REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR

,
Complainant, NPSD No.
-versus-

,
Respondents.
X- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x

SUPPLEMENTAL COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT TO THE

SUPPLEMENTAL COMPLAINT

I, , after having sworn to in accordance with law hereby depose and

state the following statements in English, fully conscious that I may face
criminal liability for false testimony or perjury, to wit:

1. I am the respondent in the above-entitled case before the

Honorable Office of the City Prosecutor, for the alleged violation
of Art. 171 & 172 of the Revised Penal Code.

2. On 03 September 2020, I filed a Counter-Affidavit denying all the

substantial allegations to the main Complaint-Affidavit.

3. Upon review of the Supplemental Counter-Affidavit with attached

affidavits of the witnesses, it is apparent that the same was filed
to put a leverage to achieve unwarranted result and expose me to
vexatious criminal prosecution as the allegations therein are
hearsay, baseless, and irrelevant. Thus, deserves outright
dismissal of this Honorable Office.

4. While I admit the allegations in paragraph 2 of the Sinumpaang

Salaysay of witnesses before which I eventually left for some
personal reasons.

5. The witnesses maintain in paragraph 3 of their Sinumpaang

Salaysay that xxx never had any single child, such allegation is
baseless and irrelevant. As previously pointed in paragraphs 12
and 13 of my counter-affidavit, the claim that xxx never had any
single child, even if true, is baseless and irrelevant. To
emphasize, whether or not xxxx had any single child is not
determinative in finding that I am guilty of falsification. To
reiterate, it is illogical to think that the allegation that xxx never
had any single child, along with the complaint for falsification
against me will automatically make me the author of the alleged

Page 1 of 3
 falsified document. Worse, guilty in the instant complaint. To
insist, would run counter the basic principles of fairness and logic.

6. I admit the allegations of the witnesses in paragraph 5 of their

Sinumpaang Salaysay.

7. I specifically deny the allegations of the witnesses in paragraph 6

of their Sinumpaang Salaysay. It should be borne in mind that
aside from their allegations, the witnesses failed to adduce
evidence to support their claim. Neither there exists sufficient
basis for the filing of the complaint for falsification. My counsel
advised me that in the case of Morales vs. Carpio-Morales, et
al.,1 the Supreme Court emphasized that:

“Xxx The basic rule is that mere allegation is not

evidence and is not equivalent to proof. Charges based
on mere suspicion and speculation likewise cannot be
given credence. When the complainant relies on mere
conjectures and suppositions, and fails to substantiate his
allegations, the complaint must be dismissed for lack of
merit.”

8. It is worthy to emphasize that jurisprudence requires the

complainant to substantiate his allegations, otherwise the
complaint must be dismissed for lack of merit. In the instant
complaint, the witnesses allege that my daughter is the same
person but failed to substantiate the same. Further, witnesses
have bereft of personal knowledge of the allegations. Even
though witnesses personally met my daughter this cannot be
equated with personal knowledge of the facts which gave rise to
the complainant’s cause of action. Clearly, witnesses’ belief does
not constitute proof. Neither is sufficient to charge me for
falsification. Thus, dismissal of the complaint is proper.
9. I specifically deny the allegations in paragraph 7 of the
Sinumpaang Salaysay of witnesses xxxxx for being irrelevant and
baseless. Witnesses failed to adduce any evidence to support the
allegations and even if true, it does not in any way related to the
instant complaint or sufficient to indict me of the crime of
falsification. It should be noted that while liking a certain post or
picture on Facebook would mean that you appreciate such a post
or picture, it should not be interpreted or given such scope or
extent that you concurred with such post or picture therein. I was
advised by my counsel that, the concept of relevance is clearly
one of logic. It deals with the rational relationship between the
evidence and the fact to be proved. In other words, the evidence
adduced should be directed to the matters in dispute and any
evidence which has neither direct nor indirect relationship to such

1
G.R. No. 208086, July 27, 2016, Emphasis supplied

Page 2 of 3
 2
matters must be set aside as irrelevant. Thus, the allegations
deserve dcredence.
10. Finally, it should be emphasized that while the allegations of the
witnesses are all the same both as to content and form, the same
were unsubstantiated by evidence. Thus, the allegations have no
leg to stand on and warrant the dismissal of the instant complaint.
11. I executed this Counter-Affidavit to attest to the truth of all the
foregoing.

Further Affiants Sayeth Naught.

2
Willard B. Riano, Evidence (The Bar Lecture Series), 2013 Edition, p. 19

Page 3 of 3