ANALYSIS OF 09/12/2019 CRIMINAL CYBER LIBEL COMPLAINT - RESOLUTION

Since this letter is part of an ongoing legal proceeding, no comments will be provided until all appeals are resolved. Therefore, only the actual document will appear below.

Repul,lic of the PhiHppines De~ artrner ! of Justice

OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR City of San Juan

11,J)T R F GE Pl ·PiNAS, Inc Rep. by. GERARDO C. Hl:RNA.NDEZ.~

Complainant~

- versus ..

JtlLIAN COHEN, Respondent

~ --, ..... ,. - cr•:a:o.i.r.J:1:s-. ... ___________ .... _______________ x

\ .. S DOCKE, NOS,,: )N-15-INV-19B·00351-3-51

For.~ Violation of Section 4(c)l4) of Republic Act 10175 · in r-r:Jation toi Artiole 353 and 355 of the Revised Pt:!nzl Cod~ (ON-LINE LIBEL)

RESQLUT!Of,I

This is a reassigned case ,n ·. t~w ot tt1=- · c11 ,rul1elv aern1~a i .• J Senior Assist~mt City Prvsecuto; rv,)·i, id o. nJt,ay

This resoJv- · ti<~ ca -~ of Violation o1 Section 4 (c) 4 of Republic Act 10115 in reiation to -Artiole 353 and 355 of t'7e t :evis -, -~ Penal Code (ON7UNE LiBEL} filed by compk=m,dr ~ MOTOR IMAGE PftlP1NAS. tnc. (Mt~~for; -_. .n bv its C',aneral Managt~r GERARDO C HERNANDEZ (3:med ~•th a Secreta; v's r:mtifi. al:. ) . gainst the respondent JU ___ AJ'1 Lo:--- r:f'., ~ ·A.,tten tor brevity) ·

St~il-?.RtiL ot_~..\!rplusages,.-1btJ.IJ.9_gat._ibns in_!b@ comJl~~inl aft)davft, show am2.n9,_ _· "LheJ ___ qa·. .. ·1 J ! . i q f~ . : is c1

corpmati n a - . ·s the exdusiv0 : p- -·er I 11stnLt t - of ·~uban1 2iri .... 1e5 with,~ the Phihp, !t1es, and ts the w: . · antor of all Subaru

l , ~ · l. 1 1m and ·= ,-. 1 through authorized dealers within the Philippines~

(

Respondent Cot.en .:..,. ... · . ~t .. t 1 b c1ch of contr~- i: Iind~ damso~!=€ before _th~ Reg1onat T ·at Court of Pasig City 1 Brant..h 264, wh,cn case was._.~.._. ~ -~ ; · · -· · · ·, since the amownt m, olved is ot~ly P148,000.00

Regportdent Cohen refilled his. claim under small claims before the Murncipal Ttial Court in Cities (MTCT) 1n Olongap_o City, uut was a--:: , . · ed becau_se the claim does not fan within the scope of smai! uatrns action, as it also. in, olves 1:he issue of "whether or not damages should be awarded to the plaintiff for not having h~nored warranty of the vehicle under the contr:.Jet between them." rjo

PaQe 2 r ~PS Cocket t 1os

V- ·15-1 f\J V -198-00:351-0035 7 esolut1on

Prior to the sec.· .d fihng, es ot1dent Cohen sought t bring h ;;· :.,J e to the n1 ~ernet and ~mcta1 r ed· a on ? 1 · ugust /t . ., .J!,

nkno'+.,. party registered rtnm "http: 'neverbuysubaru.com.-, B·y 1 October 2018, the tent ~ s f

1 1 Hs-hed on Ute .. e erbuysubaru.c.om web~it a - OHEN to ·, e th : u..;,i~ , . :"'!er and author v.;herem . . e 'Documents" nage of ht~ web31 iB 1

tre foHowi ·~ ~ppears:

. Motor lmage­Singa. ··ore They ha. I.

st - 1 ed L _ • t:. • ~.

Jtinational company based m ~ PS. -nd _ d ice -of Subaru f...ard 01

u . - ·1 •• n if their warranbes are their own initiative, or by d1ref.t

mstru '" .tion fr ~ 1 ' itt .er way -Subaru has stated in no un ..... ertain :erm. . .a authority for sel' n ~1

doesnlt matter Fe - tt .i _3'S - ubaru X r , ,.

Motor Image .....

.. , t ar. . . ndemood that there !s

Ir a - e operates with com~ let-~ "Ctn _ Subaru carsJ so it reaUt . ! _ .. ill often refer to tv1otor Image

Philipprne subsid1ar J )f sarne -~ Motor lma~.1 e .

nc, m1de 1n the text _ !. • • ~ ~ _ _ website or 1n his vig~9~;, '.~hich C(?HEN referred to both !ndiscrim inattly~

"' ?O ~:ated ·, 2 . :eb -· 1 • t e llegedly ind1scrim1natety

-~· .. · -1a r -- a-· making !se r ~- :~I t-_,a__ f' 73836-BJ .; ~

) · .. com and ideo strea mr- :-J

... ---, .e w~~ f <

:mputati • l . amst MIPI The same was afso uploaded c,n i:: ·1 i 'eo s~:-e_tm!nQ ebsite outube com

8 2018. ("ohen up• . ·- ded copy of his small clam~~ .npl3in} . s . . ~ite Nh!ch c.ompla nt was also dismtssPiJ.

1 r -u .. ,,-- ·.Jf i9e pe~od of . 5 to ~8 _ . __ . er 2018, COHEN publ ·- lt·d

.. -- ~ , . -~flla.g'An rl,::1fr.un3tnn, ~tatPn'1~ntc. ::tg·:::ltnc-·t M IP I on h·1e; \...U Absite· 'h-9 • ...,. -:l' ...-.,1....,. ..,_.. .. ,....,.. .. ~., • ""• 1 _,... ,,..,,. • ,....,.,, ••~ U U • ,;:). aw:a' • • • _. yy .._.. I . I

I \ / -~n~onn other-c. -:lrt3 -::IC:: foll • s • • •• ', -··:· • -~ ..... _., !..or .......... .- ..... •• - c • .\i\

. <' j ·\ .-,

1.·

age 3 ·JPS Docket . ,.0$ .

X -15--tNV -198-00 5 -: ~ esotutiory .· .. x-- ,..._: ·.--------------r·

. "Clearly, Subaru fs· weH a~are . the tac:: Motor Image has . no_ intention of · h onng . th _··r·· · warranties their warranties. xxn .

. . .

·!=or. a!!' .. intents and purposes t"1.ot6r . ~othmg r~ore .thatl a. proxv ' ' ·--uba~u ·u

,,... ..:. t '""'"""* -th-+ +hn "' .. :_, _ .~ ~ .. _,:..:.,._. - ~ · .

(it . was _·. N·~ T . · · Ho\vever this contain the · :~ . ~ n tho · .· 1a ... er .fequt._ - I .. f I 11C.UI

reqwrem,ents that -re n _. ~..'?-, -· 1ete ~

e · . :, .er a _-ording· you · are not

· 01ded ·. ~- . ·

• I ·. m ·· . .,·el! . . .. 1·

: I .

Obvtou -ar- ,aw

r •. r.,hcate

··hononng thek v. anties ..

'a ·1

:- ommit -n

,a , · · c

that·

-- les?

-. the

a a avoid

. orthless warranties without· 1n court:

l .-,. -It a- , I .

· al! 1mp1 •· -~f · :It · n - en t · t ere IPI as ·the .

te . · ·th _ Phili.pptnes,_ · exc.fus1ve distributor , h p n r e· ....... -.,~ «:"P\ :e~ , '7 r p'n_t.c

~- .... . l u : -· ':-i,~ ~ f • - . 4( ~}(4) of R.A. Nfj_ ·.10175.

Page4 NPS Docket Nos. XV.,;.15-1 NV. -198-00351-00357 Resofution x--------x

To prove his claim 1 complainant submitted the following: a) Secretary's certificate; b) Copy of the Order issued by RTC Branch 26.4, dismissing the

complainant filed by respondent Cohen; c) copy of the Order issued by MCTC Branch-3 dismissing the

small cla-ims action filed by respondent Cohen: d) Print copy of http:/lneverybuysubar"1. 1 information

registration; -e) _Copy of website and videos ·in CD form: f) Demand Letter; g) Reply to the demand letter;

. Respondent in his counter affidavit allegesl. among ott,tr1, that: he is the owner of a Subaru Forester covered by a valid . warranty issued by MIPI. ·with. liability- for said warranty apparently held jointly by Autosales & Aftersales Co. Inc .

l)pon the dismissal of his cases 1 he determined that best course of ac.tion is to inform potentiai purchasers of Subaru cars that Subaru warranties ar~ worthless. Hence 1 he launched a campaign against Subaru of Japan not MIPI to inform, pomnti~f Q~trcha?ers of Subaio cars that Subaru .warranties are worthless .. The campaign included statements that were facts and supported by evidence. The video uploaded were all focused at Subaru of Japan_

To support his dai~s1 respondent submitted voluminous ' records book binded in two (2) separate parts (Annex 0 A-part 111 and Annex ICA~part 11 11

}: ,

1) Part 1-· Boo~ Binded documents labeled in its table of contents. as follows: a) Documents prior to filing of lawsuit ( series ;Of lett~rs ): b} Documents relating to the lawsuit (series of pleadings • -filed in Court);

c) Japanese Translations; ~ _.....u--t!li4i..-..~~---dowments tatmtett in if§ abte of

Contents 1 as follows: 3) Documents prior to filing of lawsuit ( series of letters); 4) Documents relating to the lawsuit.( series of pleadings filed in

court); · · · 5) Japanese Translations; _

Complainant filed his Reply Affidavit reiterating all his allegations· in his complaint affidavit.

/

M.3ge 5 f'. J ..... S Socket Nos , - · 5-iNV,-198-00351-00357

esolutton x----------x

We resolve:

. Following a careful evaluation of the factual c.arcumstances that gave rise ·to the filing of the instant c.ase·l and the evidence presente<l / by the comp1ainantJ undersigned .mds NO probable caut;e to indtCt respondent JULIAN COHEN .or the c1ime o ON LINE LIBEL define. t and p n · _:. . '"· under Section 4 L - ~, of Republi.c. c,,,. No.10175

"Section 4(c-4) of Republic Act No. 10175, provides~

Section 4-cybercrime offenses - The following acts ·constitute the offense of cybercrime punish3ble under this Act:

Xxx· c} Content-related Offenses . XXX

(4) Libel- The unlawful or prohibited acts of libel as defined . n Art. 355 of the Revised Pe~:al Code, as 3mendad, committed

through 3 com·puter system . any other similar· -mea.ns which may be devised in the future .. "

Under Arhefe 355 p n . , od uhbel -~ .,c al"-! maficiou!'; irn cfime, or of a vice or

defect, re~1 ·or im3g1n:uy, or 3 act. om 1ss1on, .condition, statu or circumstance_ tending to c~use he honor, dis.credit, or _ontempt of 3 n3tu.al or juridic31 person, or to blacken the m emory of one .. o :s dead."

For ..... 1 e ' , el I h the crime of libel the foHowu,g elements .-~u - . i- e_ present

1 There must be an imputatiot:1 of a crime. or of a vice or defecti real or imagma. · 1 or any act. omission. condition 1

status, or circumstances 2~ The imputat.ion must be m3de publicly .

. -"Tt1M! p .3tion· mds! pers:on, or one who !s de.3d. .

5. The 1mputa1ion must tend to cause the dishonor_ discredit or -.Lpn"\f' t f f.h13 n~r<:;on · 10.&.3 - 1::1d ..... ...., ••• ,.., "' • u :....,. ,..., .......... _ . w-t-, ....... -

On the· !n::--_.~! .. t easel C·.., ••. ' .an - . -~ failed to prove the existence of element no and 4

-----

_·Page 6 _ NPSDooket Nos. 'XV--15-tNV.-198-00351-00357 Resotution -x--------x

_- for element· no. _2: ·· The· imputation mu~-L,~_r,,-a_de publicjr_,_

. V\hile-· it_ is true that 'the alleged defamatory.' remarks .. made' by ' ·respondent:COH~N were uploaded by him in social media' w~site, : facebook.com ·and-video_stre3ming _website Youtube.com ., this a_lor e. in the absence· of any affidavit executed l:>YJU1Y persons who

·.have-actually read the said defamatory remarks or vi,rwed the -. · · .defamatory videos.. will NOT wuffice t9 proye the existence s,f the ._ . sais;I element, beoause under the law.·~- .. Pulttioation is the . communication of the _defamatory matter to some third Re'79~ . 9r persons --(People vs. Atenci9. CA ... G~R. Nos. t1_351-R to 1 ~353. · cited in Book 2 •. Revised Penal _ Code. Eighteenth Edition by: Lu1s_ B~--

· Reyes, -pag~ ·991 ). · · · · · • • t •

· ·The .allegations of the complainanti in the absence of any proof that _the _alleged ·defamatory rerrlarks uploaded -in Facebook were read

. and/or communicated to third persons, _or the videos-were viewed bf _ ,third· persons is fat~I tQ his cause ·of action._ Fo·r logic dictate. fha1 ·Uif . ·no one re;1d the.-_uploaded defamatory rema-,k_s or no~e viewed '.

the alleged_ defamatory. videos, -- then ~t:,e same _ caused no · damage, · because _there is . no crime if the defamat_o_,=-----as. Ael .. en- ·ou11tt11fl"ioated to othe~~" ,

· · The Suprerrie Gourt in the case of P~ople vs .. Atencio (!lupra), sta.ted that_ ''tt,e law permits us to think _badly as ·we please of our· neighb~s so long -as we keep our ·· thoughts to ourselves:. So, merely

. composing a·- libel !S_ not ·actionable unless· it be published . . The -,~ommunioation of libelous matter to the person defamed 3lone does -not amount to aatioation, for that cannot injure hil reputation. A man's reputation is the estimate in which others

. :_ hold hi.rn; not the good opinion which he has for himself._ · .. .. . . . -

The element of publication by pubiishing alone is NOT satisfied without _any ,p,:oof 1tiat the_ lipelous · articles_ and/or videos · were read .

_ an~/or viewed by third -person. The element ca~not be _pr~umed by

_ For glement no,' 4: -The imputation m·m b_e dif9~ed at -A­.r,atural or juridical person, or one who· is dead. . . .

_The· -claim of M1PI ·· that from ·the_ postings made by _ the _. · ,_respond_ent, , it may -be unt1erst09d that there is no · dist•M~·.n -

between MIPI and Subaru Inc. ·does not hotd water~ and ··cannot ba ., the basis of a finding of probable .cause.· bec~use dear identification . ·of the ~arty -is required. ·1t is-· not sufficient that _tlie ' offended parly

l . '

F:.oe 7, JF- Oocv.et t'os

· . , 15 I , -19&0035 .:()Q3"'

Resolution��--. .

''

. shown that at least a third person ,;ould . · opject of. the libelous· publication·'! {K kle · Amen-..... L

1 2 Phil. 757, cited in Book 2, Revise _ Eighteenth Edition by- Luis B Reyes, page 993).

hi._'?"1 as tM · C.dblenews.enal·Code.

D•· �hi- ' USe -,annot be ,bac . T\I not !· err - ' t:. r stab Ii shed by ere :=-=�- • w ',r!hy t.f'\ ,·n•·)'':'_,•,.,Qf J�A:-- ------·---�-- · --·.· ·

1o. ._ • • ._"'_:�

ect Dyupposit.ions .• deductions,. or even presumptions, ·with ,,o basi�

. in evidence . for the tr1..1th · must have to be determined by the . hard . f admissibility and proof/� :(laq, 1 · vs Hoov.en

' r,.

' 'th +. th w n· "9

•d . 'flQ • •. '' � -� I

1 · : ent o•. , · rej- dice and/or

WI-IE-REF recorrr� ,... of

'I �Ml ob�ble cause ·

.... ..... .

tJ liance-Pen

RE.C . ti � . PROV.A._ '

.. th(// •12•

' ��-'I..RCEO-PARAS . · Senior , s! :t3nt City Prosecutor. MCLE ._. �.. - N" 'j_:0028636

' , ..

. �. •M:.·' . ·. ULINO �··· �

!l\

"'T ·w: .

· , ent, it f�llows1PI is likewise

' ' Jers, ,nect 'tnsufficienc.y

no�)

SEP· 13 2019

.· QI 7 c·· P1 osecutor - . 31trnent0rd�r No. 157 dated ·March 29· 2019.

· � 11Cl E romp Hance No v, .. 0028638 ·

NEVERBUYASUBARU.COM