How to Write and File a Counter-Affidavit in a Cyber Libel Case (Philippines)

This is practical legal information for educational use, centered on Philippine rules and common prosecutorial practice. It’s not a substitute for advice from your lawyer, who can tailor strategy to your facts.

Quick primer: what “cyber libel” is and why the counter-affidavit matters

Cyber libel is libel committed “through a computer system” (e.g., social media, blogs, websites, messaging apps). It borrows the elements of libel under the Revised Penal Code (RPC)—(1) defamatory imputation, (2) publication, (3) identification, (4) malice—and applies a higher penalty because it used information and communications technology.

When someone files a complaint-affidavit against you, the public prosecutor conducts a preliminary investigation (Rule 112, Rules of Criminal Procedure). You’ll receive a subpoena with copies of the complaint and annexes, directing you to file a counter-affidavit—your sworn, written defense with evidence. This is your first—and often best—chance to prevent a criminal case from reaching court.

The timeline at a glance

Receipt of subpoena (Day 0).
- It should attach the complaint-affidavit and annexes.
Filing deadline: 10 days from receipt to submit your counter-affidavit (standard Rule 112 timeline).
- You may request a brief extension in writing (typically 5–10 days) before the deadline; it’s discretionary with the prosecutor.
Rejoinders/Sur-rejoinders: at the prosecutor’s discretion, usually short deadlines.
Resolution: prosecutor issues a Resolution (dismissal or finding of probable cause), and if for filing, an Information may be filed in court.

If arrested and undergoing inquest, you can (a) insist on inquest, or (b) waive Article 125 rights and ask for a regular preliminary investigation—then file a counter-affidavit within the period set by the inquest prosecutor (often 10 days).

What the prosecutor is looking for

Do the elements of cyber libel appear from admissible evidence?
Is there probable cause—not proof beyond reasonable doubt, but credible facts suggesting a crime was probably committed and you probably committed it?
Are there defenses (legal or factual) that negate elements or create reasonable doubt at this early stage?
Jurisdiction/venue and timeliness (prescription) issues.
Authenticity and reliability of electronic evidence attached by both sides.

Core defenses commonly raised in cyber libel counter-affidavits

Tailor these to your facts. Back each point with evidence.

No defamatory imputation
- The statement is value-laden opinion, hyperbole, or fair comment on matters of public interest—not a false statement of fact.
No publication
- It was not communicated to a third person (e.g., a message visible only to the complainant).
- For private group chats: clarify membership, visibility settings, and access limits.
No identification
- The statement doesn’t identify the complainant expressly or by clear implication recognizable to third persons.
Truth + good motives / justifiable ends
- For criminal libel, truth alone is not enough. Show (a) the imputation is substantially true and (b) you acted with good motives and for justifiable ends (e.g., whistleblowing, consumer protection).
Privilege
- Absolutely privileged (e.g., statements in pleadings filed in court, within scope).
- Qualified privilege (e.g., fair commentaries on public officials/figures, communications made in the performance of a legal/moral duty). If qualified, malice is not presumed; the complainant must prove actual malice.
Lack of malice
- Explain context, absence of ill-will, attempts to verify, reliance on official documents, or prompt corrections/apologies when notified.
Factual misattribution / authorship
- You did not author, publish, or cause the content to be posted (consider account compromise, impersonation, or fake pages).
Defects in electronic evidence
- Screenshots without URLs/timestamps/origin data; altered/edited images; missing metadata; lack of proper authentication.
Improper venue or lack of jurisdiction
- For written defamation, venue traditionally ties to place of first publication, or the offended party’s residence (with nuances for public officials). For online content, raise concrete facts showing the venue chosen does not fit the rules.
Prescription

Argue if the complaint was filed beyond the applicable prescriptive period counted from publication (there are competing views for cyber libel; flag your computation and the rule you rely on).

Evidence: how to handle “electronic” proof

For your defense evidence (and when attacking the complainant’s):

Capture comprehensively: full-page screenshots with visible URL, account handle, date/time, and visibility settings; include print-to-PDF versions; save original files.
Metadata & logs: where available, retain device timestamps, file properties, and server logs.
Authentication: identify who took the screenshots, how, and when; describe steps ensuring they are unaltered.
Ephemeral communications (DMs, chats, stories): describe access, participants, and context; export conversation histories if platforms allow.
Translations: if posts are in Filipino or another language, include faithful translations with the translator’s details.
Third-party corroboration: affidavits of page admins, recipients, or witnesses; business records; official certifications.

You don’t need to prove your case fully at this stage, but attach enough reliable proof to negate an element or undercut credibility of the complaint.

How to structure your counter-affidavit

A. Caption & title

Office of the City/Provincial Prosecutor, City/Province
NPS Docket No. (from subpoena, if assigned)
Complainant vs. Your Name, for Cyber Libel
Title: COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT

B. Introduction / personal details

Full name, age, citizenship, address, and a line that you’re executing the affidavit to oppose the complaint for cyber libel.

C. Preliminary matters

Date you received the subpoena; timely filing statement.
Statement that you reviewed the complaint and annexes.
If counsel appears, enter counsel’s details and address for service.

D. Narrative and defenses (organized, numbered paragraphs)

Background facts: neutral timeline, context of the post(s), audience, and platform settings.
Specific denials/admissions: address each material allegation; avoid evasive denials.
Element-by-element defenses:
- Defamation: explain opinion vs fact; context; hyperbole.
- Publication: visibility; who saw it; private vs public.
- Identification: show lack of reference to complainant.
- Malice: show good faith; due care; corrections.
Affirmative defenses: truth with good motives; privilege; authorship denial; lack of venue/jurisdiction; prescription.
Electronic-evidence objections: point out alterations, missing metadata, lack of authentication; request that unreliable exhibits be disregarded.

E. Prayer

Ask that the complaint be dismissed for lack of probable cause.
Ask that inadmissible/unauthenticated electronic exhibits be disregarded.
Other appropriate relief.

F. Attachments (Annexes)

Label as Annex “1”, “2”… with brief exhibit captions (e.g., “Annex 1 – Screenshot of post showing private audience and timestamp”).
Include Affidavits of witnesses who can authenticate electronic evidence.

G. Verification/Jurat

Sign the affidavit and annex pagination.
Subscribe and swear before the investigating prosecutor or any officer authorized to administer oaths. The officer should certify you personally appeared, were personally examined, and affirmed you understood and voluntarily executed the affidavit.

Drafting tips that prosecutors appreciate

Be concise but complete: avoid rhetoric; stick to facts and law.
Cite elements explicitly and map facts to them.
Use screenshots that show the whole context (not cropped accusations).
Avoid new defamatory statements inside your affidavit.
Number paragraphs and pages; use clear exhibit labels.
Professional tone—even if the complaint is hostile.

Filing: where, how many copies, and service

Where to file: the Office of the City/Provincial Prosecutor stated in the subpoena (usually where the complaint was filed).
How many: prepare at least (i) one copy for the docket, (ii) one for the investigating prosecutor, and (iii) one for each complainant, plus (iv) one for your file. Some offices ask for a USB or e-copy—check the subpoena or call the docket section.
How to file: personal filing at the prosecutor’s receiving section is safest. If allowed, courier or email/e-filing per local guidelines (attach proof of transmission).
Proof of timely filing: secure a received copy with date/time stamp, or retain official acknowledgment for e-filing.

The prosecutor usually serves your counter-affidavit on the complainant; if you serve directly, note it on the pleading and keep proof of service.

After you file

Expect a rejoinder cycle (optional, at the prosecutor’s discretion).
The prosecutor will issue a Resolution:
- Dismissal (case closed at the PI level).
- Probable cause (Information filed in court).
If probable cause is found, consider Petition for Review (Department of Justice) or Motion for Reconsideration at the prosecutor’s office, within prescribed periods.
If an Information is filed, you’ll be arraigned in the trial court unless the case is quashed or dismissed earlier.

Special issues unique to online content (raise them if they fit)

Authorship and control
- If pages are managed by teams, clarify who had posting rights. Provide logs/records showing you didn’t post or that the account was compromised.
“Shares,” “likes,” and re-posts
- Distinguish original creation from passive interaction. Explain how your conduct does not satisfy authorship/publication as charged.
Context and thread history
- Provide larger thread captures to show provocation, contextual meaning, or subsequent clarifications/corrections.
Geography and venue for online content
- Explain where you and the complainant resided when the post was made and who could access it, to show venue defects if any.
Prescription (limitations)
- Compute from date of publication (or first access). Given varying views for cyber libel, present your computation clearly and ask for dismissal if time-barred.

Ethical and practical cautions

Do not delete posts after receiving subpoena; it can be portrayed as spoliation. Instead, preserve content and settings.
Mind data privacy: redact sensitive numbers in IDs while keeping them recognizable.
Don’t harass or contact the complainant outside counsel-to-counsel channels.
Consistency matters: ensure your narrative aligns with any public posts, emails, and messages that can surface.

Checklists

Same-day checklist (upon receiving the subpoena)

Calendar the 10-day deadline; diarize a buffer two days earlier.
Read the complaint and annexes; list each allegation to answer.
Secure counsel (recommended).
Start evidence preservation (screens, PDFs, exports, device backups).
Draft or request an extension if needed—before the deadline.

Counter-affidavit assembly checklist

Caption + NPS number; your complete details.
Clear, numbered paragraphs; element-by-element defenses.
Prayer for dismissal; reservations of rights.
Proper jurat; attach government-issued ID photocopy if office practice requires.
Annexes with labels and exhibit captions; witness affidavits.
Set of copies (docket, prosecutor, per complainant, your file).
USB/e-copy if required.

Frequently asked questions

Q: Can I ignore the subpoena? A: No. If you fail to file, the prosecutor may resolve the case based only on the complaint, which greatly increases the risk of an adverse finding.

Q: Do I need to appear personally? A: You must personally appear before the administering officer for the jurat (unless specific e-oath procedures are in place). Your counsel can file the papers, but you must swear to your affidavit.

Q: Can I attach new evidence later? A: Try to attach everything now. You can sometimes include additional evidence with a rejoinder or motion for reconsideration, but don’t bank on a second chance.

Q: English or Filipino? A: Either is acceptable. If you use another language, include an accurate translation.

Q: What if the complainant took my words out of context? A: Attach the full thread and explain context. Prosecutors understand how snippets can mislead.

A clean template you can adapt

(Use this only as a starting point—fit the facts, keep it concise, and ensure the lawyering choices match your strategy.)

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
OFFICE OF THE CITY/PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR
[City/Province]

NPS Docket No. __________

[NAME OF COMPLAINANT],
    Complainant,
                                   For: CYBER LIBEL
        - versus -

[YOUR NAME],
    Respondent.
x----------------------------------------------x

                          COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT

I, [Name], of legal age, [civil status], [citizenship], and residing at
[complete address], after having been duly sworn, depose and state:

1. I received on [date] a Subpoena in the above-entitled case with copies
   of the Complaint-Affidavit and annexes. I am filing this Counter-Affidavit
   within the period allowed.

2. I DENY the material allegations of the Complaint for the reasons below.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

3. [Brief, chronological, neutral narration of events and the online post(s),
   including platform, date/time, audience/visibility, and subsequent actions.]

DEFENSES

4. No defamatory imputation. [Explain opinion/fair comment/context.]

5. No publication. [Explain private message/limited audience/etc.]

6. No identification. [Explain absence of reference or recognizability.]

7. Lack of malice; truth and good motives/justifiable ends. [Explain.]

8. Privileged communication. [If applicable, explain and cite basis.]

9. Authorship/jurisdiction/venue/prescription/electronic-evidence defects.
   [Tailored, concise points.]

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, I respectfully pray that the Complaint for
Cyber Libel be DISMISSED for lack of probable cause. I likewise pray that
inadmissible or unauthenticated electronic exhibits be disregarded.

[Optional: Other relief just and equitable.]

[City], Philippines, [date].

                                    [Signature]
                                    [Printed Name]
                                    Respondent

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this [date] at [place]. I have personally
examined the affiant who exhibited to me his/her competent evidence of identity
[ID type and number], and I am satisfied that he/she voluntarily executed and
understood the foregoing Counter-Affidavit.

[Signature over printed name]
[Investigating Prosecutor/Officer Authorized to Administer Oaths]

Smart strategy notes (what often makes the difference)

Lead with your strongest dispositive point. If no publication or no identification, say it first and show it with a crisp exhibit.
Don’t over-plead every imaginable defense. Focus on 1–3 strongest grounds and support them well.
Authenticate, authenticate, authenticate. Many cyber libel complaints fail because screenshots are bare; turn that to your advantage by explaining the gaps.
Ask for extension early if you need time to gather digital records or affidavits—prosecutors are more receptive when you’re proactive and polite.
Consider parallel remedies: e.g., ask platforms to preserve records; prepare for a possible Petition for Review if needed.

Final word

A well-built counter-affidavit is precise, evidence-anchored, and legally framed around the elements. If you can knock out even one element (or seriously undermine the complainant’s electronic proof), dismissal at the preliminary investigation stage is realistic. If you’re unsure about venue, prescription, or privilege in your specific scenario, get counsel—those issues can be case-dispositive.