Cumpio, Domequil convicted of terrorism financing despite prior CA ruling

By Joseph Bernard A. Marzan

Frenchie Mae Cumpio and Marielle Domequil, among others, will have to stay longer in jail, after a local court in Tacloban City ruled that while they did not illegally possess firearms, they did, however, finance terrorism.

Judge Georgina Uy Perez of the Tacloban City Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 45 on Thursday, Jan. 22, promulgated two decisions: one acquitting them of illegal possession of firearms and explosives, and another finding them guilty of Section 8(ii) of Republic Act No. 10168 (The Terrorism Financing Prevention and Suppression Act of 2012).

In the 88-page judgment, Cumpio, executive director of Tacloban City-based outlet Eastern Vista, and Domequil, a volunteer for the Rural Missionaries of the Philippines, were sentenced to 12 to 18 years of imprisonment.

The specific charge was for making “available any property or funds, or financial services or other related services to a designated and/or identified person, organization, association, or group of persons.”

The judgment stated that the prosecution relied on the testimonies of former members of the New People’s Army (NPA), who were presented by the prosecution.

The court said the testimonies provided by Margie Dela Cruz, Boy Perez, Jade Cinco, and Jason Rafales were corroborative enough to establish that Cumpio and Domequil violated the said law.

Dela Cruz testified that she and a certain Berting Copquian provided PHP 100,000 in cash, two boxes of caliber .45 ammunition, and 12 pieces of shotgun ammunition and tapetas (long pants that easily dry) to Cumpio and Domequil, which the latter two transported to Catbalogan City, Samar, from Tacloban between March 28 and 29, 2019.

Perez and Rafales testified that they were with the two accused going to the NPA camp in Catbalogan, while Cinco affirmed that he was at the camp when they arrived on March 29, 2019.

Both Cumpio and Domequil denied that they were in Catbalogan on March 29, their respective testimonies establishing that they were just in Tacloban on that date.

Cumpio was responding to and documenting reported military harassment and evacuation in San Jose de Buan, Samar, providing an email she sent at 3:00 p.m. on that day as evidence.

The email was to Alexander Abinguna of Katungod Eastern Visayas–Karapatan, one of the ‘Tacloban 5’ who were also arrested in 2020.

Abinguna confirmed to the court that an email was sent, which was the fact sheet of the mass evacuation in San Jose de Buan.

Domequil, on her part, said she was at the Makabayan office in Tacloban on that date, submitting screenshots of her conversation with her sister, tweets, and Facebook activity log, and added that she was also watching Netflix on that date.

But the court found that the two accused’s own statements were lighter in weight than those of the prosecution’s witnesses.

“Aside from the screenshots of their supposed activities, which did not establish their actual location or precise whereabouts on March 29, 2019, [Cumpio and Domequil] did not present any witness to confirm or corroborate their claim that they were just in Tacloban City on that date,” the judgment read.

“While Mr. Abinguna acknowledged receiving an email from Frenchie Mae on the same day, there is nothing to show that he had personal knowledge of her activities or specific whereabouts at that time,” it added, alluding to Abinguna’s testimony.

“On the other hand, the testimonies of [Dela Cruz, Perez, Cinco, and Rafales] corroborated one another on two material points: the presence of the two accused at the NPA camp in San Andres, Catbalogan City, and their act of handing cash, ammunition, and tapetas to Kumander Butil, the head of the camp, on March 29, 2019. Corroboration on such material matters significantly enhances the credibility of the prosecution witnesses,” the court said of the prosecution’s testimony.

The court also gave weight to the fact that the two knew Perez, Cinco, and Rafales, and junked their notion that the latter three were pressured to testify against them.

“Notably, the two accused themselves admitted that they knew Perez, Cinco, and Rafales, and that no ill will or animosity existed between them. Hence, their bare assertion that these witnesses may have been pressured to testify against them remains speculative and unsupported by any evidence,” the judgment said.

The charges under Rep. Act No. 10168 came in 2021 after the Department of Justice indicted the two following the discovery of an alleged PHP 557,360 in cash in their shared apartment during a raid on Feb. 6, 2020.

PRIOR CA RULING

But the Tacloban RTC’s ruling against Cumpio and Domequil came despite the Court of Appeals’ (CA) ruling, promulgated in November 2025, reversing the civil forfeiture of the PHP 557,360 granted by the Manila RTC Branch 18 in 2023.

The CA stated that the two were not designated as terrorists under the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Consolidated List, a mode of designation of terrorists under Rep. Act No. 11479 (Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020).

The allegations charging them with violation of Rep. Act No. 10168 were based on acts committed in March 2019, or more than a year before Rep. Act No. 11479 was even signed into law.

The appellate court also found that there were no ties between Cumpio and Domequil and the NPA and its parent organization, the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP).

“A careful review of the evidence at hand, moreover, reveals that there is a dearth of reason to believe that the respondents-appellants were or are connected to the CPP–NPA,” the CA’s ruling read.

It is the CA’s ruling that lawyer Julianna Agpalo, Cumpio and Domequil’s counsel, is relying on to move for reconsideration of the Tacloban RTC’s decision.

“We still have time to file our motion for reconsideration before the same court. We have 15 days from the time it was issued on January 22 to file the MR. If there is still a denial, we will go all the way up—we will exhaust all legal remedies to overturn the decision convicting them,” Agpalo told Daily Guardian on Sunday, Jan. 25.

“There is no basis in the first place to convict them, because, for one, there is a ruling from the CA, which is an appellate court, saying that they are engaged in legitimate humanitarian work, and that there is no indication of their involvement in financing terrorism,” she added.

Agpalo said that they will also be pushing for bail while their appeal is pending.

“Since the penalty imposed upon Frenchie and Marielle is essentially bailable, we will ask the discretion of the court to allow them to post bail pending appeal, or pending the filing of a notice of appeal with [the CA],” she said.

“Under the rules, [bail] is allowed for offenses where the penalty is less than reclusion perpetua or less than 20 years. Frenchie and Marielle are not flight risks, so we will be imploring the court’s discretion for that to be granted, considering that they have been imprisoned for six years,” she added.