Enrile sues Ong for Libel---let's analyze

Senate president Juan Ponce Enrile has just filed a libel case against Yoly Villanueva-Ong, a professional communicator and columnist of Philippine Star over what Enrile described as "malicious insinuations" that Ong wrote in her column. In his complaint, Enrile cited these reasons why he believes Ong wrote a very libelous piece. I lifted this from Rappler.com.

"Enrile took offense in the following paragraphs in Ong's article. (Emphasis supplied in Enrile's complaint.)

Just when we were about to forgive-and-forget Juan Ponce Enrile's checkered past, he himself reminded us of what a wily, shifty chameleon he truly and naturally is.

In Juan Ponce Enrile: A Memoir, and bio-documentary 'Johnny' that aired in ABS-CBN --- he recants his previous recantation of the assassination attempt on him, which Marcos used as one more reason to justify Martial Law xxx Did he expect national amnesia to afflict Filipinos who know the truth?

In his attempt to leave an acceptable legacy for posterity and bequeath a Senate seat for junior, the nonagenarian is sanitizing his recollections instead of asking for absolution. Stem cell therapy can deter dementia but it cannot regenerate an innocent man. 

We are being wooed to perpetuate the 40-years-running Enrile saga. Every night we should pray: Dear God, Make all who want our vote, be the men we want them to be.

Another misdeed associated with father-and-son is the alleged rampant car smuggling in Port Irene. In 1995, the Cagayan Export Zone Authority (CEZA) was established through Republic Act 7922, authored by Cagayan native JPE xxx Despite EO156 issued in 2008, which prohibited such importations, smuggling continued. Enrile countered the CEZA is not covered by the prohibition because the importers pay the correct duties and taxes. Ford reportedly pulled out its manufacturing business to protest the nefarious activities in CEZA."

The first "libelous" topic was Enrile's recent memoir where the octogenarian legislator recanted his earlier pronouncements in public about his alleged "assasination" attempt which eventually led to Martial law in 1972. Enrile said the assassination was not a fluke, but it did, indeed, happened.

Okey. So, is Enrile now saying that the basis why he and his fellow RAM members went out in the streets and took refuge in Camp Aguinaldo in 1986 was a naked grab of power, and not as what he earlier told the public then, was a clean separation from a regime of lies?

Remember that Enrile used this "assasination" thing as one of his reasons why he left Marcos in the first place, accusing his former boss of lying to the public about this. The people back then believed him and that absolved him from the sins he committed while he served as Marcos' defense minister. Enrile was responsible for countless deaths during Martial law but he never was tried for any of these things because he took part in EDSA uno that caused the fall of the dictator.

So, is Enrile now saying that the things he did during Martial law were all true and he does not feel that he should be remorseful for all of these things? That he masterminded the biggest failed experiment in political management is all true, therefore, he should be made accountable for all the deaths and the vile things that led this country into the darkest recesses of economic stagnation. We are still paying for the failures they did during Martial law. Enrile should actually be made accountable to all these.

Now, is Ong liable for libel when she countered what Enrile wrote in his memoirs? Is faking someone's assassination a crime? No. There is no provision in the Revised Penal Code for this. Therefore, Ong's charge that Enrile lied in faking his assassination is not a libelous thing. Libel only happens when someone directly accuses somebody of committing a crime. In this case, Ong is just trying to reveal to the public the disparity between Enrile's earlier public pronouncement and his present one.

The second charge is pretty much a tightrope act. Ong wrote of an alleged "misdeed" that Enrile and his son Jackie, committed and it is about car smuggling. Ong said that the Enriles control most of the activities of the Cagayan Export Zone Authority. Did Ong accused Enrile of direct smuggling? No. Ong just said that there was this incident in the past which Enrile did which frustrated an importer, Ford. She was never really clear why smuggling was involved there, only insinuated that this illicit activity happened.

I don't know with you, but a mere insinuation without backing it up with concrete evidence is bordering on libel.