MANILA, Philippines?Taguig City Mayor Freddie Tinga and his father, former Supreme Court Associate Justice Dante Tinga, filed on Wednesday a libel case against an anti-narcotics agent who accused the two of influencing a court ruling on a drug case.

Tinga, in a statement released Thursday, said they have filed with the Department of Justice a libel case against Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency Intelligence Officer 2 Jeffrey Roquero over his affidavit claiming the Tingas influenced former Pasig Regional Trial Court Judge Raul Villanueva into dismissing the drug cases filed against their relatives, Alberto and Fernando Tinga, and Allan Carlos.

But Mayor Tinga called Roquero?s affidavit, published on the Philippine Daily Inquirer last March 4, as ?malicious, false, baseless, and without factual basis.?

The younger Tinga dismissed the affidavit as politically motivated and a ?black propaganda? orchestrated by their political rivals. Dante Tinga is running for mayor in Taguig while Freddie is gunning for a congressional seat in Taguig?s 2nd district.

Freddie said that Roquero?s affidavit was given to reporters illegally when the affidavit should be treated as confidential ?based on the procedures being observed in the Judiciary.? Freddie also said that Roquero ?had himself interviewed ?as evidenced by his quoted statements, merely to emphasize the involvement of the complainants in the outcome of the case.?

?The publication of the article accusing them not only of influencing Judge Villanueva, but of coddling drug pushers, again without any proof thereto, has not only besmirched the reputation of a former high-ranking official in the judiciary, but has likewise affected the public?s perception on the Tinga family?s integrity and standing,? the Tingas? joint affidavit read.

?Finally, it is clear that the subject libelous article is attended with malice in fact, as respondent Roquero?was prompted by ill will and spite, in as much as there was no factual basis whatsoever for uttering the defamatory statement, neither were they made in response to duty. They were said with the obvious intention to injure the reputation of complainants,? the affidavit added.