CYBERLIBEL

IN THE PHILIPPINES
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES
OUTLINE OF THE LECTURE
• Freedom of expression and its constitutional basis
• Limits to freedom of expression
• Cyber crimes and their legal bases
• Cyber Libel and its definition, elements, and how committed
• Cyber / Libel and selected Supreme Court decisions
• How to avoid committing Cyber Libel
NOTA BENE: Questions may be asked and answered during the lecture. And
all pictures or images used in this presentation were taken from the
public domain.
 CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES

• Freedom of expression
Gonzales v. Commission on Elections, 32 in which it
was held:
…At the very least, free speech and free press
may be identified with the liberty to discuss publicly
and truthfully any matter of public interest without
censorship and punishment. There is to be no previous
restraint on the communication of views or subsequent
liability whether in libel suits, prosecution for sedition,
or action for damages, or contempt proceedings
unless there be a clear and present danger of
substantive evil that Congress has a right to prevent.
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES

No law shall be passed abridging the

freedom of speech, of expression, or
of the press, or the right of the people
peaceably to assemble and petition
the government for redress of
grievances. [ARTICLE III, SECTION
4, 1987 CONSTITUTION]
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES

“Everyone has the right to freedom of

opinion and expression; this right
includes freedom to hold opinions
without interference and to seek, receive,
and impart information and ideas
through any media and regardless of
frontiers.” [Article 19, UNITED NATIONS
DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS]
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES

Limits to freedom of expression

(1) Contempt of Court
(2) Laws against invasion
of privacy
(3) Laws against obscenity
(4) National security laws
(5) Copyright law
(6) Laws on Libel / Cyber
Libel
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES

What is LIBEL?
Art. 353. Definition of libel. — A libel is
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. [Revised
Penal Code]
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES

HOW IS LIBEL COMMITTED?

Art. 355. Libel means by writings or similar means. — A
libel committed by means of writing, printing,
lithography, engraving, radio, phonograph, painting,
theatrical exhibition, cinematographic exhibition, or
any similar means, shall be punished by 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 which may be brought by the
offended party.
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES

CYBER CRIME ACT (Republic Act 10175)

Signed into law on SEPTEMBER 12, 2012
after more than 10 years of legislative
work.
Declared CONSTITUTIONAL by our Supreme
Court on February 18, 2014, except for
Sections 4(c)(3), 7, 12, and 19.
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES

CYBER CRIMES IN THE PHILIPPINES (Sec. 4, RA 10175)

1. Illegally accessing computer systems
2. Unauthorized interception of signals
3. Data interference
4. Interfering with the computer system\
5. Misusing computer units
6. Cyber squatting
7. Computer forgery
 CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES
9. Defrauding via computer
10. Computer-related forgery
11. Identity theft or ‘phishing’
12. Cyber sex
13. Cyber pornography
14. Cyber Libel Abetting the commission of the computer crimes
15. Crimes punished under Revised Penal Code that use
computers
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES

CYBER LIBEL DEFINED:

The unlawful or prohibited
acts of libel as defined in
Article 355 of the Revised
Penal Code, as amended,
committed through a computer
system or any other similar
means which may be devised
in the future.
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES

ELEMENTS OF CYBER LIBEL (very

similar to RPC Libel):
• Imputation of a crime, a vice or
defect, real or imaginary, or any act,
omission, condition, status, or
circumstance.

• Imputation must be made publicly.

• The imputation must be malicious.
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES

• The imputation against at a natural or

juridical person, including those already
dead.

• The imputation intended to cause

dishonor, discredit or contempt of the
person defamed.

• The imputation was done through the

use of a computer system or any other
similar means. (See Section. 4(c)(4) of
R.A. 10175)
 CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES
SELECTED CASES DECIDED BY THE SUPREME COURT
Imputation of a crime, vice, defect (real or imaginary), hence,
DEFAMATORY
An allegation is considered defamatory if it ascribes to a
person the commission of a crime, the possession of a vice
or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition,
status or circumstance which tends to dishonor or discredit
or put him in contempt, or which tends to blacken the
memory of one who is dead.66 In determining whether a
statement is defamatory, the words used are to be construed
in their entirety and should be 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. [Manila Bulletin vs.
Victor Domingo, GR 170341, July 5, 2017]
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES
Examples of defamatory words:
“kalokohan” “non-performance”

“low morale of staff” “nepotism”

“gross inefficiency” “improper decorum”

“mismanagement” “mangongotong”
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES

How about
“P_ _ _ _G INA MO!”?

Well the Supreme Court held that …

CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES

In Reyes vs. People, we ruled that the expression

"putang ina mo" is a common enough utterance in the
dialect that is often employed, not really to slender but
rather to express anger or displeasure. In fact, more
often, it is just an expletive that punctuates one's
expression of profanity. We do not find it seriously
insulting that after a previous incident involving his
father, a drunk Rogelio Pader on seeing Atty.
Escolango would utter words expressing anger.
Obviously, the intention was to show his feelings of
resentment and not necessarily to insult the latter.
Being a candidate running for vice mayor, occasional
gestures and words of disapproval or dislike of his
person are not uncommon.
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES
Malice
There is "actual malice" or malice in fact when the
offender makes the defamatory statement with the
knowledge that it is false or with reckless disregard
of whether it was false or not. The reckless
disregard standard used here requires a high
degree of awareness of probable falsity. There must
be sufficient evidence to permit the conclusion that
the accused in fact entertained serious doubts as to
the truth of the statement he published. Gross or
even extreme negligence is not sufficient to
establish actual malice. [DISINI vs. DOJ Secretary,
GR No. 203335, Feb. 11, 2014]
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES

Malice connotes ill will or spite and

speaks not in response to duty but
merely to injure the reputation of
the person defamed, and implies an
intention to do ulterior and
unjustifiable harm. Malice is bad
faith or bad motive. It is the
essence of the crime of libel.
[Manila Bulletin vs. Victor Domingo,
supra.]
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES

But, where the offended party is a

private individual, the prosecution need
not prove the presence of malice. The
law explicitly presumes its existence
(malice in law) from the defamatory
character of the assailed statement. For
his defense, the accused must show that
he has a justifiable reason for the
defamatory statement even if it was in
fact true. [DISINI case]
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES
Publication
Publication, in the law of libel, means the making of
the defamatory matter, after it has been written,
known to someone other than the person to whom
it has been written. If the statement is sent straight
to a person for whom it is written there is no
publication of it. The reason for this is that "a
communication of the defamatory matter to the
person defamed cannot injure his reputation
though it may wound his self-esteem. A man’s
reputation is not the good opinion he has of
himself, but the estimation in which others hold
him.“ [Magno vs. People, GR No. 133896, Jan 27,
2006]
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES

There is publication if the material is

communicated to a third person. It is not
required that the person defamed has read
or heard about the libelous remark. What is
material is that a third person has read or
heard the libelous statement, for "a man's
reputation is the estimate in which others
hold him, not the good opinion which he
has of himself.“ [MANILA BULLETIN vs.
VICTOR DOMINGO, supra]
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES
“Wala mai laing nakabalo.”
“Kita kita ra bitaw nakabasa ani.”
“Wala man nako siya hinganli.”

NOTE: “On the other hand, to satisfy the

element of identifiability, it must be
shown that at least a third person or a
stranger was able to identify him as the
object of the defamatory statement.”
[MANILA BULLETIN vs. VICTOR
DOMINGO, supra.]
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES
BUT THE LIBELOUS LETTER WAS INSIDE AN UNSEALED ENVELOPE?

Now, if sending a letter "not shown to be sealed" is

publication, sending of an "unsealed letter" as in this
case, should a fortiori be held to be publication.
[PEOPLE vs. SILVELA, G.R. No. L-10610 , May 26, 1958
cited also in DOLORES MAGNO vs. PEOPLE, G.R. No.
133896, January 27, 2006]
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES

AVOIDING CYBER LIBEL

1. Truth

Art. 361. Proof of the truth. — In every

criminal prosecution for libel, the truth may
be given in evidence to the court and if it
appears that the matter charged as libelous
is true, and, moreover, that it was published
with good motives and for justifiable ends,
the defendants shall be acquitted.
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES
2. Privileged Communication (Article 354, RPC)
A privileged communication may be classified as either absolutely
privileged or qualifiedly privileged. The absolutely privileged
communications are those which are not actionable even if the
author has acted in bad faith. This classification includes statements
made by members of Congress in the discharge of their functions as
such, official communications made by public officers in the
performance of their duties, and allegations or statements made by the
parties or their counsel in their pleadings or motions or during the
hearing of judicial proceedings, as well as the answers given by
witnesses in reply to questions propounded to them, in the course of
said proceedings, provided that said allegations or statements are
relevant to the issues, and the answers are responsive or pertinent to
the questions propounded to said witnesses
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES
The qualifiedly privileged communications
are those which contain defamatory imputations but
which are not actionable unless found to have been
made without good intention or justifiable motive, and
to which "private communications" and "fair and true
report without any comments or remarks" belong. Since
the qualifiedly privileged communications are the
exceptions to the general rule, these require proof of
actual malice in order that a defamatory imputation may
be held actionable.90 But when malice in fact is proven,
assertions and proofs that the libelous articles are
qualifiedly privileged communications are futile, since
being qualifiedly privileged communications merely
prevents the presumption of malice from attaching to a
defamatory imputation. [MANILA BULLETIN CASE]
 CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES
3. Common Sense / Prudence
Refrain from carelessly POSTING in social media
(Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Messenger, E-Mail, and
other platforms or applications.
4. Do not make libelous comments to the posts of
others.
‘Likes’, ‘sharing’ or ‘thumbs up’ are SAFE, for as long
as you do not make a new libelous or defamatory
comment yourself on somebody else’s post. Original
author is liable [Section 4(c)(4), RA 10175]
CYBER LIBEL IN THE PHILIPPINES

DAGHANG
SALAMAT!