For Facebook post Call center agent faces libel

CEBU, Philippines - For allegedly maligning the reputation of his employer on Facebook, a call center agent is charged with libel.

The Cebu City Prosecutor’s Office found probable cause on the complaint filed by ePerformax Contact Center Cebu Corp. against Jeffrey Roden.

 “After an evaluation of the evidence on record, this office finds the existence of all the elements of libel in this case,” Prosecutor Rhodna Bacatan’s resolution stated.

Article 353 of the Revised Penal Code states that the elements of libel are imputation of a discreditable act or condition to another, publication of the imputation, identity of the person defamed and existence of malice.

Bail recommended is P10,000.

The case against Roden stemmed from the complaint filed by ePerformax represented by Stephanie Canlas because of Roden’s derogatory statement posted on Facebook against the company.

Canlas in her affidavit said that on Sept. 16, 2011, Roden filed his resignation letter addressed to the management.

However, ten days later, Roden allegedly posted an open letter on his Facebook account containing libelous statements.

“All these promises and false hopes that you people state during the training process can, in my view, be considered a form of illegal recruitment by way of making deceitful promises to the general public,” a portion of the Facebook post read.

He also accused ePerformax of deception for its failure to give the promised incentives to some employees who referred their friends and relatives to work for the company.

Canlas said Roden’s statements accusing ePeformax of committing the crime of illegal recruitment and economic sabotage were libelous.

“Respondent, with malice made such imputation against complainant and it tends to cause dishonor, hatred, contempt and ridicule to the reputation of the complainant in the IT industry, when he posted the foregoing libelous statements,” Canlas’ affidavit stated.

The company also asked the accused to pay P500,000 for exemplary damages. Roden in his counter affidavit denied the allegations.

He said he and other former employees filed numerous complaints against the company and that he was only stating a fact in his Facebook post.

He also argued that “actual malice” should be established as the complainant is a public figure.

But Bacatan stated that Roden failed to establish that ePerformax is a public figure and therefore, actual malice is not required.— (FREEMAN)