353

Libel

Elements of Libel
1. There must be a an imputation of a crime, or of a vice or
defect, real or imaginary or any act, omission, condition,
status or circumstance
2. The imputation must be made publicly
3. It must be malicious
4. The imputation is directed to a natural or juridical person, or
one who dead
5. That the imputation must tend to cause the dishonor,
discredit, or contempt of the person defamed, or to blacken
the memory of one who is dead
Defamation - Art 353 actually defines defamation and not libel
It means the offense of injuring a persons character, fame or
reputation thru false and malicious statements
It includes libel (thru writing) and slander (oral defamation)
Seditious libel is punished differently under Art142
Ratio for punishment: A person is entitled to enjoyment of
private reputation.
Test of Defamatory Character of words used the words used are
construed in their entirety and taken in their plain, natural and ordinary
meaning as they would naturally be understood by persons reading
them UNLESS it appears that they were used and understood in
another sense
It is not the intention of the writer/speaker, or even the
understanding of the reader/hearer BUT the meaning that the
words in fact conveyed to the minds of persons of reasonable
understanding taking into consideration the surrounding
circumstances.

354
Requirement for
Publicity

GR: Every defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious, even if

true, if no good intention and justifiable motive for making it is shown
XPNS:
1. A private communication made by any person to another in
the performance of any legal, moral or social duty
2. A fair and true report, made in good faith without any
comments or remarks:
a. of any judicial, legislative or other official proceedings
which are not of confidential nature,
b. or of any statement, report or speech delivered in said
proceedings,
c. or of any other act performed by public officers in the
exercise of their functions.

Notes on the elements:

First Element:
Imputation of a crime may be implied from the acts and
statements of the accused.
Imputation of criminal intention is not libelous because
mere intent to commit a crime is not in violation of law.
Vice or defect may include imputation of lascivious or
immoral habits.
Calling a person a bastard or leper, witch, etc may be
considered imputation of condition, status of circumstance
Second Element:
Publication is the communication of the defamatory matter
to some third person.
A mans reputation is the estimate in which others hold
him; not the good opinion he has of himself.
Third Element:
Malice in fact may be shown by proof of ill-will, hatred
or purpose to injure
Malice in law it is presumed from a defamatory
imputation; proof of malice is not required in view of the
grossness of the imputation
HOWEVER, presumption of malice does not arise if
communication is privileged, in which case, malice in fact
must be proved.
Fourth Element:
Identification of the offended party is required, not only
that the victim recognized himself, it must be shown that at
least a third person could identify him.
Note that if the slanderous utterances, even if committed
on the same date/place, against two different persons,
there should be as many offenses as there are persons
defamed.
Notes on the two XPNS:
Para 1: Private Communication to another in the performance of any
legal, moral or social duty
Requisites of privileged comm.:
1. The person who made the communication had a legal, moral or
social duty to make the communication, or at least, he had an
interest to be upheld
2. The communication is addressed to an officer or a board, or a
superior, having some interest or duty in the matter
3. The statements are made in good faith and without malice in
fact
Ratio: This exemption from liability is predicated upon the
fact that it is the duty and right of a citizen to make a
complaint of any misconduct on the part of public officials

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER | Cielo Goo | A2015

Two kinds of privileged communication:

1. Absolutely privileged they are those which are not
actionable even if the author acted in bad faith
Includes legislative and judicial proceedings and statements
made by members of Congress (e.g. privileged speech)
Purpose: to allow them to speak their minds freely and
exercise their respective functions without incurring the risk
of criminal prosecution
2. Conditional or qualifiedly privileged are those which contain
defamatory imputations which would not be actionable
unless made with malice or bad faith
Includes private communications made to another in the
performance of legal, moral and social duty
Doctrine of Fair comment Fair Commentaries on matters of public
interest are also privileged and a valid defense in an action for libel
When the discreditable imputation is directed against a public
person in his public capacity, it is not necessarily actionable.
In order for it to be actionable, it must based on a false
allegation of fact or comment.
Criticism v. Defamation
Criticism deals only with things as shall invite public attention
or call for public comment. It does not follow a public man
into his private life nor pry into his domestic concerns.
Other notes:
Statements made in self defense or in mutual controversy are
often privileged
But retaliation or vindictiveness alone cannot be a basis of
self defense unless it is shown to be a fair answer and related
to the earlier imputation made

to those charged supervision over them, even if the charges

contained therein are not substantiated upon investigation,
UNLESS it appears to be maliciously and without any
reasonable ground for believing them to be true
The communication need not be in a private document, it
may be in a public document, like an affidavit
Legal duty presupposes a legal provision conferring upon
the accused the duty to communicate.
Moral duty depends on the relationship between the giver
and receiver of the communication, whether said comm. Is
voluntarily given or not (e.g. religious organization). The
same goes with the social duty (teacher/principal).
Unnecessary publicity destroys good faith
NOTE that the privileged character does not mean that it is
not actionable, it merely does away with the presumption
of malice.
That it is privileged is a matter of defense by showing that:
a. Defendant acted with malice in fact
b. There is no reasonable ground for believing the charge
to be true.
Malice in fact may be proved by using extrinsic evidence
that the defendant bore a grudge against the offended
party, or that there was rivalry or ill-feeling between them
existing at the time of imputation or that the defendant
had an intention to injure the offended party
Probable cause for belief in the truthfulness of the
statement or that it is made in good faith shall be sufficient.

Para2: Fair and true report of official proceedings

Requisites:
1. It is a fair and true report of a judicial, legislative or other
proceedings which are not of confidential nature, or of
statement, report, or speech delivered in said proceedings, or
of any other act performed by a public officer in the exercise of
his functions
2. It is made in good faith
3. It is without any comments or remarks
-

Even if there are some errors, still privileged

In judicial proceedings, allegations in pleadings are
privileged insofar as they are relevant or pertinent to the
issues
An action for libel in a judicial proceeding may be instituted
even if the defamatory matter had not yet been stricken
out of the record

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER | Cielo Goo | A2015

355
Libel by means of
writings and
other similar
means

356
Threatening to
publish and offer
to prevent such
publication for a
compensation
357
Prohibited
publication of
acts referred to
in the course of
official
proceedings

358
Slander

359
Slander by Deed

A libel may be committed by means of:

1. Writing
2. Printing
3. Lithography
4. Engraving
5. Radio
6. Phonograph
7. Painting
8. Theatrical exhibition
9. Cinematographic exhibition
10. Other similar means
NOTE: Criminal action is in addition to civil action that may be brought
by the offended party.
Acts Punished:
1. By threatening another to publish a libel concerning him, or
his parents, spouse, child or other members of his family
2. By offering to prevent the publication of such libel for
compensation or money consideration

Notes:
-

Elements:
1. The offender is a reporter, editor, manager of a newspaper
daily or magazine
2. He publishes facts connected with the private life of another
3. Such facts are offensive to the honor, virtue and reputation of
said person

Notes:
-

Defamation through an amplifier is not libel but oral

defamation because unlike those listed, this is not of
permanent nature (cf radio in list)
Television is considered similar means thru which libel may
be committed
In a letter where threats and defamation are contained,
threats will be considered; there is not independent crime
of libel

Blackmail any unlawful extortion of money by threats of accusation

or exposure.
Aside from this provision, blackmail is also possible under
Art 283 or Light Threats

This is considered as the GAG LAW which requires two things to

constitute a violation:
a. The article published contains facts connected with the
private life of an individual
b. Such facts are offensive to the honor, virtue and
reputation of said person

The prohibition applies even if publication be made in

connection with or under the pretext that it is necessary in
the narration of the proceeding
According to RA 53, as amended by RA 1477: the publisher,
editor, columnist, reporter of a newspaper, magazine or
periodical cannot be compelled to reveal the source of any
news report or information appearing in said publication
related in confidence UNLESS the court or a House or
committee in Congress finds that such revelation is
demanded by the security of the state

Slander libel committed by oral or spoken means, instead of in

writing; oral defamation.
It is the speaking of base and defamatory words which tend
to prejudice another in his reputation, office, trade, business
or means of livelihood.
Note that the slander need not be heard by the offended
party (what matters is that third persons heard the
slanderous words)

Two kinds of defamation:

1. Simple Slander
2. Grave Slander
The gravity will depend on:
a. The expressions used
b. The personal relations of the accused and offended
party and
c. The circumstances surrounding the case like the social
standing and position of the offended party

Elements:
1. The offender performs any act not included in any other

Notes:
-

Slapping a person is slander by deed if the intention is to

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER | Cielo Goo | A2015

2.
3.

360
Persons
Responsible

crime against honor

Such act is performed in the presence of other persons
Such act casts dishonor, discredit or contempt upon the
offended party

Slander by deed a crime against honor which is committed by

performing any act which cases dishonour, discredit or contempt upon
another person

Two kinds:
1. Simple slander by deed
2. Grave slander by deed

Persons liable for libel are:

1. The person who publishes, exhibits or causes the publication
or exhibition of any defamation in writing or similar means
2. The author or editor of a book or pamphlet
Liability of the editor is the same as that of the author
3. The editor or business manager of a daily newspaper
magazine or serial publication
4. The owner of the printing plant which publishes a libelous
article with his consent and all other persons who in any way
participate in or have connection with its publication
Venue of criminal and civil actions for damages in case of written
defamations:
1. Where the libelous article is printed and first published or
2. Where any of the offended parties actually resides at the time
of the commission of the offense

361
Proof of the truth

362
Libellous remarks
363
Incriminating

Proof of truth is admissible in any of the ff:

1. When the act or omission imputed constitutes a crime
regardless of whether the offended party is a private
individual or a public officer
2. When the offended party is a government employee, even if
the act or omission imputed does not constitute a crime,
provided, it is related to the discharge of official duties
If the truth of the imputation is proved, he shall be acquitted

Libelous remarks or comments on matters privileged, if made with

malice in fact, will not exempt the author or editor from liability
1. The offender performs an act
2. By such act, he directly incriminates or imputes to an

shame or humiliate (otherwise, it can be slight phys injury)

Pointing a dirty finger is simple slander by deed
There is no fixed standard to determine the seriousness of
the deed, the courts are given sufficient discretion given
the attendant circumstances
SbD v. Acts of Lasciviousness: Intent is to cast dishonor as
opposed to lewd designs
SbD v. Maltreatment: the nature and effects will determine
the crime committed, hence, if the offended party suffered
from shame or humiliation, it is SbD
Cf Unjust Vexation: Without any other factor (i.e.
humiliation or lewd design), the act is merely unjust
vexation if it produced annoyance or irritation

Notes:
-

In case offended party is a public officer, then in the office

at the time of the commission of the offense also
The civil and criminal actions must be filed in the same
court
The court where it is first filed will have jurisdiction to the
exclusion of other courts
NOTE that If the crime being imputed to is a private crime
which cannot be prosecuted de oficio, the offended party
must file the complaint!
There is no need to prove actual damages, if the publication
is libelous per se, because injury to the reputation is a
natural and probable consequence of the defamation
Exemplary damages may be recovered is action is based on
quasi delict (not delict)
In case of absolutely privileged communication, no remedy
is provided for damages
Proof of truth it must rest upon positive and direct evidence upon
which a definite finding may be made by the Court; probable cause
for belief in the truth of the statement is sufficient
Note that retraction may mitigate damages
If the article is libelous per se, publication was an honest
mistake is not a complete defense
Three requisites of defense in defamation:
1. It appears that the matter charged as libelous is trye
2. It was published with good motives
3. For justifiable ends

Notes:
-

Limited to planting of evidence which tend to directly cause

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER | Cielo Goo | A2015

innocent Person
3.

innocent person the commission of a crime

Such act does not constitute perjury

364
Intriguing against
Honor

false prosecution
363 v. Perjury:
a. 363 is committed by performing an act which imputes
the commission of a crime; in perjury, the gravamaen
is the imputation itself falsely made before an officer
b. 363 is limited to planting of evidence while perjury is
the giving of false statement under oath or false
affidavit
Also different from defamation

How is it committed By any person who shall make any intrigue which
has for its principal purpose to blemish the honor or reputation of
another person
It may involve some trickery or some ingenous, crafty or
secret plot (unlike in slander by deed)

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER | Cielo Goo | A2015