BY GEROME DALIPE IV
ILOILO City – A trial court has convicted two village officials from this city for lying under oath when they executed affidavits to support the filing of charges against a private complainant in 2020.
Judge Mark Anthony Polonan, of the Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Branch 8 in Iloilo City found former Nonoy barangay captain and now barangay councilor Evan Joe Anonoy and councilor Jeffrey Francisco of perjury, which is penalized under Article 183 of the Revised Penal Code.
“Francisco and Anonoy executed judicial affidavits, though containing falsehoods, to file criminal complaints…” read Polonan’s seven-page consolidated judgment.
The judge sentenced the convicts from four months as the minimum penalty to one year and eight months as the maximum.
The case stemmed from the complaint filed by private complainant Joseph Tan Hao, who accused Anonoy and Francisco of perjury before the Office of the Iloilo City Prosecutor.
Hao said he went to Anonoy’s office supposedly to follow up on the complaint he filed against a vendor selling goods on his property without his consent.
When Hao confronted why he did not act on his complaint, Anonoy told the latter that he did not file a formal charge.
Hao told the village chief that he had indeed filed the formal charge. Hao said he even complained to the league of barangay captains for the failure of Anonoy to act on his complaint.
Irked by Hao’s statement, Anonoy reportedly placed Hao under supposed citizen’s arrest and was charged with slight oral defamation and unjust vexation.
The convicts executed their affidavits claiming that they informed Hao of his constitutional rights when they placed them under citizen’s arrest for alarms and scandals and assaults of persons in authority.
But Hao played video footage of the incident to dispute the claim of the convicts that they read to him the “Miranda doctrine” as a constitutional mandate in arresting a person.
During the trial, the convicts argued that the charges against them were filed merely to harass and intimidate them for suing Hao.
They insisted that Hao’s arrest was valid and that they informed him of his constitutional rights during the citizen’s arrest
In the decision, Judge Polonan gave weight to the video footage presented by the prosecution during the trial.
“Hao’s previous experience with Anonoy tending to shout and use abusive language prompted him to record the incident via video. As for the recording, the same was continuous and was neither edited nor tampered with,” said Polonan in his ruling.
Polonan said Francisco and Anonoy willfully and deliberately made false statements in their judicial affidavits when they attested that they informed Hao of his constitutional rights during his arrest.
“In the present case, Francisco and Anonoy executed judicial affidavits, containing falsehoods, to file criminal complaints against Hao for alarms and scandals and assault of a person in authority,” said Polonan in his ruling./PN
