Quick Notes on Constitutional Law 2 Cases

Arellano University School of Law

Freedom of Speech & Freedom of Religion
Vr Novio
Case Citation
Facts
Decision/Doctrine
FREEDOM OF SPEECH
Espuelas vs. People, GR L- - Escar Espuelas convicted - SC affirmed CA decision;
2990, 17 December 1951
of Art 142 of RPC - The freedom of speech
secured
by
the
(Inciting to sedition) w/c
Constitution
does
not
was affirmed by the CA;
- Accused faked suicide of
confer an absolute right
another person and sent
to speak or publish
photos to newspapers
without
responsibility
local and abroad;
whatever
one
may
- In
the
suicide
note,
choose;
accused
stated
that - It does not mean though
suicide was committed
that
citizens
cannot
because he didnt like
criticize
but
such
the
Roxas
criticism be specific and
administration;
therefore
constructive,
reasoned or tempered,
and not a contemptuous
condemnation of the
entire govt set-up;
- When the use of irritating
language centers not on
persuading the readers
but
on
creating
disturbances,
the
rationale of free speech
cannot apply and the
speaker or writer is
removed
from
the
protection
of
the
constitutional guaranty;
Lopez vs CA, GR L-26549, - Fidel
Cruz,
sanitary - A
newspaper,
it
is
31 July 1970
inspector,
sent
a
stressed, "should not be
distress signal to Manila
held to account to a
re series of killings in
point of suppression for
Babuyan Islands;
honest
mistakes
or
- Said distress signal was a
imperfection
in
the
hoax and was made for
choice of words.";
Cruz for transportation - However, this was not
home to Manila;
applicable in the instant
- This
Week
magazine
case because there was
published a pictorial
no daily deadline to
magazine with a photo
meet
because
of a different Fidel Cruz
Page 1 of 11

Quick Notes on Constitutional Law 2 Cases

Arellano University School of Law
Freedom of Speech & Freedom of Religion
Vr Novio
Case Citation
Facts
Decision/Doctrine
(former Mayor of Sta
publication is on a
Maria, Bulacan);
weekly basis;
- The
magazine - Also, there is reasonable
acknowledged its errors
care
imposed
by
and expressed regrets;
previous SC decisions
- Petitioner contends that
upholding the freedom
no action for libel would
of the press which were
arise
because
of
not present in this case;
freedom of the press;
- The prompt correction
however justified the
reduction
of
the
damages awarded from
P11 thousand to P1
thousand;
Quisumbing vs Lopez, GR - Norberto Quisumbing filed - CA decision affirmed;
L-6465, 31 January 1955
a
complaint
against - There is no evidence in
the record to prove that
respondents
for
a
the publication of the
libelous article (raid of
news
item
under
offices of usurers) but
consideration
was
was dismissed by the
prompted by personal ill
CFI and affirmed by CA);
- Petitioner alleged that the
will or spite, or that
headline branding him
there was intention to do
as usurer is libelous per
harm;
Newspapers
should be
se;
given such leeway and
tolerance as to enable
them to courageously
and effectively perform
their important role in
our democracy;
- In the preparation of
stories, press reporters
and edition usually have
to
race
with
their
deadlines;
and
consistently with good
faith and reasonable
care, they should not be
held to account, to a
point of suppression, for
honest
mistakes
or
Page 2 of 11

Quick Notes on Constitutional Law 2 Cases

Arellano University School of Law
Freedom of Speech & Freedom of Religion
Vr Novio
Case Citation
Facts

Bulletin Publishing Corp vs - Petitioners were charged Noel,

GR
76565,
9
with libel for an article
November 1988
stating
that
Amir
Mindalano was not from a
royal
house
but
became
a
leader
because he had the
advantage to live with
an American family;
- Respondents
herein
(relatives of Mindalano)
argued that their family belong to no less than 4
of the 16 royal houses of
Lanao del Sur and that
the
article
inflicted
damage and irreparable
injury;
- The RTC denied motion to
dismiss which is the
subject of petition for certiorari
and
prohibition of the instant
case;

Decision/Doctrine
imperfection
in
the
choice of words;
SC
granted
petition
(complaint lack cause of
action);
There were no derogatory
or derisive implications
or nuances in the article
and that no evidence of
malevolent intent either
on the part of the author
or the publisher of the
article here involved;
No
legal
rights
or
privileges are contingent
upon grant or possession
of a title of nobility or
royalty
and
the
Constitution
expressly
forbids the enactment of
any law conferring such
a title;
Personal
hurt
or
embarassment
or
offense, even if real, is
not,
however,
automatically equivalent
to defamation;
It
is
to
community
standards-not personal
or family standards-that
a court must refer in
evaluating a publication
claimed
to
be
defamatory;
A newspaper especially
one national in reach
and coverage, should be
free to report on events
and developments in
which the public has a
legitimate
interest,
Page 3 of 11

Quick Notes on Constitutional Law 2 Cases

Arellano University School of Law
Freedom of Speech & Freedom of Religion
Vr Novio
Case Citation
Facts

Decision/Doctrine
wherever they may take
place within the nation
and as well in the
outside
world,
with
minimum fear of being
hauled to court by one
group
or
another
(however
defined
in
scope) on criminal or
civil charges for libel, so
long as the newspaper
respects
and
keeps
within the standards of
morality
and
civility
prevailing
within
the
general community;
- petitioners in the exercise
of freedom of speech
and of the press have
kept well within the
generally
accepted
moral and civil standards
of the community as to
what
may
be
characterized
as
defamatory;
Borjal vs CA, GR 126466, - CA held that petitioners - Petition
granted;
CAR
14 January 1999
are solidarily liable for
ruling reversed;
damages for writing and - In order to maintain a libel
suit, it is essential that
publishing
articles
the victim be identifiable
(Philstar) claimed to be
although
it
is
not
derogatory
and
necessary that he be
offensive
to
private
named and it is also not
respondent
Francisco
sufficient
that
the
Wenceslao;
- Series of articles on the
offended
party
alleged
anomalous
recognized himself as
activities of an organizer
the person attacked or
of a conference without
defamed, but it must be
naming or identifying
shown that at least a
private respondent;
third
person
could
- A crime of libel filed was
identify him as the
Page 4 of 11

Quick Notes on Constitutional Law 2 Cases

Arellano University School of Law
Freedom of Speech & Freedom of Religion
Vr Novio
Case Citation
Facts
Decision/Doctrine
dismissed
by
the
object of the libelous
Assistant
Prosecutor
publication
(these
which was sustained by
requisites not complied);
privileged
DOJ and the President; - A
- A civil action for damages
communication may be
was filed based on libel
either
absolutely
which was granted by
privileged or qualifiedly
the RTC and affirmed by
privileged.
Absolutely
the CA;
privileged
- Petitioners
raised
the
communications
are
defense
of
qualified
those which are not
privileged
actionable even if the
communications under
author has acted in bad
Art 354 of the RPC;
faith.
ualifiedly
privileged
communications
containing
defamatory
imputations
are
not
actionable unless found
to have been made
without good intention
justifiable motive. To this
genre belong "private
communications"
and
"fair and true report
without any comments
or remarks.";
- publications which are
privileged for reasons of
public
policy
are
protected
by
the
constitutional guaranty
of freedom of speech;
- The concept of privileged
communications
is
implicit in the freedom of
the press;
- privileged
communications
must, sui generis, be
protective
of
public
opinion;
Page 5 of 11

Quick Notes on Constitutional Law 2 Cases

Arellano University School of Law
Freedom of Speech & Freedom of Religion
Vr Novio
Case Citation
Facts

Decision/Doctrine
- fair
commentaries
on
matters
of
public
interest are privileged
and constitute a valid
defense in an action for
libel or slander;
- The
doctrine
of
fair
comment means that
while in general every
discreditable imputation
publicly made is deemed
false, because every
man
is
presumed
innocent until his guilt is
judicially proved, and
every false imputation is
deemed
malicious,
nevertheless, when the
discreditable imputation
is directed against a
public person in his
public capacity, it is not
necessarily actionable.
In
order
that
such
discreditable imputation
to a public official may
be actionable, it must
either
be
a
false
allegation of fact or a
comment based on a
false supposition. If the
comment
is
an
expression of opinion,
based on established
facts,
then
it
is
immaterial
that
the
opinion happens to be
mistaken, as long as it
might reasonably be
inferred from the facts;
- There is no denying that
the questioned articles
Page 6 of 11

Quick Notes on Constitutional Law 2 Cases

Arellano University School of Law
Freedom of Speech & Freedom of Religion
Vr Novio
Case Citation
Facts

Decision/Doctrine
dealt with matters of
public interest;
- But
no
matter
how
intemperate
or
deprecatory
the
utterances appear to be,
the privilege is not to be
defeated
nor
rendered inutile for,
as
succinctly expressed by
Mr.
Justice
Brennan
in New York Times v.
Sullivan, "[D]ebate on
public issues should be
uninhibited, robust and
wide open, and that it
may
well
include
vehement, caustic and
sometimes unpleasantly
sharp attacks on the
government and public
officials;
- While, generally, malice
can be presumed from
defamatory words, the
privileged character of a
communication destroys
the
presumption
of
malice;
- Even assuming that the
contents of the articles
are false, mere error,
inaccuracy
or
even
falsity alone does not
prove
actual
malice.
Errors or misstatements
are inevitable in any
scheme of truly free
expression and debate.
Consistent with good
faith and reasonable
care, the press should
Page 7 of 11

Quick Notes on Constitutional Law 2 Cases

Arellano University School of Law
Freedom of Speech & Freedom of Religion
Vr Novio
Case Citation
Facts

Cabansag vs Fernandez, GR L-8974, 18 October

1957

Decision/Doctrine
not be held to account,
to
a
point
of
suppression, for honest
mistakes
or
imperfections
in
the
choice
of
language.
There must be some
room for misstatement
of fact as well as for
misjudgment. Only by
giving
them
much
leeway and tolerance
can they courageously
and effectively function
as critical agencies in
our democracy;
-

People vs Castelo, GR L- 11816, 23 April 1962

People vs Alarcon, GR 46551, 12 December 1939

Page 8 of 11

Quick Notes on Constitutional Law 2 Cases

Arellano University School of Law
Freedom of Speech & Freedom of Religion
Vr Novio
Case Citation
Facts
Gonzales
vs
Kalaw- Katigbak, GR L-69500, 22
July 1985

Decision/Doctrine
-

Lagunzad vs Soto Vda de Gonzales, GR L-32066, 6

August 1979

Ayer
Production
vs Capulong, GR L-82380, 29
April 1988

People vs Kottinger, GR 20569, 29 October 1923

People vs Go Pin, GR L- 7491, 8 August 1955

Page 9 of 11

Quick Notes on Constitutional Law 2 Cases

Arellano University School of Law
Freedom of Speech & Freedom of Religion
Vr Novio
Case Citation
Facts
Eastern Broadcasting vs Dans, GR L-59329, 19 July
1985

FREEDOM OF RELIGION
Fonacier vs CA, GR L- 5917, 28 January 1955

Decision/Doctrine
-

Ebralinag
vs
Division Superintendent,
GR
95770, 1 March 1993

American Bible Society vs City of Manila, GR L-9637,

30 April 1957

Page 10 of 11

Quick Notes on Constitutional Law 2 Cases

Arellano University School of Law
Freedom of Speech & Freedom of Religion
Vr Novio
Case Citation
Facts
Victoriano vs Elizalde Rope Workers Union, GR L25246,
12
September
1974

Decision/Doctrine
-

Pamil vs Teleron, GR L- 34854, 20 November 1978

Imbong vs Ochoa,
204819, 8 April 2014

GR -

Diocese of Bacolod vs COMELEC, GR 205728, 21

January 2015

Page 11 of 11