COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT OF RESPONDENT KAGAWAD xxx, IN RE: NPSD#-XV-04-INV.

xxx, ENTITLED xxx PENDING WITH THE OFFICE OF

THE CITY PROSECUTOR OF xxx CITY, FOR MALICIOUS MISCHIEF AND GRAVE COERCION

I, KAGAWAD xxx, of legal age, married, Filipino, and with postal address at c/o Barangay Hall, Barangay xxx, xxx Village, xxx, xxx
City, under oath, depose and state:
I am a respondent in the above-mentioned complaint. I am submitting this counter-affidavit to deny, rebut, and controvert the false,
malicious, and fabricated allegations against me stated in the complaint.
I am a senior Kagawad of my community, i.e., Barangay xxx, xxx City, which I have served with full dedication and selflessness for many
years now without any taint of dishonor, graft, corruption, abuse, malice, dishonesty, or misconduct.
The complainant xxx charges me with the alleged felonies of MALICIOUS MISCHIEF AND GRAVE COERCION for:
(a) The alleged destruction of her stair which was attached to the perimeter fence existing between xxx Village (which is a separate
Barangay) and xxxSubd. (which is under Barangay xxx) that separates the lot on which her main house was located and the lot on which
her second house was located, and
(b) The alleged destruction of her second house located on a lot adjoining the main lot on which her main house was located. It was
allegedly valued at P250,000.00.
The true and correct historical facts of the instant case are stated hereinbelow for the full appreciation of the Honorable Investigating
Prosecutor.
The true, lawful and registered owner of the subject real property (which is described as Lot xxx, Block xxx with an area of xxx square
meters and covered by TCT No. T-xxx issued on xxx 1994 by the Register of Deeds of xxx City) is a certain xxx, married to xxx, with postal
address at Unit xxx, xxx Townhomes, xxx St., xxx Village, xxx City.
A copy of the said TCT No. xxx is attached hereto as Annex A hereof.
At the lower end thereof appears the digital/computerized authentication of the said Register of Deeds that it is a true copy of the original
thereof.
The complainant and her husband (xxx) were in possession of a fake, spurious or falsified version of the same TCT No. xxx, which they
had used to deceive future lessees and other persons interested in the subject property by making it appear that they were the lawful
owners thereof.
A photocopy of the said fake, spurious and falsified TCT which bears the registered owner as xxx, married to xxx, residing at xxx St.,
xxx Village, xxx City, is attached as Annex B hereof.
Please note that the falsified and spurious version of the complainants TCTdoes not bear the official digital/computerized
authentication of the Register of Deeds.
Sometime in 2012 the registered owner xxx signed an unnotarized Special Power of Attorney authorizing his legal representative xxx to
sell the property and, in effect, to insure that the sad property was free from any and all issues and problems, like the presence of illegal
occupants or squatters, as a prelude to the smooth sale thereof to interested third parties.
Attached is a copy of the said unnotarized SPA, marked as Annex C hereof.
On xxx 2012, the said legal representative, xxx, issued a Letter-Authorizationto the board and officers of xxx HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION, which had jurisdiction over the subject property, empowering the Association to demolish and remove the illegally built
house of the complainant on the subject property, with the assurance that the said xxx would shoulder all liabilities or damages arising
out of any and all acts of the Association pursuant to the powers granted to it under the said Letter-Authorization.
A copy of the said Letter-Authorization, dated xxx 2012, is attached as Annex D hereof.
On xxx 2012, the said legal representative xxx issued, under oath, a follow-up Authorization reiterating the powers and instructions to the
said Association as previously stated in his Letter-Authorization, dated xxx 2012.
A copy of the said notarized Authorization, dated xxx 2012, is attached asAnnex E hereof.
The xxx HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION is duly recognized by the Barangay xxx as an entity. For instance, see the attached Barangay
Clearance, dated xxx 2012, issued by the Chairman of Barangay xxx, Hon. xxx, in re: cutting of obstructive ipil-ipil trees on the subject
property (Lot xxx, Block xxx). It is marked as Annex F hereof.

The stair of the complainant that she had illegally attached to the perimeter fence separating two (2) barangays -- xxx Village under Brgy.
xxx Village, where she actually lived, and the xxx Subd. under Brgy. xxx -- in order to enable her to access her illegally-built house
located on the subject property in the latter village (Lot xxx, Block xxx, xxx Subd.), was prohibited by existing city and barangay rules
because it was a great security risk that could be used by criminals and other suspicious elements to access one village from another
village to commit a crime to cause a disturbance of peace and order or to escape from one village to another village after committing such
a crime or disturbance of peace and order.
For instance, by way of analogy, in xxx City Ordinance No. xxx-02, the City and the Barangay xxx are very conscious of maintaining
orderliness by clearing public areas, which should include, by spirit and analogy, a perimeter fence of two (2) adjoining barangays. A copy
of the said ordinance is attached as Annex G hereof.
The lawful owner of the subject property, i.e., xxx, acting thru his legal representative, i.e., xxx, had previously sought in 2012 the
mediation and conciliation assistance of Barangay xxx to persuade the complainant to remove her illegally-built house on the subject
property, even to the point of offering her a financial assistance, but the complainant unjustly rejected the said offer. There was an
instance in the past where a meeting was held at the Office of the City Engineer, upon the prodding of the complainant, where the
complainant insisted on her unjust claims, hence, the said meeting produced no positive result.
Going back to the instant complaint, it will be noted that there is no single allegation therein which shows that I had a clear, direct,
personal, and actual participation in the removal of her stair and the demolition of her illegally built house.
All her allegations from Question No. 1 to Question No. 7 in her complaint do not mention or state my alleged direct, actual and personal
participate in the felonies she alleges against me.
The only allegation that the complainant has made to directly implicate me appears in Question No. 8 where she allegedly talked to me
over the phone about her stair -- an allegation which I vehemently deny, the truth of the matter being that I have never talked to the
complainant over the phone about such matter.
It will be noted that aside from her bare and empty allegations, she has offered no documentary evidence or supporting statements from
credible witnesses to show my direct, actual, and personal participation in the felonies she alleges against me.
For whatever worth it may be, attached is a copy of the photos of the subject illegally-built house (a squatters shanty, actually) of the
complainant, marked as Annex H hereof.
Its condition, appearance, and appraisal would never reach the alleged value of P250,000. Further, it will be noted from the photos that the
house was not destroyed, although it appears that its roof and windows were missing.
1.

As to the charge of malicious mischief, Art. 327 of the Rev. Penal Code provides that there must be clear and positive proof that the guilty
partydeliberately cause to the property of another any damage not falling within the terms of the next preceding chapter.
There is no evidence presented by the complainant that I DELIBERATELY CAUSED DAMAGE to her property.
Article 286 of the Rev. Penal Code provides that the guilty party in a case for grave coercion must have committed the following act, to
wit: any person who, without authority of law, shall, by means of violence, prevent another from doing something not prohibited by law,
or compel him to do something against his will, whether it be right or wrong.
There is no positive and convincing evidence on record that I used violence to prevent the complainant from doing something, or that
I used violence to compel her to do something.