Counter Affidavit

Republic of the Philippines
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
National Prosecution Services
Office of the Prosecutor General
DOJ Building
P. Faura St., Manila
YSABEL MIAGAO,
Complainant
-versus- I. S. No. 07-N-2020
ALBERTO MIAGAO,
Respondent
x------------------------------------x
COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT
I, ALBERTO MIAGAO, of legal age, Filipino, married, with

residential address at 123 Judgmental St., Katarungan Subdivision,
Sobrana, Manila, after having been duly sworn to in accordance with law,
hereby depose and state:
1. I am the husband of Ysabel Miagao, the complainant, in the subject

cases for falsification of a private document, bigamy, rape,
attempted rape, illegal possession of firearms, and disbarment.
2. I am the person who is charged with the crimes mentioned in the

preceding number.
3. There is no truth to any of the accusations against me as will be

discussed hereunder.
4. The complainant accuses me of falsifying a private document

under Article 172, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code.
Allegedly, I authored the falsification of a deed, particularly an
Authority to Sell Property, relative to an estate in Makati which was
owned by the late spouses Mario and Flordeliz Marquez,
complainant’s parents. A copy of the said Authority to Sell Property
purportedly shows that the same was executed by Mario Marquez
in my favor and that the property subject thereat has already been
sold to a certain Jose Sebastian.
5. To begin with, the estate in Makati was jointly owned by the late
spouses Mario and Flordeliz Marquez. Hence, Mario Marquez alone
has no authority to execute such an Authority to Sell Property
(deed). Secondly, Mario Marquez could not have possibly executed
in June 2013 the said deed as he and Flordeliz died in a car
accident in March 2013. To be sure, such deed is spurious.
Further, during the testate proceedings of the spouses Mario and
Flordeliz Marquez where the property subject of the spurious deed
had been adjudged solely in favor of Manuel to the prejudice of my
would-be wife then, I would not have opposed the same if truly I
had a part in the disposition of the said property. Aside from that
questionable deed, there is dearth of evidence implicating me to the
disposition or sale of the said property.
6. Article 172, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code provides that

“falsification by a private individual is done when such private
individual had committed any of the falsifications enumerated in the
next preceding article in any public or official document or letter of
exchange or any other kind of commercial document.”
7. Here, as hereinabove stated, I had no participation at all in the

disposition of the property in Makati nor had I falsified the Authority
to Sell Property which deed I even brand as spurious. Thus, the
imputed act of falsification that I allegedly committed by causing to
appear that persons have participated in any act or proceedings
when they did not so in fact participate has no leg to stand on.
8. With regard to the accusation of bigamy, the same is unfounded.

Yes, I admit that I was married to Carmen on June 12, 2011 in civil
rites. However, such marriage was declared a nullity in September
2014 as it was solemnized without a marriage license. A copy of the
Decision of the trial court declaring the nullity of our marriage and a
certificate of its finality is attached as Annexes “1” and “2,”
respectively, for ready reference.
9. Article 349 of the Revised Penal Code provides that a person can
be criminally responsible for the crime of bigamy if: 1) the offender
is legally married; 2) the marriage has not been nullified, or the
absent spouse could not yet be presumed dead based on the Civil
Code; 3) a second or subsequent marriage is contracted and has
met all the requisites for validity. This provision is not applicable to
me as my first marriage has been declared a nullity by the court
before I married Ysabel.
10. The Family Code pertinently provides that the formal requisites
of marriage are, inter alia, a valid marriage license except in the
cases provided for therein. Complementarily, it declares that the
absence of any of the essential or formal requisites shall generally
render the marriage void ab initio and that, while an irregularity in
the formal requisites shall not affect the validity of the marriage,
the party or parties responsible for the irregularity shall be civilly,
criminally and administratively liable.1
11. Article 4 of the Family Code is clear when it says, "The

absence of any of the essential or formal requisites shall render the
1
Cosca v. Palaypayon, A.M. No. MTJ-92-721, September 30, 1994
marriage void ab initio, except as stated in Article 35(2)." Article
35(3) of the Family Code also provides that a marriage solemnized
without a license is void from the beginning, except those
exempted from the license requirement under Articles 27 to 34,
Chapter 2, Title I of the same Code. Again, this marriage cannot be
characterized as among the exemptions, and thus, having been
solemnized without a marriage license, is void ab initio. 2
12. With regard to the allegation of rape and attempted rape of my

stepdaughter Bernadette hurled against me, I cannot and will never
do such a beastly thing. First, I treat my stepdaughters as my own
flesh and blood. Second, during the alleged dates according to the
police report the rape happened on (July 26, 2013) and attempted
rape (July 19-20, 2013), and even the near dates before and after
those, I was in Davao. Hence the impossibility of my committing
such crimes. To substantiate my claim, attached as Annexes “3-20”
are copies of my plane tickets as well as the airlines’ manifest of
passengers showing that I was in Davao on the days prior, during
and after the alleged dates of rape. Third, Bernadette has a
boyfriend who stays in our house even when I and Ysabel are not
there. There is then no discounting that Bernadette’s boyfriend could
have fathered her child. To substantiate my claims, I am attaching
herewith a flash drive as Annex “21” that has the copy of our CCTV
camera showing everyday timestamps that Bernadette’s boyfriend
has been seeing my stepdaughter, Bernadette, almost every day,
and has been staying until wee hours in the morning. There is even
a part in the video wherein Bernadette while crying, slapped her
boyfriend on the face, yelled at him, and pushed him to the car; the
latter only wearing boxer shorts. Just to emphasize my innocence, I
would even dare Bernadette to have her child undergo DNA test to
prove once and for all the paternity of the child. Clearly, Republic Act
No. 8353 ("The Anti-Rape Law of 1997") 3, cannot be used against
2
Abbas v. Abbas, G.R. No.183896, January 30, 2013
3
Rep. Act No. 8353 (1997), available at https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1997/ra_8353_1997.html#:~:text=%2D%20Any%20physical
me.
13. As regards the accusation of illegal possession of firearms for
allegedly having threatened to kill Bernadette and her mother with a
gun not licensed, I vehemently deny the same. I am a morally
upright person and I do not own or possess any gun. I am really in a
quandary why Bernadette would accuse me of that knowing that
there is no truth in it. All I know is that she never wanted me to be
her stepfather and this is how I perceive she wanted to get rid of me.
However, there is overwhelming evidence of my innocence as may
be gleaned from the disquisitions herein which is substantiated by
concrete evidence. Evidently, illegal possession of firearms as
provided for in Republic Act No. 10591 ("Comprehensive Firearms
and Ammunition Regulation Act")4 will not prosper.
14. Finally, as none of these accusations are true, the disbarment

case against me must likewise be dismissed. Contrary to the
submission of complainant, I should not be disbarred on the grounds
of grossly immoral conduct and unmitigated violation of the lawyer’s
oath for the acts I have not committed in the first place.
CANON 1 - A LAWYER SHALL UPHOLD THE
CONSTITUTION, OBEY THE LAWS OF THE LAND AND
PROMOTE RESPECT FOR LAW OF AND LEGAL
PROCESSES.
Rule 1.01 - A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest,

immoral or deceitful conduct.
CANON 7 - A LAWYER SHALL AT ALL TIMES UPHOLD

THEINTEGRITY AND DIGNITY OF THE LEGAL
PROFESSION AND SUPPORT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE
INTEGRATED BAR.
Rule 7.03 - A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that
%20overt%20act%20manifesting,under%20Article%20266%2DA.%22 (last visited December 10, 2020)

4
Rep. Act No. 10591 (2013), available at https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2013/ra_10591_2013.html#:~:text=Short%20Title.,Section
%202.&text=The%20State%20also%20recognizes%20the,circumstances%2C%20the%20use%20of%20firearms (last visited December 10, 2020)
adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law, nor shall he
whether in public or private life, behave in a scandalous
manner to the discredit of the legal profession.
CANON 10 - A LAWYER OWES CANDOR, FAIRNESS AND

GOOD FAITH TO THE COURT.
Rule 10.01 - A lawyer shall not do any falsehood, nor consent

to the doing of any in Court; nor shall he mislead, or allow the
Court to be misled by any artifice.
CANON 16 - A LAWYER SHALL HOLD IN TRUST ALL

MONEYS AND PROPERTIES OF HIS CLIENT THAT MAY
COME INTO HIS PROFESSION.
Rule 16.03 - A lawyer shall deliver the funds and property of

his client when due or upon demand. However, he shall have a
lien over the funds and may apply so much thereof as may be
necessary to satisfy his lawful fees and disbursements, giving
notice promptly thereafter to his client. He shall also have a
lien to the same extent on all judgments and executions he
has secured for his client as provided for in the Rules of Court.
Accordingly, I did not violate the Code of Professional

Responsibility.5 I reiterate that none of the accusations, that
constitute grossly immoral conduct, imputed against me are true. I
have always upheld the sworn lawyer’s oath. I know the duties and
burden attributed to the legal profession and I have duly sworn to
always observe and adhere to them.
15. More importantly, the charges of falsification, bigamy, rape,

attempted rape, and illegal possession of firearms, and disbarment
against me will not prosper since these things allegedly happened in
2013 as per the complaint. Ysabel married me in 2015. She could
not have married me if these were all true.
5
Code of Professional Responsibility (1988), available at https://www.chanrobles.com/codeofprofessionalresponsibility.html#.X9K8GGgzZPY
(last visited December 11, 2020)
16. I am executing this affidavit to attest to the truthfulness of the
foregoing narration/circumstances and to maintain my innocence in
all these baseless allegations.
AFFIANT FURTHER SAYETH NAUGHT.
ALBERTO MIAGAO
Affiant
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 30th day of

September 2019 at the City of Manila.
JUSTICIA O. PALAGE
Assistant City Prosecutor
CERTIFICATION
I HEREBY CERTIFY that I have personally examined the affiant

and that I am satisfied that he voluntarily executed and understood his
Counter-Affidavit.
JUSTICIA O. PALAGE
Assistant City Prosecutor

Counter Affidavit

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Counter Affidavit

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Counter Affidavit

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of the Philippines

-versus- I. S. No. 07-N-2020

I, ALBERTO MIAGAO, of legal age, Filipino, married, with

1. I am the husband of Ysabel Miagao, the complainant, in the subject

2. I am the person who is charged with the crimes mentioned in the

3. There is no truth to any of the accusations against me as will be

4. The complainant accuses me of falsifying a private document

6. Article 172, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code provides that

7. Here, as hereinabove stated, I had no participation at all in the

8. With regard to the accusation of bigamy, the same is unfounded.

11. Article 4 of the Family Code is clear when it says, "The

12. With regard to the allegation of rape and attempted rape of my

14. Finally, as none of these accusations are true, the disbarment

Rule 1.01 - A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest,

CANON 7 - A LAWYER SHALL AT ALL TIMES UPHOLD

Rule 7.03 - A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that

%20overt%20act%20manifesting,under%20Article%20266%2DA.%22 (last visited December 10, 2020)

CANON 10 - A LAWYER OWES CANDOR, FAIRNESS AND

Rule 10.01 - A lawyer shall not do any falsehood, nor consent

CANON 16 - A LAWYER SHALL HOLD IN TRUST ALL

Rule 16.03 - A lawyer shall deliver the funds and property of

Accordingly, I did not violate the Code of Professional

15. More importantly, the charges of falsification, bigamy, rape,

AFFIANT FURTHER SAYETH NAUGHT.

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 30th day of

I HEREBY CERTIFY that I have personally examined the affiant

You might also like