provincial Capitol of Zambales in Iba and at El Pescador Beach Resort in the town of Bolinao, Pangasinan.
43. The same affidavits of falsities stated that in the alleged meeting at the provincial capitol of Zambales, the kid heard Governor Espino telling Zambales Governor Hermogenes Ebdane that Mayor Martinez knew about the “black rock” or “black sand” or “itim na bato.”
44. The same affidavits quoted the kid as hearing Ebdane replying: “Bahala naa si Governor Espino dahil siya naman ang taga-Pangasinan” (it was up to Governor Espino because he resided in Pangasinan).
45. The same affidavits quoted the kid as saying that they left the Zambales Capitol and motored to Bolinao, Pangasinan and met at El Pescador Beach Resort in Bolinao, Pangasinan.
46. There at the beach resort, the kid said that Jaime, Governor Espino and Congressman Celeste discussed again the murder plot against Mayor Martinez.
47. The same affidavits said that the kid heard Governor Espino saying that Mayor Martinez must be killed because they feared that Martinez might implicate them about the “black sand.”
48. The same affidavits also said that Congressman Celeste said there would be no problem because Celeste had many guns while Celeste was making a gesture with a hand to show a symbol of a gun.
49. The same affidavits also said that the kid heard Congressman Celeste as saying: “Ito si Kardo, bata ko ito, kahit ito na ang pumatay” (Here is Kardo, my man, even if he would be the one to do the killing).
50. The same affidavits also said that after Congressman Celeste said those words, Kardo left.
51. The same affidavits said that after Kardo had left, somebody called Governor Espino and the governor said he would leave as he had something important to attend to.
52. The same affidavits said that after Espino left, the kid said he saw Congressman Celeste handing over one bundle of money in P1,000 bills.
53. The same affidavits said that the kid heard that the bundle of money was Jaime’s share in jueteng and that Jaime accepted the money and thanked the congressman.
54. After that, the affidavits stated that his father left and Congressman Celeste stayed at the El Pescador.
55. The same affidavits said that after arriving home, his father Jaime counted the money and it was worth P100,000.
56. The same affidavits stated that the kid said that his father Jaime met with Congressman on December 14, 2012 to get the share of Jaime from jueteng and there the kid said he again saw the man of Celeste named Kardo.
57. On December 15, 2012, Mayor Martinez was murdered inside the compound of his residence in Infanta, Pangasinan.
58. The same affidavits said that Celeste ordered Kardo to go to Mayor Martinez in Infanta and make it sure that he killed Martinez and that the kid said he heard Kardo saying it was okay in Ilocano.
59. The same affidavits said that after Kardo left, Congressman Celeste gave money to Jaime saying, “this is yours” in Ilocano dialect.
60. The same affidavits also said that Jestin also knew of the murder of Barangay Kagawad Jovencia Gasmin of Barangay San Juan in Alcala, Pangasinan and that the killing of Gasmin was blamed by Engineer Reynaldo Mencias to defendant Manuel “Manny” Tolentino.
61. The same affidavits said that on May 19, 2012, the kid was with his father Jaime at Chowking in Rosales, Pangasinan and he said he heard Mencias telling Jaime that Governor Espino was already mad at Mencias that he cannot stop Gasmin from protesting against the quarry of Governor Espino in Alcala, Pangasinan.
62. The same affidavits said that when Jaime left, Engineer Mencias gave Jaime money for the construction of a house.
63. The same affidavits said that on May 27 or May 28, in 2012, Engineer Mencias called Jaime and it was Jestin who answered the telephone and that after hanging up the phone the kid and his father Jaime went to the farm of Engineer Mencias and when they arrived there he saw Governor Espino, Vice-Mayor Ryan Paolo Mencias and Engineer Mencias.
64. The same affidavits said that the kid heard Governor Espino demanding that if Mencias cannot fix the stopping of their quarry, there might be a person who would be killed.
65. The same affidavits said that the kid said that Engineer Mencias replied that he will fix the problem.
66. After that, the affidavits said that the kid was ordered by Jaime to newspapers from the car of his father and returned with the copies of newspaper, and that in that newspaper it was headlined: “Kasong Rape vs Tolentino, naisampa na.”
67. On June 6, 2012, the affidavits said that the kid and Jamie went back to the farm of Engineer Mencias and it was there that Engineer Mencias ordered Richard to kill Gasmin and the order was made in the presence of Espino and Vice-Mayor Ryan Paolo Mencias.
68. On June 7, 2912, the affidavits said that in Urdaneta City the governor, Engineer Mencias, Vice-Mayor Mencias met with Jaime at Max’s Restaurant and there Richard arrived to confirm that the latter shot Gasmin dead and that Jaime was ordered by Governor Espino to publish in Jaime’s newspaper a news story blaming Tolentinto as the one who killed Gasmin.
69. The same affidavits of falsities also quoted the kid to have knowledge about the death of Bayambang Councilor Nato Sabangan where the kid was quoted as saying that he and Jaime met with the two men they fetched from Bayambang and that they brought the same men to the capitol of Pangasinan in Lingayen, Pangasinan.
70. After that, the affidavits also quoted the minor as saying that he and Jaime climbed to the office of the governor and these two men approached Governor Espino and at this juncture the governor asked the two men if Councilor Nato Sabangan was already killed.
71. The same affidavits also quoted the kid as saying that the two men confirmed having killed Sabangan.
72. The same affidavits contained falsities all throughout because all of these are not true and highly improbable to happen, considering alone the fact that the defendants did not file murder raps on the two other killings committed against Gasmin and Sabangan.
73. The fact is that Tolentino is running for mayor against Vice-Mayor Ryan Paolo Mencias revealed the political motive of Tolentino.
74. Another fact is that a case for rape with serious illegal detention was filed before the Regional Trial Court of Pasig and that a warrant for the arrest of Tolentino was issued.
75. A copy of this warrant of arrest is attached hereto as ANNEX “G.”
76. The fact that Tolentino has been in the belief that it was Jaime who caused the said case to be elevated in court revealed also the motive of revenge on the part of Tolentino.
77. Now, Tolentino is running for mayor of Alcala under the Liberal Party and a copy of the official list of candidates in the town is attached hereto as ANNEX “H.”
78. Now, Tolentino is a partymate of Alaminos City Mayor Hernani Brangaza, who, in turn, is running for governor of Pangasinan against Espino.
79. A son of Branganza is running for mayor of Alaminos against former Congressman Arthur Celeste.
80. Art Celeste is a brother of Congressman Jesus Celeste.
81. Now, it may be a right and duty for the defendants to investigate, but they abused the same right and committed grave abuse in the performance of their duties deliberately against laws, moral, public order, and public policy.
82. This is so because the minor was used by the defendants to lie in order to give them a justification to file against plaintiff Jaime along with Espino and Celeste the charges of plotting the murder committed against Martinez.
83. The purpose of the filing of the charges was to destroy the governor and the congressman before Pangasinan voters.
84. This purpose is so glaring to be seen because the affidavits of the minor when examined are glaringly insufficient to constitute probable cause that Jaime G. Aquino, Governor Espino and Congressman Celeste plotted the murder against Martinez yet the defendants filed the same before the Department of Justice.
85. In including Jaime G. Aquino, the purpose of the defendants is to scare Jaime into joining them so that the affidavits of the minor will be strengthened and for them to justify the filing of the murder charges against Espino and Celeste and justify the press releases so that the voters of Pangasinan would believe in the concocted stories of the minor.
86. The purpose that has been the political demolition work was immediately seen when the said falsified affidavits were published in almost all news entities, newspaper and broadcast stations.
87. That publication has put the life of Jaime, his son Jestin, and their entire family to the real threats to life, liberty and security.
88. The supporters of Governor Espino and Congressman Celeste were angered by the news reports announcing to the whole country that Governor Espino and Congressman Celeste have been tagged as the brains behind the murder against Martinez.
89. Because of this, men identified with Congressman Celeste and Governor Espino have been stalking Jaime’s house and person.
90. Because of this, Jaime and his family have been on the run, avoiding getting caught by the men of the governor and the congressman.
91. The apparent political demolition work was planned to be strengthened further with the aid of Secretary De Lima in ensuring that a probable cause of murder will be concluded by the investigating prosecutors.
92. The investigation given by the defendant Secretary for the hearing body to complete their preliminary investigation in thirty (30) days so that the resolution finding probable cause will be filed as soon as possible and the issuance of warrants for the arrest of the governor and the congressman would be secured before the elections set forth on May 13, 2013.
93. The ulterior motive on the part of De Lima was apparent because she reacted immediately to the Writ of Amparo issued by the Supreme Court on the petition of Jaime Aquino and Ester Aquino.
94. De Lima labeled that the Writ of Amparo was “misused.”
95. Subsequent thereto, the defendants caused the publication of another news story that in gist says that the kid was inviting his father Jaime to join as the witness to corroborate the said false affidavits.
96. The plaintiffs were compelled to engage the services of a counsel in order for him to protect their honor and save them from the threats of life, liberty and security.
97. In a country that is in democracy, these high-handed and abusive acts of the defendants cannot be permitted.
98. These acts ought to stop once and for all: the acts must not be duplicated by whoever is in power.
99. In the entirety, the acts done by the defendants are persecution rather than prosecution.
100. With respect to the minor, the acts done by the defendants are child abuse rather than giving what is the best for the minor.
101. Child abuse is any act, including teaching or compelling a child to lie, as long as the act causes trauma and damage to the intrinsic worth and dignity of the minor.
102. By itself, the criminal acts of child abuse committed by the defendants have a civil aspect, which, in this case, is in a form of damages.
103. Thus, the plaintiffs are seeking the moral damages of P200,000 (Philippine Currency) in order to restore them into their former esteem and security to life and liberty.
104. The plaintiffs are also entitled to the exemplary damage of P200,000 (Philippine Currency).
105. The entitlement to exemplary damage is supported by the facts of the case that the acts done must not be repeated.
106. The entitlement to the attorney’s fee of P100,000 (Philippine Currency) is also supported by the fact that the plaintiffs have been compelled to secure the services of the lawyers.
WHEREFORE, after due notice and hearing, it is respectfully prayed of the Honorable Court to order the defendants to pay the plaintiffs, jointly and severally, of the following amounts:
1. P200,000 in moral damages;
2. P200,000 in exemplary damages; and
3. P100,000 in attorney’s fees.
Other reliefs and just and equitable are also prayed for. March 15, 2013.
Respectfully submitted. March 15, 2013. Manila.
ALAB NG MAMAMAHAYAG (ALAM)
Ground Floor, National Press Club Bldg.,
No. 1 Magallanes Drive, Intramuros, Manila
RENTA PE CAUSING SABARRE CASTRO & ASSOCIATES
Unit 1, 2368 JB Roxas St. corner Leon Guinto St., Malate, Manila
BERTENI CATALUÑA CAUSING
IBP No. 876498 / Manila IV / 10-01-2013
PTR No. 1435314 / Manila / 10-01-2013
Roll No. 60944 / MCLE No. IV -0007338 / 08-10-2012