Cyber libel cases against Caindec to be heard by Pagadian court
A court in Pagadian City in Zamboanga del Sur will hear the cyber libel cases filed against LTO-7 Director Victor Caindec by a motorcycle dealer based in Pagadian. | inquirer.net file photo
MANDAUE CITY, Cebu — A Regional Trial Court Judge in Pagadian City in Zamboanga del Sur will hear the four counts of cyber libel that were filed in court against Director Victor Emmanuel Caindec of the Land Transportation Office in Central Visayas (LTO-7).
Arraignment is set on May 18.
The arraignment was set after the LTO-7 Director posted bail of P192,000 or P48,000 each for the cyber libel cases that were filed against him to ensure his freedom while his case is still being heard.
On September 9, 2021, Judge Dennis P. Vicoy of Branch 20 of the Pagadian RTC issued four warrants for Caindec’s arrest.
His bail was paid at the Cebu City RTC on September 13 or four days after the warrants were issued.
Executive Judge Marlon Jay Moneva of the Cebu City RTC was the one who issued Caindec’s release order on the same day that his bail was paid.
The warrants against Caindec stemmed from the cyber libel complaints that DES Strong Motors, Inc., which holds business office at the Balangasan District in Pagadian City, filed against him at the City Prosecutor’s Office following posts on the agency’s Facebook page accusing five motorcycle companies of cheating on their customers.
In a press conference that was streamed live on LTO-7’s FB page on March 10, 2020, Caindec allegedly accused Du Ek Sam, DES Marketing, DES Strong, DESMark and Premio of fraud.
In another Facebook live on June 19, 2020, Caindec, allegedly ‘insinuated’ that DES Strong become a billionaire by cheating as they also allegedly cheated the government of at least a billion in taxes.
On July 18, 2020, Caindec insinuated in another Facebook live that DES Strong allegedly committed corruption of public officials and grave threats.
On July 30, 2020, Caindec who appeared in a the Facebook post of “Mugstoria Ta” also allegedly referred to DES Strong as a tax evader.
In a Resolution dated August 19, 2021, Pagadian City Prosecutor Domingo Santiago Briones approved the recommendation of Deputy City Prosecutor Cleto Edralin for the filing of four separate information for violation of Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 against Caindec filed before the Cyber Crime Court.
The prosecutor further recommended bail of P48,000 for each of the four counts of cyber libel.
Caindec’s Omnibus Motion to Dismiss the cases filed against him was also denied.
His in-court arraignment and pre-trial was first set on March 23, 2022, but was later on reset after Caindec filed a Motion for Reinvestigation where in he cited a ‘violation of due process ‘at the city prosecutor’s level.
But the court again denied his motion for reinvestigation on April 21, 2022 because of its lack in merit.
Judge Vicoy said that while the accused might have sensed a violation of his right to due process at the prosecutorial level, he should have done his sought after remedy within the reglementary period pursuant to DOJ Department Circular No. 70.
“Sadly, this was not followed with, and this has already foreclosed his statutory right to do do,” Vicoy said.
Vicoy pointed out that once an Information is filed in court, the court would be the best and sole judge to decide on how to dispose of the criminal case.
Also, he said that the court had to abide by the need for a speedy disposition of cases.
Earlier, Caindec also filed cyber libel cases against motorcycle dealers in Central Visayas, but these were ordered dismissed.
Caindec on May 4, 2022, filed his appeal before the Department of Justice on the decision made by the Regional State Prosecutor.
RELATED STORIES
Caindec appeals dismissal of complaint against motorcycle dealers
Dismissal of falsification charge vs DSMI officials, employees upheld
/dbs
Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of Cebudailynews. We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.
