Lakas-CMD asks NBI to probe Manila Times report; files cyberlibel case
Logo of Lakas-CMD political party (File photo)
MANILA, Philippines — Political party Lakas-CMD has asked the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) to check on a so-called Oplan Horus published by a Manila-based newspaper recently, on grounds that the document was merely fabricated and falsified.
In a statement on Wednesday, Lakas-CMD confirmed that its Executive Director Anna Capella Velasco wrote to NBI Director Atty. Jaime Santiago, regarding concerns about the document, supposedly about discrediting candidates backed by former president Rodrigo Duterte.
The document, which was cited several times in an April 23 report of The Manila Times, has been attributed to House of Representatives Majority Leader Manuel Jose Dalipe. Lakas-CMD, however, insisted that the House official, who is the party’s vice president, has not released such a document.
“This manufactured document was published in The Manila Times on 23 April 2025 and has since been widely disseminated on multiple social media platforms,” Velasco stated.
`Reputational damage’
“It has caused significant reputational damage not only to the Office of the Majority Leader, but also to the House of Representatives and the Lakas-Christian Muslim Democrats,” she added. “(The document was) clearly fraudulent and contains a forged signature purporting to be that of Rep. Dalipe.”
According to Lakas-CMD, the incident constitutes “identity fraud, cyber libel and possible violations under the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012.”
READ: QC prosecutors junk Trillanes cyberlibel case vs Roque
“We respectfully request […] to initiate the appropriate legal proceedings and file criminal charges, if warranted, against those found responsible for the fabrication, publication and malicious sharing of the said document,” Velasco said in the letter.
“We urge the NBI to treat this matter with the utmost urgency, as it involves not only the identity and integrity of a high-ranking public official but also the credibility of our democratic institutions ahead of the 2025 midterm elections,” she added.
Prior to this letter from Lakas-CMD, Dalipe had already filed a cyberlibel complaint against The Manila Times’ management staffers, editors, and reporters responsible for the story.
Named as respondents in Dalipe’s complaint are the following:
- Dante Francis Ang II
- Michael Alexander Ang
- Anna Marie Thompson
- Dante A. Ang
- Ma. Preciosa Monica Ang
- Joanna Paola Ang
- Michele Denise Saludo
- Joseph Noel Estrada
- Editors Arnold Belleza, Leena Calso Chua, Lynette Luna, Tessa Mauricio-Arriola, Conrad Cariño, Emil Noguera, Frederick Nasiad, Dafort Villaseran, and Rene Dilan
- Reporters Red Mendoza, Kaiser Jan Fuentes, and Catherine Valente.
Orchestrate impeachment
Dalipe said that the document being cited by the Times, supposedly to orchestrate the impeachment of Duterte’s daughter, Vice President Sara Duterte, are inauthentic.
Lawmakers have repeatedly mentioned that the younger Duterte was impeached based on the findings of committee hearings, as her offices have not been able to explain where confidential funds under her offices went, and due to her threats of high-ranking officials.
READ: VP Duterte impeached for failing to address fund use issues, solons say
“These accusations are without merit, and I categorically deny the authenticity of this document,” Dalipe said in his sworn affidavit.
“I cannot allow myself to be the subject of another’s desperate attempt to make a baseless claim that seeks not only to tarnish my reputation but to destabilize the political landscape by attributing to me actions that are both uncharacteristic and contrary to the principles of fair play and democracy that I have always upheld,” he added.
According to Dalipe, the reporters behind the article never attempted to get his side of the story — adding that the newspaper still went on to publish the report even if Alyansa Para sa Bagong Pilipinas campaign manager Navotas Rep. Toby Tiangco maintained that the document is fake.
“The respondent Authors never made any attempt to confirm the truthfulness of the Falsified Document with me,” he claimed.
“The deliberate omission to verify the Falsified Document with me – despite its facially dubious content and obvious implausibility – compounded by an explicit denial from another party, amounts to a blatant disregard for the truth,” he added.
