People vs. Kottinger, G.R. No.

20569, 29 October 1923

FACTS: On November 1922, Detective Juan Tolentino raided the premises known as Camera Supply Co.
located at 110 Escotta, Manila where he found and confiscated postcards depicting non-Christian
inhabitants of the Philippines in their native attire and in poses showing how they live.

These were used as evidence against J.J. Kottinger, the manager of the company, and charged him of
having kept for sale in the store, obscene and indecent pictures in violation of Section 12 of Article 277
otherwise known as, “The Philippine Libel Law.”

No evidence proving the obscenity and indecency of the postcards were presented by the prosecution
as they believed the postcards themselves are the best evidence of that. Dr. Beyer, a UP professor, and
corroborated by other witnesses, testified that none of the pictures showed anything that he did not see
on various occasions in his studies.

The defendant interposed a demurer based upon the ground that the facts alleged therein do not
constitute an offense and were not contrary to law. The trial court overruled the demurrer.

Kotingger was found guilty of the offense, the question was one of first impression not just in the
Philippines, but also in the United States, Great Britain and elsewhere, which is why the case was
submitted en banc for decision.

ISSUE: Whether or not pictures portraying the inhabitants of the country in native dress and as they
appear and can be seen in the regions in which they live are obscene or indecent.

DECISION: NO. The test ordinarily followed by the courts in determining whether a particular publication
or other thing is obscene within the meaning of the statutes, is whether the tendency of the matter
charged as obscene, is to deprave or corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences
and into whose hands a publication or other article charged as being obscene may fall. Another test of
obscenity is that which shocks the ordinary and common sense of men as an indecency.

The pictures that were confiscated merely depict persons as they live, without attempted presentation
of persons in unusual postures or dress. The aggregate judgment of the Philippine community, the moral
sense of all the people in the Philippines, would not be shocked by photographs of this type.
The Court is convinced that post-card pictures in this case cannot be characterized as offensive to
chastity, or foul, or filthy. The judgment is reversed, the information is dismissed, and defendant-
appellant is acquitted with all costs de oficio.