This columnist, while preparing this issue inside the District Jail in Del Rosario, Naga City, is reprinting below the letter of compliance submitted by the Bicol Mail to the order of RTC Judge Filemon Montenegro to explain why no contempt charge should be filed against the publisher, the editor, and the editorial consultant of this tabloid.

Republic of the Philippines
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
5th Judicial Region
BRANCH 26
Naga City

Civil Case No. RTC’2005-0030

HEIRS OF JOSE MARIANO AND
HELEN S. MARIANO, ET AL.,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
- versus -

CITY OF NAGA
Defendant-Appellee.
x-----------------------------------------x

C O M P L I A N C E

COME NOW now Jose B. Perez, Nilo P. Aureus and Liberato S. Aureus, Editor, Publisher and Editorial Consultant, respectively, of the BICOL MAIL, and by way of complying with latest Order of the Honorable for them to explain and show cause why they should not be held in contempt of Court, most respectfully allege:

There was never an intention to malign or interfere. –

a. The banner headline and the news items in connection therewith are clearly copied, quoted or reproduced from the lawful sources, to wit:

The Oral and formal Manifestations of counsel for the City of Naga at the hearing last 18 July 2005;

The Pleadings, specially the Manifestations and Formal Offer of Evidence by said counsel filed with the Court most specially Par. 9, referring to the offer of Exhs. “2” and “2-A”, and the latter reads:

“Malaking pera an involved dito sa sabingmillion daw ang tinanggap ni Judge.”

b. There was never a deviation, change, alteration from said public records made in the news items in question and what were contained in the other portions of the news item was a chronological sequence and incident of the proceedings had before the Honorable Court in connection with the hearing of the above-entitled case;

c. There was also no additional discussion. The news items had no independent discussion on the merit or demerit of the pleadings and manifestations filed in Court which is shown clearly in the published item, consequently, the same was never intended to interfere with the proceedings and to influence the Honorable Court in its decision making;

d. Adverse findings not published. – The BICOL MAIL conducted its own private investigation regarding the matter and there were adverse information gathered against the Honorable Presiding Judge, but in keeping with responsible Reporting in accordance with the Ethics of Journalism, the same were not published;

e. The above news items were made based on public records and in open public hearings without the lest intention of maligning the Honorable Presiding Judge but as a bounden duty to inform the public of what was happening in a very case affecting the general welfare of the public in Naga City.

f. No Complaint. – In this particular incident of Indirect Contempt, there was no proper complaint filed as required by Sec. 3, Rule 71 as defined under Sec. 2, Rule 110 of the Revised Rules on Civil Procedure.

WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed that the foregoing explanation be considered legally sufficient and that herein respondents be absolved of any liability arising out or in connection with the publication of the news item in question.

Naga City, July 19, 2005.


(SGD.) NILO P. AUREUS
(SGD.) JOSE B. PEREZ Publisher Editor
(SGD.) LIBERATO S. AUREUS
Editorial Consultant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 19th day of July, Naga City.

Notary Public
Until Dec. 31, 2006
PTR ________

Doc. No. ____
Page No. ____
Book No. ____
Series of 2005