DEFENDANTS EVIDENCE

As follows are the gists of the testimonies of the defendants

witnesses:

(1) RUBELYN F. OGAWA, Filipino, 51 years old, widow, a Part-time

Language Teacher, resident of Block 18, Lot 22 Anahaw Street, Cristina
Homes, Zabarte Road, Novaliches, Caloocan City.

Her testimony was taken by way of deposition under Rule 23 of

the Rules of Court.

Witness identified her Judicial Affidavit and adopted it in lieu of

her oral testimony (Exh. 6 to. 6- g-1). In addition thereto, she
identified

Exhibit 1 (P) AWRI - Department Order No. 100 Series of 2010 form
the Department of Labor and Employment dated 13 August 2010
(Exhibit 6- Guioguio and ARISE), hence, Atty. Pamfilo adopted it as his
Exh. 1 for defendant Ogawa.

Atty. Samilin expressed her objection in the presentation and

identification of the witness of the photocopy of the Resolution which
was previously marked (Exhibit 2), for the reason that Atty. Pamfilo
failed to bring with him the provisional document originally marked.
The latter however undertook to present the originally marked exhibits
on the next scheduled hearing.

Witness likewise identified the photocopy of a Resolution dated

29 June 2012 by Asst. City Prosecutor Suwerte L. Ofrecio-Gonzales
(Exh. 3 AWRI) on which the opposing counsel interposed objection
subject to the presentation on the next hearing.
She likewise identified a Letter dated 23 November 2010 from Mrs.
Pineda (Exh. 4 Ogawa and Exh. U) (P)

Opposing counsel stipulated as to the existence and due

execution of Exh. 4.
After the identification of the photocopy of a Complaint Affidavit of
Elvira A. Pineda dated 08 March 2011 as well as the attached
Secretarys Certificate, Atty. Pamfilo manifested that he would like to
mark it as his Exh. 5. However, Atty. Samilin objected to its
presentation on the ground that it was not previously marked during
the pre-trial.

In her Judicial Affidavit, Ogawa asserted that she knows Elvira

Pineda (Pineda for brevity) as the President of Interskills
Development Foundation, Inc., (Interskills for brevity) where she
used to work as Japanese language teacher, a training assistant and an
interpreter at the same time during interviews of the applicants.

Witness first met Pineda in 1995, while working with International

Workface Corporation (IWC for brevity). She has a dental clinic in the
same building adjacent to IWC office and shes friend with her boss.
She often see Pineda as her boss was helping the former in the
documentation for the accreditation of her sending organization
(Interskills) that she wanted to put up.

She narrated under TESDA-JITCO program, IWC has been

categorized as a sending organization which used to send trainees to
Japan.

TESDA-JITCO program involves sending qualified Filipino trainees

to an accredited accepting organization (AO) to Japan by an accredited
sending organization (SO) in the Philippines in exchange of technology
between Japan and the Philippines. Once the trainees were accepted
and sent to Japan, they will receive monthly training allowances from
the implementing organizations or companies where the trainees were
trained. Hence, during that time, TESDA is the responsible government
agency in the implementation of the JITCO program. She came to
know all of these because he boss used to ask her assistance in the
processing of the documentation of Pineda as she was familiar with
JITCO program.

She got involved with Pineda when the latter asked for her help
since she is in need of a Japanese language teacher with a Japanese
Language Proficiency Certificate as one of the requirements in order to
be accredited as a Sending Organization which the former has.
Consequently, the certificate was included in the application for
accreditation of Pineda. When the latter got her TESDA accreditation,
the latter offered her to be a part-time Japanese language teacher in
Interskills.

In 1996, due to some internal problems, IWC become

inoperational. She started working with Interskills from 1995 up to
2005. In 2000, she became a full time employee as Japanese language
teacher, a training director and Japanese interpreter in the interviews
of the applicants. When she left Interskills she did part time job as
Japanese language teacher in different companies.

She admitted she was aware of a civil case for damages filed
against her and four other persons by Pineda and Interskills, subject
matter of the instant case. She added, based on the plaintiffs
complaint, they befall familiar with the business in addition thereto,
they allegedly conspired, confederated and connived with one another
as a group or individually in secretly negotiating and influencing
various clients accredited accepting organizations to transfer to her
benefit and to the prejudice of Interskills.

She however, denied that she became familiar with the business
by reason of her employment with the plaintiff. She recounted prior to
her employment with Interskills in 1996, she was already working in a
foundation (IWC) twhich used to send trainees in Japan under JITCO
program. Contrary to what plaintiff alleges, she was the one helping
Pineda in setting up a foundation together with her former boss.
Morever, she denied conniving with other defendants or any other
entity nor knows their activities.

Ogawa added that she knows Sandra Cimafranca

(Cimafrancafor brevity) as the live-in partner of the brother of the
 Pineda, Nestor Aquino, thus personally related to the former. The
allegation of Cimafranca in her Sinumpaang Salaysay, particularly
paragraphs 22 and 23, was denied as well. That sometime in 2010,
Ogawa called her to arrange a meeting with Ms. Cany Gil who is a
friend of Ms. Nancy Mitsuichi and partner of Mr. Mitsuichi who owned
an accepting organization and convince them to transfer his
organization with STEIFI.1 She clarified it was Cimafranca who
spearheaded the meeting and asked her help about future business
plans.

Similarly, she denied the contention of the same Sinumpaang

Salayasay; that according to the former, Mr. Mitsuichis account can be
transferred from Interskills to the foundation they are going to make or
to the foundation of her friends. In the alternative, even to those who
are in position in the aforementioned foundations particularly STEIFI,
Mitch Agency wherein Ogawa is the General/Operation (sic), AWRI-All
World Placement Agency and ARISE headed by Ms. Guioguio or to other
foundations who wanted to tie up with them.2 Ogawa stressed they did
not met in April of 2010. The truth was she was called between July
and August 2010 to arrange a meeting and wanted her to help
Cimafranca and her friends in setting up an overseas recruitment
agency because during that time foundation like Interskills were no
longer allowed to act as sending organization under JITCO-TESDA
program. Given that on June 2010, TESDA Board already issued a
Board Resolution stating that trainees sent under JITCO-TESDA program
were considered workers and their deployment shall fall under the
POEA. Consequently, Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE)
issued Department Order No. 016 Series of 2010 dated 13 April 2010 3,
setting the guidelines in the implementation of JITCO Program. Ogawa
rationalized neither she would discuss such things which is no longer
allowed for JITCO program after June 2010 nor discuss it to Cimafranca
who is personally related to Pineda.

In the same way, Ogawa denied the allegation in paragraph 14 of

the Sinumpaang Salayasay; that Cimafranca was not surprised when
Mores left Interskills because of her plan of setting up a new
foundation. She (Ogawa) narrated she was in quandary why
Cimafranca keeps on claiming that Mores wanted to put up a
foundation where in fact after June 2010 foundations can no longer
send trainees to Japan.

Ogawa claimed that she felt insulted and humiliated when Pineda
sent a letter (Exhibit 4) asking her to desist from contacting or
communicating her existing and previous clients. Further, she added
why Pineda would interfere with her job.

Pineda filed a criminal case of syndicated Estafa as against

Ogawa and her co-defendants before the Prosecutors Office,
containing similar allegations with the instant case. Alleging among
others, respondents conspired and connived to induce clients of
Interskills to transfer to another sending organization. The same was
eventually dismissed by the Prosecutor per Resolution (Exhibit 2)
dated 14 October 2011. Consequently, Pineda filed a Motion for

1 Paragraph 7 Sinumpaang Salaysay of Sandra Cimafranca

2 Page 9 Sinumapaang Salaysay
3 Exhibit 1 Ogawa
Reconsideration which was also denied as per Resolution dated 29 June
2012.

With the filing of criminal and civil cases, witness averred that
she suffered sleepless nights, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings
and experienced serious anxieties. Thus, she is praying that Pineda
and Interskills compensate him the following:
a. One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) as moral damages;
b. One hundred thousand (P100,000.00) as exemplary damages;
c. Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00) as Attorneys fees;
d. Three thousand P3,000.00) per court appearance.
(2) WILLIAM P. GUIOGUIO - he is the President of Alternative
Resources Innovations and Skills Enhancement Foundation, Inc.
(ARISE for brevity)

He knows (sic) defendant ARISE as non-stock non-profit

corporation. It is categorized as a Sending Organization under TESDA-
JITCO program in the Philippines.
JITCO or Japan International Training Cooperation Organization
signed an agreement with the Philippine government to implement its
program in the Philippines whose purpose is to bring Filipino skilled
workers to train in Japan for a maximum period of three years with
training allowances.
When ARISE was still operating as foundation and sending
organization, it is TESDA who implements the JITCO program.
Elucidating further that sending organizations as part of the JITCO
program was abolished by TESDA in June 2010 as evidenced by
Department Order No. 116 issued by the Secretary of Labor on August
2010 setting guidelines on how to implement JITCO program through
the POEA. It is said specifically that TESDA Board issued a Resolution in
June 2010 stating that trainees sent to Japan are workers and should
be sent as such. Witness identified the said Department Order.

He narrated neither he knows Elvira Pineda nor Interskills

Development Foundation (Interskills for brevity). However, he is
aware of the case filed against ARISE by Interskills through Elvira
Pineda which is a complaint for an alleged conspiracy and connivance
by other five defendants in influencing clients AOs to transfer to other
SOs. In addition thereto, there is nothing in the complaint that alleges
the specific offense committed by ARISE against the plaintiff.

As a contradictory to the plaintiffs allegation that they connive in the

transfer of the plaintiffs client AOs to SOs like ARISE, accepting
organizations are independent minded and free to choose Sending
organizations that legitimately meet their standards of trainee
applicants, hence, free to drop any SO that failed their expectations.

Guioguio stated as a result of baseless and unfounded suit,

defendant ARISE suffered and continue to suffer besmirched
reputation. As a consequences thereof, he prayed to be compensated
by Pineda and Interskills with the following:
a. One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) as moral damages;
b. One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) as exemplary damages;
c. One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) as Attorneys fees;
d. Three thousand P3,000.00) per court appearance.
 (3) LOURDES GUIOGUIO she is the President of defendant AWRI
All World Recruitment, Inc. (AWRI for brevity)

Her direct examination contained in a Judicial Affidavit which states that

She knows Elvira Pineda as she was a former church mate and he
used to help her in office chores in Interskills Foundation (Interskills
for brevity)

AWRI is an overseas recruitment agency under the POEA and is not

similar with a foundation like Interskills. She claimed that there is no way
that Interskills can compete with AWRI.
The complaint of Interskills against all of the defendants is a mere
fabrication and therefore, lacks any legal basis.

She was aware of the complaint initiated against her and others co-
defendants alleging that they conspired and connived in influencing various
Accepting Organizations to transfer to another Sending Organizations.
However, the same was dismissed by the Prosecutor per Resolution dated 14
October 2011 (Exh. 2)

A motion for Reconsideration was filed but the same was denied per
Resolution dated 29 June 2012 (Exh. 3)

She negated the allegation in the complaint that she was formerly
employed with Interskills. She was once a volunteer, in fact Pineda contacted
her as one of their client AOs was in need of a Filipino monitoring staff to
Japan. She was interviewed together with some applicants and was
fortunately chosen. While waiting for a working visa in Japan, Pineda asked
her help in whatever capacity she could at Interskills.

She left for Japan in 2003. She has OFW Information Certificate (Exhibit
1) issued by the POEA dated 30 April 2003 and passport with visa (Exhibit
2 and 2-a) stamped on it as a proof that indeed she was an overseas
contract worker. Further, she has OFW Information Certificates dated 22
November 2006, 01 July 2008, 13 July 2009, 05 October 2009, and 03
December 2009.

She disaffirms the assertion in the complaint that she together with
other defendants became familiar and learn the transactions involving
around the foundation and was able to interact with Japanese clients of
Interskills or not. She was in Japan from 2003 to 2010 as an overseas contact
worker as shown in her visa and information sheets from the POEA. Ergo, no
way of meeting the other defendants. Moreover, Guioguio denied having
known Sandra Cimafranca.

Due to filing of baseless and unfounded suit, she suffered and continue
to suffer sleepless nights, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings and
serious anxiety. With respect to defendant AWRI, the latter suffered and
continue to suffer besmirched reputation, among other things for which
plaintiff should be held liable to the former. Hence, defendant Guiguio prayed
that Pineda and Interskills compensate her with the following, to wit;
a. One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) as moral damages;
b. One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) as exemplary damages;
 c. One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) as Attorneys fees;
As to defendant AWRI, she prayed to be compensated, as follows:
a. One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) as moral damages;
b. One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) as exemplary damages;
c. One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) as Attorneys fees;
d. Three thousand P3,000.00) per court appearance.

she identified his Judicial Affidavit (Exh. ) as well as the signature

appearing thereat as his own.

Department Order No. 106 Series of 2010 issued by the Department of Labor
and Employment (Exh.1 AWRI 6 Guioguio & ARISE)