The crime of libel is committed when a person makes, against another, a public and malicious

imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition,
status or circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, discredit or contempt of a natural or
juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who is dead (Article 353, Revised Penal
Code).

When libel is committed by means of writing, printing, lithography, engraving, radio,

phonograph, painting, theatrical exhibition, cinematographic exhibition or any similar means, the
penalty imposed under the law is prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods or a
fine ranging from 200 to 6,000 pesos, or both, in addition to the civil action that may be brought
by the offended party. (Article 355, Ibid.)

To address the changing times as well as the advancement of technology, Republic Act (RA)
10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 was passed into law. One of the salient parts of
RA 10175 is Section 4 (c) (4), which renders unlawful or prohibited acts of libel those mentioned
under Article 355 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, if such acts are committed through a
computer system or any other similar means that may be devised in the future.

Accordingly, a person may institute a complaint against another person who posted something
online for libel if what was posted on social media was publicly made and in such a manner that
it maliciously impute a crime, or of a vice or defect, or any act, omission, condition, status or
circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, discredit or contempt of his friend.

There is a presumption of malice in every defamatory imputation made, notwithstanding whether

the imputation made is true, as long as there is no good intention and justifiable motive for
making it is shown. The only exceptions are: (1) private communications made by any person to
another in the performance of any legal, moral or social duty; and (2) fair and true reports, made
in good faith, without any comments or remarks, of any judicial, legislative or other official
proceedings which are not of confidential nature, or of any statement, report or speech delivered
in said proceedings, or of any other act performed by public officers in the exercise of their
functions (Article 354, Id.).

Insofar as filing a complaint against a person who posted a comment, we take into account the
ruling of the Supreme Court in the case of Jose Jesus M. Disini Jr. et al. vs. The Secretary of
Justice et al. (G.R. No. 203335, February 11, 2014):

“x x x But the Court’s acquiescence goes only insofar as the cybercrime law penalizes the author
of the libelous statement or article. Cyberlibel brings with it certain intricacies, unheard of when
the penal code provisions on libel were enacted. The culture associated with Internet media is
distinct from that of print. x x x
“Of course, if the ‘Comment’ does not merely react to the original posting but creates an
altogether new defamatory story against Armand like ‘He beats his wife and children,’ then that
should be considered an original posting published on the Internet. Both the penal code and the
cybercrime law clearly punish authors of defamatory publications. Make no mistake, libel
destroys reputations that society values. Allowed to cascade in the Internet, it will destroy
relationships and, under certain circumstances, will generate enmity and tension between social
or economic groups, races, or religions, exacerbating existing tension in their relationships. x x
x”

Remedies of the Victim of Cyber Libel: (i) the person libeled may file a criminal case or a
separate civil case for damages (ii) but he may opt to recover damages in the same criminal case

Article 2219 (7) of the Civil Code provides that moral damages may be recovered in cases of
libel, slander or any other form of defamation. In effect, the offended party in these cases is
given the right to receive from the guilty party moral damages for injury to his feelings and
reputation in addition to punitive or exemplary damages. (Occena vs. Icamina, 181 SCRA 328;
M.H. Wylie vs. Rarang, 209 SCRA 357)

The civil action for libel shall be filed in the same court where the criminal action is filed and
vice versa and the court in which the action is first filed acquires exclusive jurisdiction to
entertain the corresponding complaint for libel. (Art. 360, Revised Penal Code as amended by
Republic Act No. 1289; Laquian vs. Baltazar, 31 SCRA 552; Agbayani vs. Sayo, 89 SCRA 699;
Cojuangco, Hr. vs. CA, 203 SCRA 620)

In the present case, we can file a separate civil case in which we can claim damages. However,
we need to prove that there was indeed libel