Ex-monk wants DOJ to review case

CEBU, Philippines - Former Marian monk Venancio Cabillon is filing today a motion for reconsideration on the dismissal of the libel case he earlier filed against Cebu Archbishop Ricardo Cardinal and three other church officials.

Dr. Edwin Fonghe, who has been helping Cabillon on the case, said that they will be pursuing the fight to gain back Cabillon’s integrity.

Fonghe said that they only received a copy of the resolution dismissing the case for lack of probable cause last week because the provincial prosecutor’s office had it mailed to Cabillon’s residence in Ronda.

According to Fonghe, they were not happy with the resolution rendered by the handling prosecutor. They intend to bring the case before the Department of Justice for review.

The provincial prosecutor’s office has dismissed Cabillon’s complaint for libel against Cardinal Vidal, Fr. Marnell Mejia, Msgr. Cristobal Garcia and Abelio Mangila alias Frater Martin Mary, for lack of the essential elements of libel.

Cabillon filed the libel case last year based on the August 9, 2009 publication of the “Bag-ong Lungsoranon,” which bore a notice to the public of his disconnection from the Marian Monk Monastery in Simala, Sibonga .

Cabillon claimed that the publication was done in bad faith and was meant to malign his person.

The newsletter had announced that Cabillon was no longer connected with the Marian Monks of the Eucharistic Adoration since January 8, 2009.

“Any transactions or solicitations of funds bearing the name of the congregation in his behalf is considered illegal and punishable by law,” the newsletter reads.

The newsletter also published the grounds by which Cabillon was disconnected from the congregation, including grave faults against the religious vows of the order, as a trafficker of their members of the religious formation, and violating the vows of chastity and obedience.

Cabillon said that the notice was defamatory and malicious because aside from the notice of disconnection itself, the newsletter published alleged false grounds of his disconnection from the congregation.

But the prosecutors found the publication wanting to support the crime of libel. According to the prosecutors, the notice was not libelous because “it appears nothing more than a simple notice of disconnection of a certain individual from a certain group. – THE FREEMAN