Davao politics
Paolo Duterte files libel complaints against the NBI chief, a dismissed policeman and GMA, and Matibag asks that Davao's city prosecutor step aside
October 28, 2026 · Joshua S Bariñan
Davao City First District Representative Paolo Duterte filed libel and cyberlibel complaints at the Davao City Hall of Justice on October 23 against National Bureau of Investigation Director Melvin Matibag, dismissed policeman Rodulfo Gracioso Jr. and eight GMA Network executives, anchors and reporters over the claim that he received suitcases of cash on the orders of former Speaker Lord Allan Velasco. Three days later Matibag asked the Department of Justice to take the case away from City Prosecutor Jhopee Avanceña, whom he described as a first cousin of Honeylet Avanceña, the partner of the congressman's father, and to move it to Manila.
Neither side has won anything yet. A complaint at the prosecutor's office starts a preliminary investigation, not a trial. The respondents will be asked for counter affidavits and the prosecutor decides whether there is probable cause to go to court. Before that can start, Justice Secretary Fredderick Vida has to decide whether the Davao prosecutor keeps the case.
What was filed on October 23
The congressman brought his complaint affidavit to the Office of the City Prosecutor at the Davao City Hall of Justice on Friday and spoke to reporters at the Hall of Justice afterward. The respondents are Matibag, Gracioso, GMA Network chairman Felipe Gozon, president and chief executive Gilberto Duavit Jr., 24 Oras anchors Mel Tiangco, Vicky Morales and Emil Sumangil, and reporters Darlene Cay, Marvin Parado and Joel San Luis.
"We filed libel and cyberlibel cases against Melvin Matibag, Gracioso, and several personalities from GMA News' 24 Oras because of their untruthful statements, which clearly tarnished my name and that of our family," Duterte said.
His counsel, Peter Paul Danao, said the sequence from Gracioso's sworn statement on September 14 to the airing of his interview alongside Matibag on GMA on September 25 showed malice, because the allegations were released at once and the NBI chief called them 99 percent true on the strength of a lie detector test while the bureau's own investigation was still open. Danao said the congressman does not know Gracioso, that GMA knew the man had been dismissed from the police and did not examine his claims, and that the network never sought his client's side.
The allegation behind it
Gracioso, a dismissed police officer who worked as an aide to Velasco when Velasco was Speaker, has claimed that starting in 2018 he delivered cash to former President Rodrigo Duterte, Vice President Sara Duterte and the congressman on Velasco's instructions. Daily Tribune reported that the amount he attached to the congressman was 100 million pesos in suitcases. Paolo Duterte has called the story pure fiction and submitted an affidavit to the bureau; the Vice President has also denied it and filed her own affidavit.
Matibag has said the bureau invited the congressman to give his side and received instead a one page letter from a lawyer questioning the NBI's jurisdiction. The bureau says it is still verifying Gracioso's affidavit and the other material in its file, and that the allegations have not been proven in court. Matibag had earlier dared the Duterte camp to go through the legal process if they believed Gracioso was lying, and said the bureau could charge Gracioso itself if there were grounds to say he lied.
The same director has been running the bureau's inquiry into flood control contracts in the congressman's district. He said he saw red flags in 47 of 100 projects there, and on October 13 the bureau asked the Department of Justice to prosecute 21 people, including Davao public works officials and contractors, over those projects. The libel complaint names Matibag over what he said about the cash claims as the investigation ran, not over the flood control findings.
Matibag's answer and the inhibition motion
On the day of the filing Matibag said he would wait for a copy of the complaint and that the congressman was within his rights. "It's also good that he bring it to the fold of the justice system, so we know what the direction will be," he said.
On Monday, October 26, he went further. NBI agents filed a motion at the Department of Justice asking that City Prosecutor Jhopee Avanceña inhibit from the case and that proceedings be suspended, and the same motion went to the Davao City prosecutor's office by email. Matibag said the bureau had learned that Avanceña is a first cousin of Honeylet Avanceña, the common law partner of former President Duterte, and that she was appointed head of the Davao City prosecutor's office on February 7, 2022 by the congressman's father. He said the relationship may not amount to a legal conflict of interest but that moving the case to the National Prosecution Service in Manila would ensure fairness.
Prosecutor General Richard Fadullon said the decision belongs to the justice secretary, who may also appoint a special prosecutor. As of October 27 no ruling had been reported, and the Davao City prosecutor's office had not responded to GMA's request for comment.
De Lima and the press freedom argument
Hours after the filing, ML Party list Representative Leila de Lima, the senior deputy minority leader, posted on X that the complaint was an attempt to silence journalists and truth seekers and would send a chilling message to other reporters. She said the Dutertes had shown a repressive streak toward the media before, citing the closure of ABS CBN in 2020, the revocation of Rappler's license and attacks on the Philippine Daily Inquirer during the elder Duterte's presidency. "Those facing accusations can simply respond to them, especially when the media is asking for their side," she said.
The congressman replied in Bisaya. "De Lima, as a lawyer and former human rights advocate, you know that every person has the right to protect themselves from any accusation. Filing a case through the legal process is not an attack on the freedom of speech, but a right that every citizen has," he said. He added that freedom of the press carries a duty to give the other side a chance to respond, that "reporting an allegation and proving it to be true are two different things," and that he wanted an evidence based process rather than prejudgment.
GMA Network, Gracioso and Matibag had not filed formal answers to the complaint as of the latest reports.
What happens next
A complaint affidavit starts a preliminary investigation. The prosecutor issues subpoenas, the respondents submit counter affidavits, and the office then resolves whether there is probable cause to file an information in court. No subpoena had been reported as of October 27, and the inhibition motion could pause the clock while the justice secretary decides who handles the case. Cyberlibel, under the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, carries a penalty one degree higher than libel under the Revised Penal Code.
The first legal question is whether Matibag's statements, made as bureau director about an investigation in progress, count as privileged communication. An official describing an inquiry stands on different ground from a private person repeating the same claim, and the complaint against the network turns on whether broadcasting a sworn allegation without the congressman's side was negligent or malicious.
Two tracks now run in parallel over overlapping facts: the Department of Justice's preliminary investigation of the 21 flood control respondents, and a Davao prosecutor's, or a Manila prosecutor's, preliminary investigation of the men who accused the congressman. Mindanao Live will follow both.
Sources and verification
Reader response
- Views
- 6
- Shares
- 0
- Rating
- Not rated
- Comments
- 0