The Quezon City Regional Trial Court has dismissed the last remaining criminal case against drag artist Amadeus Fernando Pagente, popularly known as Pura Luka Vega, marking a major legal victory following years of controversy.
In a 25-page joint resolution dated September 19, QC RTC Branch 306 Judge Dolly Rose R. Bolante-Prado granted Pura Luka Vega’s demurrer to evidence, dismissing three counts of alleged violation of Article 201 par. 2(b)(3) of the Revised Penal Code (immoral doctrines, obscene publications, and indecent shows) in relation to Section 6 of the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012.
A demurrer to evidence is a legal mechanism that argues the prosecution’s evidence is insufficient to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The court cited two key reasons for its dismissal:
- Failure to authenticate video evidence – The prosecution was unable to properly prove the integrity and authenticity of the video of Pura’s performance, which served as the primary evidence.
- Lack of legal standing – The court ruled that the three private complainants did not have the legal personality to file the case.
“Prayers answered. Thank you Lord!” Pura Luka Vega posted on X (formerly Twitter), after sharing a portion of the ruling. They added that they are still waiting for the decision to be finalized, noting that complainants may still file a motion for reconsideration.
Prayers answered.
Thank you Lord! ❤️ https://t.co/uTqKDWlpGu pic.twitter.com/bYOH518T3T— Pura Luka Vega (@puralukavega) September 19, 2025
The dismissed case stemmed from a 2023 complaint filed by Hijos del Nazareno over Pura’s viral drag performance of the Lord’s Prayer (Ama Namin) while dressed in the likeness of Jesus Christ. The group claimed the act was a “direct attack on our Lord, our God and savior, Jesus Christ.”
In past interviews, Pura maintained that their intent was not to offend but to embody “a version of Christ that is one with the queer audience.”
The ruling comes months after the Manila RTC also acquitted the artist in June 2025 on similar charges under Article 201.
