REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

SANGGUNIANG BAYAN
MUNICIPALITY OF CANDELARIA
PROVINCE OF QUEZON

ATTY. RUSSEL C. MIRAFLOR,

Complainant,

-versus- SB Admin Case No. ______

JOHN RYAN ROADILLA, ARNEL B.

MAGCAGWAS, ALFREDO
CARURUCAN AND DORICO
CANAL,
Respondents.
x-----------------------------------------------x

JOINT COUNTER AFFIDAVIT

Respondents John Ryan Roadilla, Alfredo Carurucan at Dorico Canal,
to the Honorable Sangguniang Bayan, respectfully avers:

1. We deny the charge of abuse of authority under Sec. 60 (e) of RA

7160 of 1991.

2. There is no abuse of authority on our part when the complainant was

confronted at the Barangay Quarantine check point in Barangay Masalukot II,
Candelaria, Quezon by the respondent Barangay Tanod John Ryan Roadilla on
July 31, 2020.

3. Chief Barangay Tanod Roadilla was merely doing his job pursuant to
the Executive Order No. 037, S. 2020 issued by the Municipal Mayor Hon.
Macario D. Boongaling.

4. The said Executive Order, reads:

Section 2. Precautionary Measures and Guidelines. The

following precautionary measures and guidelines shall be strictly
observed:
2.1 General Guidelines.
1. Minimum public health standard shall be complied with
all the times for the duration of the Modified General Community
Quarantine:
a. Wearing of face mask, earloop mask, indigenous,
reusable, do-it-yourself masks, face shields, handkerchief, or such
other protective equipment or any combination thereof in public
areas is mandatory. Only individuals with the aforesaid PPEs shall
be allowed to enter hospitals, government or private officers, drug

1
 stores, banks, grocery stores, and other similar establishments that
are allowed continued operation amidst the MGCQ.
b. Physical distancing shall be practiced at all times
especially in the public market, grocery stores, banks, and other
similar establishments that are allowed continued operation amidst
the MGCQ. A distance of at least one (1) meter must be maintained
between individuals.
c. Respiratory etiquette such as using tissue or the inner
portion of the elbow to cover the nose and mouth when coughing or
sneezing shall be practiced at all times in all settings.
d. Regular hand washing with soap and water or sanitizing
with hand disinfectants, and proper hygiene to minimize risk of
infection.
e. Disinfection of frequently touched surfaces such as but
not limited to tables, doorknobs, light switches, phones and toilets
among others using 0.5% bleach solution (100 ml bleach and 900 ml
water).
f. Used tissue and PPEs shall e properly disposed.
2. Movement outside of residence shall be limited to
accessing food, medicine and other basic necessities and
essential services, and for work in offices or industries permitted to
operate under MGCQ , and for other permitted activities stated in
IATF-EID amended Omnibus Guidelines.

Copy of the Executive Order No. 037, S. 2020 is attached as ANNEX “A”

5. Notably, on 31 July 2020 was a holiday, Eid al-Adha.

6. A lawyer, like the complainant who resides in Bgy. Pahinga Norte,

Candelaria, Quezon is not supposed to visit friends or loiter in another Barangay
pursuant to Quarantine Regulations. Since it was a holiday, it is not normally
expected that a lawyer would be discharging his duty as a lawyer.

7. In other words, it is not believable that a lawyer, would perform his

duty on a holiday. Notably, all offices in private or government offices are closed.
The duty of a lawyer is not so urgent like a doctor.

8. Moreover, if the complainant is really discharging his functions as a

lawyer, then such a meeting should take place in his law office, and not a lawyer
physically visiting a client in another Barangay.

9. Sad to say, the complainant was not acting as a lawyer to visit a

client on 31 July 2020, being a holiday. Complainant was there in our Barangay
visiting Mr. Emmanuel Jonas for his fighting cocks.

10. Said act of visitation is not “accessing road, medicine and basic
necessities and essential service” that would warrant free access to loiter
around. Thus, the Barangay Tanod, much less the respondent Punong Barangay
cannot be charged with abuse of authority.

2
 11. Second, the act of the Barangay Tanod was legitimate. He was
merely following the Quarantine Regulations of the Municipal Mayor.

12. Moreover, we deny the allegations that Chief Barangay Tanod

Roadilla, said: “kung sa ibang lugar lusot ka, dito sa amin hindi ka puwede dito.”

13. The truth is, the Chief Baranagy Tanod Roadilla merely said, “kung
hindi rin lang po importante ang lakad niyo, ay wag na kayong tumuloy.”
Certainly, visiting a friend for fighting cocks is not important and essential.

14. Third, it is not true that complainant was refused entry. His vehicle
was caught on CCTV camera to have been travelling our Barangay beyond the
check point area. Complainant was able to enter our Barangay.

15. The screen shot of the vehicle of the complainant traversing our
Barangay is attached as ANNEX “B.”

16. The complainant was worded in such a way that the complainant
was a victim who was unjustifiably refused entry.

17. Moreover, the language of Chief Barangay Tanod Roadilla was

taken out of context to make it appear that the Bgy. Tanod was arrogant. There
was no truth to the arrogance of the Chief Brgy. Tanod Roadilla. He was
respectful. The accusation of complainant is false and perjured.

18. Fourth, I was not at the scene of the incident when it happened.
There is no specific act attributable to me that would lead to abuse of authority on
my part.

19. In all the narrations of complainant, he was referring to his

“altercation’ between him and Barangay Tanod Roadilla.

20. So how can I be charged with abuse of authority?

21. I could be charged with grave abuse of authority if I acted in

connivance with the Barangay Tanod Roadilla. There has to be specific overt act
that I would have done.

22. From the plain reading of the allegations in the complaint, there is
nothing to suggest that I was particularly linked to the incident on July 31, 2020,
other than that I am the Punong Barangay in the area. Moreover, I did not act in
conspiracy with Barangay Tanod Roadilla to prevent the complainant from free
passage.

23. Fifth, this is a pandemic time. Everyone is expected to be cautious

and careful. We are avoiding covid-19 cases in our Barangay. The action of
Barangay Tanod Roadilla is reasonable and commendable.

24. Notably, before the visit of the complainant, our Barangay is covid
free. Few days after the visit of complainant, there were covid-19 cases in our
Barangay. The complainant could have brought the virus to our Barangay. He
should be held accountable for the spread of virus in our Barangay.

3
 25. The complainant being a lawyer should not bully around and use his
profession to arrogate upon himself to violate government regulations. He should
act ethically. If he will not stop harassing us through this complaint, and through
some arrogant demeanor, I will be forced to file administrative case against him
in the IBP. He even resorted to false statements in his complaint. That is perjury.

26. Lastly, complainant is making a mountain out of a mole hill. The

charge here does not involve SAP money, extortion, illegal, immoral or
illegitimate conduct by the Barangay Tanod. The issue here simply pertains to
the enforcement of quarantine regulations, where the Barangay official is
presumed to have regularly performed his duties.

27. I therefore pray that this complaint be dismissed for lack of merit.

Candelaria, Quezon Province; August 19, 2020.

John Ryan Roadilla Alfredo Carurucan

Affiant Affiant

Dorico Canal
Affiant

JURAT & CERTIFICATION

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this __ day of August 2020 in

Candelaria, Quezon Province. I hereby certify that I have personally examined
the affiants and that I am satisfied that they voluntarily executed and understood
their joint counter affidavit.

ADMINISTERING OFFICER