Republic of the Philippines

Department of Justice
OFFICE OF THE CITY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE
Lapu-Lapu City

JUVELYN ALCANARA RAUTO NPS DOCKE NO.

VII-
12-INV-1J-00516
Complainant,

-versus-

NEIL REY BARSOBIA ZUASOLA,

Respondent.
x------------------/

WITNESS AFFIDAVIT

I, EMETERIA B. ZUASOLA of legal age, widow, Filipino, and a resident

of Block 6, Lot 25 & 27 Oxford St. Cambridge Subd. Iponan Cagayan de Oro
City, after having been duly sworn in accordance with law, fully conscious
that I do so under oath and may face criminal liability for false testimony
and perjury, do hereby depose and state that:

1. Q. Please state again your name, address, and other personal

circumstances?

A. I am EMETERIA B. ZUASOLA, of legal age, widow, Filipino, and

a resident of Block 6, Lot 25 & 27 Oxford St. Cambridge Subd.
Iponan Cagayan de Oro City where I may be reached with the
processes of the Honorable Office of the Public Prosecutor;

2. Q. Why are you executing this Counter Affidavit?

A. I am executing this Witness Affidavit in answer to the Affidavit

of Complaint executed by JUVELYN ALCANARA RAUTO against
my son NIEL REY ZUASOLA and to corroborate the statements
made the latter in his Counter Affidavit;

3. Q. What was the reason why a Subpoena was issued against your
son NIEL REY ZUASOLA?

Counter-Affidavit
Page 1 of 4
 A. A Subpoena was issued against him because JUVELYN
ALCANARA RAUTO executed a sworn statement and submitted
the same to the Office of the City Prosecutor, stating therein
that I allegedly committed an offense against her which is
define under R.A 262 as PSYCHOLOGICAL ABUSE.

4. Q. What can you say about such allegations?

A. Her allegations are unfounded and baseless. The truth of the

matter being that, my son NIEL REY ZUASOLA works so hard in
a crew ship abroad in order to give the herein complainant and
their two daughters a better life and a brighter future.

5. Q. How about on the allegation that your son ignored the herein
complainant and their daughters, that even when the latter
were sick your son did not care for them?

A. The same is not true. She and their daughters are everything to
my son. My son even caused the renovation of their house in B-
16 L-66 Lessandra Heights Gran Europa, Lumbia Cagayan de
Oro City, by making an extension of such for their better
comfort.

6. Q. How about on the allegation that your son stopped supporting

them financially since July of 2019?

A. The same is also not true. The truth being that the herein
complainant has all the access of all his money. In fact he even
gave her the pincode of his account in Brightwell, an online
banking agency where my son’s monthly salaries are credited
to. More so, to belied the statements of the herein
complainant, is the Bank Statement of the Joint account of my
son the complainant which will show that in fact on
September 19, 2019, the latter withdrew an amount of Forty
Thousand from such account.

( Attached is the Bank Statement in BDO for the account no.

3160097255 as Annex 1, which shall form part of this Witness
Affidavit)

7. Q. Do you have anything else you want to say, if any?

A. I would like to stress out that, the alleged crime that was
accordingly committed by my son was done, while the herein
complainant was living in the house of my son located at Block
16 Lot 66 Lessandra Heights Gran Europa, Lumbia Cagayan de
Counter-Affidavit
Page 2 of 4
 Oro City. The City of Cebu in effect thereof, does not have the
jurisdiction over the instant complaint.

8. Q. Do you have anything else you want to say, if any?

A. The Complaint Affidavit filed by JUVELYN ALCANARA RAUTO,

is unfounded and nothing more than a scrap of paper. Lest she
forget that, the Honorable Office of the Public Prosecutor is an
institution well created only to protect the rights of every
individual and to serve justice only where justice is due. It is
never to be used as a means to put persons behind bars for
crimes they never commit. That it behooves to remind the
Honorable Investigating Prosecutor of the purpose of
Preliminary Investigation, thus: “This must be so, because the
purpose of a preliminary investigation or a previous inquiry of
some kind before an accused person is placed on trial, is to
secure the innocent against hasty, malicious and oppressive
prosecution, and to protect him from an open and public
accusation of a crime, from the trouble, expenses and anxiety
of public trial. It is also intended to protect the state from
having to conduct useless and expensive trials. While the right
is statutory rather than constitutional in its fundament, it is a
component part of due process in criminal justice. The right to
have a preliminary investigation conducted before being bound
over to trial for a criminal offense and hence formally at risk of
incarceration or some other penalty, is not a mere formal or
technical right; it is a substantive right. To deny the accused's
claim to a preliminary investigation would be to deprive him of
the full measure of his right to due process.” [Doromal vs.
Sandiganbayan, 177 SCRA 354 [1980]; Go vs. Court of Appeals,
206 SCRA 138 [1992]

9. Q. Do you attest to the truthfulness of all the foregoing statements?

A. Yes;

…………………………………………….......
AFFIANT FURTHER SAYETH NAUGHT.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature

this _____________, at Cagayan de Oro City, Philippines.

Counter-Affidavit
Page 3 of 4
 EMETERIA B. ZUASOLA
Affiant
SSS no. 08-0601235-7

SUBCRIBED and sworn to before me this ____________ at Cagayan

de Oro City, Philippines.

Doc. No.______;
Page No.______ ;
Book No.______ ;
Series of 2019

Copy furnished:

JUVELYN ALCANARA RAUTO

Block 3, Lot 10, Earnestine Homes
Subdivision Brgy. Babag, Lapu-Lapu City

LBC Tracking number:___________

Counter-Affidavit
Page 4 of 4