The Quezon City Prosecutor’s Office has dismissed the grave threat complaint filed by ACT Teachers Party-list Rep. France Castro against former president Rodrigo Duterte. The dismissal was based on insufficient evidence, as stated in a 14-page resolution by Senior Assistant Prosecutor Ulric Badiola.
According to Badiola, the words and phrases used by Duterte did not convincingly establish his intention to be taken seriously. He highlighted that if Duterte truly intended to intimidate and carry out the threats, he would not have used excessive prologues and would have directly and immediately pronounced the threats. Badiola also found it unusual for an individual, especially someone of Duterte’s age and no longer immune from criminal prosecution, to make true with their threats.
The prosecutor further noted that the grave threats referred to in Castro’s complaint were sourced from Facebook and YouTube. However, Castro failed to obtain the necessary authentication or certification from these platforms or the network that carried the program where Duterte allegedly uttered the threats. Without proper authentication, there is no assurance that the threatening remarks and statements were accurately quoted or extracted from the original source.
Badiola cited a Supreme Court ruling that states the absence of a clear basis to determine probable cause, except by considering the attendant facts and circumstances. Based on his evaluation, Badiola concluded that probable cause had not been established in this case.
Castro had accused Duterte of grave threats under the Cybercrime Prevention Act, referring to his statements made on the SMNI program in October. Duterte’s statement, “I told her [daughter Sara Duterte-Carpio] to be frank. Say that this intelligence fund, I will use for Filipinos’ minds because my target is you communists in Congress,” was deemed by Castro as a grave threat to her life, liberty, and security, as well as that of her family.
In response to the complaint, Duterte stated in his counter-affidavit that Castro was using trivial and measly concerns as a means of retaliation since he no longer enjoys immunity from suit.
It is important to note that the decision to dismiss the complaint was made based on the lack of sufficient evidence and proper authentication. The prosecutor’s role is to evaluate the case and determine whether there is enough evidence to proceed with a formal charge. In this instance, the evidence presented did not meet the required threshold.
This dismissal does not absolve or condemn either party involved, but rather reflects the legal assessment of the evidence presented. It is crucial to respect the legal process and the decisions made by the appropriate authorities.
With a report from Aric John Sy Cua, the dismissal of the grave threat complaint against former president Rodrigo Duterte highlights the importance of presenting substantial evidence and adhering to proper authentication procedures in legal proceedings.
Source: The Manila Times
