1

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY OMBUDSMAN FOR THE MILITARY
AND OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICES
OMBUDSMAN BLDG., QUEZON CITY
(3rd Floor, Ombudsman Bldg., Agham Road, Diliman, Quezon City (1104), Phil.)
(Dir. Eulogio S. Cecilio)

VICENTE LIM
Complainant,

-versus- OMB-P-C-08-0173-B
FOR: GRAVE THREATS & ADULTERY
FIREMAN BEBOT LUNA OMB-P-A-08-0164-B
Respondent. FOR: IMMORALITY & MISCONDUCT
/------------------------------------/

POSITION PAPER FOR THE

RESPONDENT WITH NOTICE OF ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

Respondent, by and through the undersigned counsel, most respectfully submits

his Position Paper with notice of entry of appearance for the consideration of this
Honorable Office, and avers the following:
1.) The undersigned counsel respectfully enters his appearance for the respondent,
and hereby requests that he be furnished with all notices, orders, and pleadings
filed in connection with this case.

THE PARTIES
Respondent LUCILO CELERA LUNA a.ka. Bebot Luna (“Respondent”) is a
fireman assigned at the fire station of San. Remegio, Cebu, with monthly salary of
P13,715.00, married, and a resident of Alpine Subdivision, Dakit, Bogo where he may be
served with sumons and other court processes.
Complainant VICENTE C. LIM (“Complainant”) is a resident of Poblacion, San
Remegio, Cebu, where he can be served with summons and other court processes.

STATEMENT OF FACTS AND CASE

Respondent met Cheryl M. Lim, the wife of complainant, sometime in the year
2006. Respondent is a fireman assigned to the fire station of San. Remegio, Cebu.
During those times, respondent sometimes takes his lunch in a canteen just at the back

1
 2

of RHU (Health Center) in San Remegio, Cebu. Cheryl Lim works at the RHU (Health
Center) in San. Remegio, Cebu. On several coincidences, respondent takes his lunch
about the same time Cheryl Lim takes hers, and eventually they became friends. Since
the town of San Remegio is small, it was not impossible to make friends with many
localities therein. While respondent admits that sometimes Cheryl Lim would confide
to him about her marital problems, respondent would always try to elude the topic to
avoid getting too close to her because he believes it was not good in the eyes of other
people especially when people in the small municipality know that respondent to be a
married man, and Cheryl Lim to be a married woman. Although Cheryl Lim confides
with respondent some of her problems, it should be stressed that Cheryl Lim does not
confide only to respondent since she has lots of guy and lady friends too. In other
words, her life is not totally a close book. Everytime Cheryl Lim confides something to
respondent, he would always advise her through jokes so as not to get too emotional
and attached. We submit that complainant’s actions are mainly caused by his own
insecurity and paranoia being also a drug addict. The truth is, respondent has never
been inside the house of the Spouses Lim, and there was never a time that respondent
allowed Cheryl Lim to back-ride on his motorcycle, and there was never a time that
respondent invited or waited for Cheryl Lim inside a “nipa” hut near the shore,
contrary to the allegations of complainant, knowing Vicente Lim to be a jealous,
insecure, and a paranoid drug addict. These allegations are clearly absurd and
impossible! Although sometimes, complainant would chance upon respondent and
Cheryl Lim talking with each other in the canteen on broad daylight, or when they
accidentally bumped into each other in the road or market place while Cheryl Lim is
together with complainant, respondent always puts a smile on his face when extending
his greetings to both of them. Complainant misconstrued respondent’s kind treatment
towards Cheryl Lim as something deeper and illicit. In fact, Cheryl Lim is no exemption
to other lady friends of respondent whom he also treats kindly. Rumors around San
Remegio have it that Cheryl Lim previously had an affair with a certain Victor. To
rationalize complainant’s actions, we submit that while complainant heard of the
rumors between Cheryl Lim and a certain Victor, it was not difficult for him
(complainant) to accuse respondent as a paramour of his wife. Respondent never
displayed nor brandished any firearm to Vicente Lim. Had he done that, he would have
gone to jail long before. Complainant’s jealousy and paranoia must have developed out
of proportion already so as to accuse respondent a paramour of his wife

2
 3

ISSUES

I. WHETHER OR NOT RESPONDENT IS GUILTY OF GRAVE THREATS.

II. WHETHER OR NOT RESPONDENT IS GUILTY OF ADULTERY.
III. WHETHER OR NOT RESPONDENT IS GUILTY OF IMMORALITY.
IV. WHETHER OR NOT RESPONDENT IS GUILTY OF MISCONDUCT.

ARGUMENTS

We respectfully adopt our arguments, affidavit of witness, and other evidences

attached to respondent’s counter-affidavit, and we respectfully argue that respondent is
not guilty of any of the above accusations of the complainant for the following reasons,
to wit:
a.) The allegations of complainant are purely self-serving and without any basis
since his allegations are uncorroborated with any other testimonies or other
substantial evidences.
b.) The quantum of evidence required under administrative due process is
substantial evidence. In this case, the allegation of complainant is clearly
unsubstantiated.
c.) On the first issue: The case on grave threats should be dismissed. Aside from the
fact that complainant’s affidavit is uncorroborated, the allegations of
complainant in par.10 and 11, assuming arguendo the truth thereof, do not even
constitute a grave threat. In par.10 of his affidavit, the alleged threat was only
heard by complainant from a certain Lindy Vina, therefore hearsay. In par.11 of
his affidavit, the alleged threat was directed to the “people around”, and
definitely not to complainant himself. The elements of grave threats, should at
least, require that the threat is addressed to the complainant himself and for that
reason alone, complainant was in fact threatened.
d.) On the second issue: The case on adultery should be dismissed. Adultery requires
that there should be sexual intercourse. The mere allegations of acts such as,
intimate talking with each other, back riding on the motorcycle, visiting the
house, and waiting in the nipa hut, are not substantial evidences of the act of

3
 4

carnal knowledge as required in adultery. In adultery, both parties should be

charged.
e.) On the third and fourth issues: The cases on immorality and misconduct should be
likewise dismissed because the mere testimony of complainant is self-serving
and uncorroborated with other evidences. There is no showing definitely of
specific acts or conduct that would fall under the definition of immorality and
misconduct. All that were alleged by complainant are mere SPECULATIONS or
OPINIONS of facts gathered not from personal knowledge but allegedly from
observations of other people. It can be compellingly gleaned from complainant’s
own affidavit.
f.) If truth be told, it was complainant who harassed respondent and orally defamed
him in front of many people. Respondent was able to blotter it with the police on
July 30, 2007. Attached to the respondent’s counter-affidavit as Annex “A” is a
copy of the police report.

PRAYER
In the light of the foregoing, it is respectfully prayed that these cases be
DISMISSED for lack of merit or for lack of substantial evidence.
Other measures of relief and remedies just and equitable under the premises are
likewise prayed for.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.

August 22, 2008. Cebu City, Philippines.

DAX MATTHEW M. QUIJANO

Counsel for the Respondent
54-B Salvador St. Labangon,
Cebu City 6000, Philippines
IBP No. 734690; 1/14/2008
PTR. No. 7486157; 1/16/2008
Roll No. 51730

Explanation

Copy furnished through registered mail due to lack of personnel to effect personal
service to:
VICENTE C. LIM
Poblacion, San Remegio,
Cebu