Chief prosecutor warns giving false addresses in complaints is perjury

MANILA, Philippines — Veteran journalist Philip Lustre was deprived of due process when he was indicted and arrested without receiving a copy of the complaint or a chance to defend himself because the complainant provided the wrong address, the chief government prosecutor said Monday.

“I would have to agree with them that they were not given due process, as they were not given the opportunity to actually answer the charges against them,” Prosecutor General Richard Anthony Fadullon told reporters.

The case involves a cyberlibel complaint in which Lustre was identified as affiliated with the Philippine Daily Inquirer. Because the subpoenas were sent to the wrong address, Lustre learned of the case only last Saturday, when the police were already implementing the arrest warrant.

READ: Sara Duterte’s husband Mans Carpio behind cyberlibel case vs Lustre

Fadullon said the error by the prosecutor who handled the complaint might not have been intentional.

“I believe that there was some omission…for not validating why and how certain the respondent was on the address provided,” he said.

He pointed out that prosecutors cannot rely solely on complainants’ statements or mail return cards. A return card with an incorrect address does not guarantee that the respondent received the complaint.

However, he said that while the Office of the Prosecutor cannot initiate an investigation into the matter, Justice Secretary Fredderick Vida may immediately order an investigation into the prosecutor’s lapses or potential negligence.

Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla, a former justice secretary, said some complainants used a modus of providing false addresses to prosecutors to prevent respondents or those who are the subject of complaints from defending themselves.

Fadullon acknowledged Remulla’s statement.

“I do agree that it is the modus of some complainants who, when they want to file cases, give false information. The danger here is if the offense is non-bailable, a respondent will just wake up one morning with an arrest warrant, wondering why they were sued and why they were never given a chance to answer,” Fadullon said.

READ: Journalist Philip Lustre posts P48,000 bail in cyberlibel case

He also warned that submitting false information in the investigation data form could make a person criminally liable for perjury.

To prevent such tactics, Fadullon said the Department of Justice had previously issued circulars mandating a strict two-stage evaluation process before a case is officially docketed and assigned an NPS (National Prosecution Service) criminal number.

Under the guidelines, evaluating prosecutors must double-check the Investigation Data Form and determine whether the evidence establishes a prima facie case with reasonable certainty of conviction before issuing subpoenas.

In this case, Fadullon said that, with the posting of bail, Lustre could already file a motion requesting a preliminary investigation.

If granted, he said, the case would be returned to the prosecutor’s office, where Lustre could submit his counter-affidavit. /mcm