SC allows newspaper columnist to pursue counterclaim vs. Enrile in libel suit

The Supreme Court (SC) has allowed newspaper columnist Yolanda Ong to pursue her counterclaim against former Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile in connection with the libel case he filed against her in 2012.

In a ruling, the SC First Division reversed the Court of Appeals' decision in 2014 that upheld the Pasay City Regional Trial Court Branch 118's move to block her counterclaim worth P88 million on technicalities.

Enrile filed the P31-million libel suit against Ong over the article “Like father, like son?” published on the Philippine Star on October 26, 2012.

The column supposedly characterized Enrile as a liar, fraud, and manipulator, and accused him of attempting to revise history to support the candidacy of his son, then-Cagayan Representative Juan “Jack” Ponce Enrile, Jr., in the 2013 senatorial elections.

Enrile's son, however, did not win.

Ong then filed a counterclaim for a total of P88 million in damages and P1 million in attorney’s fees, saying the libel suit was meant to "intimidate and silence" her and other journalists and "to place a chilling effect" on their ability to write about Enrile's public conduct on matters of public concern.

Enrile filed a motion to dismiss and argued that Ong’s counterclaims are actually permissive, thus she should have complied with the requirements of an initiatory pleading, specifically the payment of docket fees and certification against forum shopping.

The Pasay court, in its April 26, 2013 order, directed Ong to pay the appropriate docket fees, otherwise, such counterclaims would be dismissed.

Ong appealed to the CA but lost. She then turned to the SC, which ruled in her favor on November 22, 2017.  

“We find that petitioner’s claims are compulsory, and hence should be resolved along with the civil complaint filed by respondent, without the necessity of complying with the requirements for initiatory pleadings,” the decision stated, a copy of which was released to the media only on Wednesday.

“Indeed, a perfunctory reading of respondent’s allegations in support of her counterclaims refers to incidental facts or issues related to her counterclaim against petitioner. She alleges that respondent unduly singled her out, and is actually violating her legal and constitutional rights," it added.

The SC also held that the counterclaim is intertwined with the libel case that it is "incapable of proceeding independently."

Associate Justice Noel Tijam penned the decision that was concurred in by Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno and Associate Justices Teresita Leonardo-De Castro, Mariano Del Castillo, and Francis Jardeleza. —KBK, GMA News