Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Primer For Libel and Cyber Libel
Primer For Libel and Cyber Libel
*CORE Cybercrimes:
(a) cyber-squatting;
(b) cybersex;
(c) libel; and
(d) other offenses - aiding/abetting in the commission of cybercrime,
and attempt in the commission of cybercrime.
On the other hand, the Supreme Court’s Rule on Cybercrime Warrants (A.M.
No. 17-11-03-SC) classifies cybercrimes, for purposes of determining the
venue, in this manner:
ELEMENTS/REQUISITES
For an imputation to be libelous under Art. 353 of the RPC, the following
requisites must be present:
(a) it must be defamatory;
(b) it must be malicious;
(c) it must be given publicity; and
(d) the victim must be identifiable.
A fifth element or requisite is added under R.A. 10175 for online libel: the
act must be committed through a computer system or any other similar
means which may be devised in the future.
3 of 11
PRIMER FOR LIBEL AND CYBER LIBEL
COMPUTER SYSTEM
- any device or group of interconnected or related devices, one or more
of which, pursuant to a program, performs automated processing of data. It
covers any type of device with data processing capabilities including, but not
limited to, computers and mobile phones. The device consisting of hardware
and software may include input, output and storage components which may
stand alone or be connected in a network or other similar devices. It also
includes computer data storage devices or media (RA 10175)
- any device or group of interconnected or related devices, one or more of
which, pursuant to a program, performs automated processing of data (A.M.
No. 17-11-03-SC)
Source: https://pnl-law.com/blog/online-libel-as-cybercrime-in-the-philippines-definition-
requisites-and-application-of-penalties/ (with edits by MCN)
APPLICABLE PENALTIES
SEC. 6. All crimes defined and penalized by the Revised Penal Code, as
amended, and special laws, if committed by, through and with the use of
information and communications technologies shall be covered by the
relevant provisions of this Act: Provided, That the penalty to be imposed
shall be one (1) degree higher than that provided for by the Revised Penal
Code, as amended, and special laws, as the case may be.
CASES
1. Jose Disini, Jr., et. al. vs. The Secretary of Justice, et. al., G.R. No.
203335, 18 February 2014
1
SEC. 5. Other Offenses. — The following acts shall also constitute an offense:
(a) Aiding or Abetting in the Commission of Cybercrime. – Any person who willfully abets or aids in the
commission of any of the offenses enumerated in this Act shall be held liable.
(b) Attempt in the Commission of Cybercrime. — Any person who willfully attempts to commit any of
the offenses enumerated in this Act shall be held liable.
2
(4) Libel. — 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.
4 of 11
PRIMER FOR LIBEL AND CYBER LIBEL
With the exception of the crimes of online libel and online child
pornography, the Court would rather leave the determination of the
correct application of Section 7 to actual cases.
2. Belen vs. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 211120, 13 February 2017
Publication in libel
In claiming that he did not intend to expose the Omnibus Motion to
third persons, but only complied with the law on how service and
filing of pleadings should be done, petitioner conceded that the
defamatory statements in it were made known to someone other
than the person to whom it has been written. Despite the fact that
the motion was contained in sealed envelopes, it is not
unreasonable to expect that persons other than the one defamed
would be able to read the defamatory statements in it, precisely
because they were filed with the OCP of San Pablo City and copy
3
Ibid.
4
(2) Child Pornography. — The unlawful or prohibited acts defined and punishable by Republic Act
No. 9775 or the Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009, committed through a computer
system: Provided, That the penalty to be imposed shall be (1) one degree higher than that provided
for in Republic Act No. 9775.
5 of 11
PRIMER FOR LIBEL AND CYBER LIBEL
“It is not that a crime has not been committed that the case has
been dismissed. It is the insufficiency of evidence to prove that
indeed the respondent is the perpetrator of the crime,” Santos said,
adding the NBI can still file another complaint.
Santos was the same prosecutor who junked the NBI’s earlier
complaint in February for its failure to provide evidence that Mas
indeed posted the controversial tweet.
In his arrest, Mas allegedly confessed his crime to the media even
without any legal counsel present with him. State agents were
confident that this statement could be used to prosecute him easily.
But an Olongapo judge ruled this could not be admissible in court.
ORAL DEFAMATION
Oral defamation is a crime punishable under Section 94 of RA 10951, 5 which
amended Article 358 of the RPC.
Art. 358, as ameded. Slander. - Oral defamation shall be punished by
arresto mayor in its maximum period to prisión correccional in its minimum
period if it is of a serious and insulting nature; otherwise the penalty shall be
arresto menor or a fine not exceeding Twenty thousand pesos (₱20,000).
DEFINITION
Oral Defamation or Slander is libel committed by oral (spoken) means,
instead of in writing. It is defined as "the speaking of base and defamatory
words which tend to prejudice another in his reputation, office, trade,
business or means of livelihood."6
ELEMENTS/REQUISITES
(1) there must be an imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or
imaginary, or any act, omission, status or circumstances;
(2) made orally;
(3) publicly;
(4) and maliciously;
(5) directed to a natural or juridical person, or one who is dead;
(6) which tends to cause dishonor, discredit or contempt of the person
defamed.7
Grave/Serious or Slight Oral Defamation
Whether the offense committed is serious or slight oral defamation, depends
not only upon the sense and grammatical meaning of the utterances but also
upon the special circumstances of the case, like the social standing or the
advanced age of the offended party. "The gravity depends upon: (1) the
expressions used; (2) the personal relations of the accused and the offended
5
An Act Adjusting the Amount or the Value of Property and Damage on Which a Penalty is Based and
the Fines Imposed Under the Revised Penal Code, Amending for the Purpose Act No. 3815, Otherwise
Known as "The Revised Penal Code", as Amended.
6
De Leon vs. People, G.R. No. 212623, January 11, 2016, 779 SCRA 84.
7
Ibid.
8 of 11
PRIMER FOR LIBEL AND CYBER LIBEL
party; and (3) the special circumstances of the case, the antecedents or
relationship between the offended party and the offender, which may tend to
prove the intention of the offender at the time. In particular, it is a rule that
uttering defamatory words in the heat of anger, with some provocation
on the part of the offended party constitutes only a light felony."8
RED-TAGGING
DEFINITION
Petitioners in the case had asked the court for a writ of amparo and writ of
habeas data – both aimed at protecting one’s right to life, liberty and
security – for allegedly being harassed after being tagged by the military as
“communist front organizations.”
While the court dismissed the petition, Leonen said the case involved red-
baiting.
The bill was introduced by Reps. Carlos Zarate, Edcel Lagman, Jose
Belmonte, Pablo Ortega, Eufemia Cullamat, Ferdinant Gaite, Arlene Brosas,
France Castro, and Sarah Jane Elago.
Under the bill, any public official or employee who red tags a person shall be
punished with imprisonment or be fined, suffer perpetual disqualification to
hold public office, or face administrative cases.
By CNN Philippines Staff | Published May 25, 2021 4:13:59 PM
https://cnnphilippines.com/news/2021/5/25/hb9437-criminalize-red-tagging.html
8
Ibid.
9
G.R. No. 220028, November 10, 2015.
9 of 11
PRIMER FOR LIBEL AND CYBER LIBEL
Under the measure, the crime of red-tagging is defined as the act of labeling,
vilifying, branding, naming, accusing, harassing, persecuting, stereotyping,
or caricaturing individuals, groups, or organizations as state enemies, left-
leaning, subversives, communists, or terrorists as part of a counter-
insurgency or anti-terrorism strategy or program, by any state actor, such
as law enforcement agent, paramilitary, or military personnel.
"Any person found guilty of red-tagging shall be imprisoned for 10 years and
shall suffer the accessory penalty of perpetual absolute disqualification to
hold public office," according to the bill.
FREEDOM OF SPEECH
Section 4 Article III of the 1987 Constitution: No law shall be passed
abridging the freedom of speech, of expression or of the press, or the right of
the people to peaceably assemble and petition the government for redress of
grievances.
But in the case of Ellen Tordesillas, et. al. vs. DILG Sec. Ronaldo Puno, et.
al.10 the Supreme Court reminded that, “such valued freedom is not absolute
and unfettered at all times and under all circumstances. 11 The realities of life
in a complex society preclude an absolute exercise of the freedoms of speech
and of the press. They are not immune to regulation by the State in the
exercise of its police power.”12
Fake News
Under Article 154 of the RPC, as amended by RA 10951, 13 any person who
by means of printing, lithography, or any other means of publication shall
publish or cause to be published as news any false news which may
endanger the public order, or cause damage to the interest or credit of the
state shall be imposed with the penalty of arresto mayor and a fine ranging
from P40,000 to P200,000.
Circulating fake news through the internet is dealt with more heavily. Under
RA 10175 or the “Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012,” a penalty one degree
higher than that provided by the RPC shall be imposed whenever the crimes
10
G.R. No. 210088, October 01, 2018.
11
Philippine Journalists, Inc. (People's Journal) v. Thoenen, 513 Phil. 607 (2005).
12
ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corporation v. COMELEC, 380 Phil . 780, 793 (2000).
13
Supra, Note 5.
10 of 11
PRIMER FOR LIBEL AND CYBER LIBEL
defined and penalized by the RPC are committed by, through, and with the
use of information and communications technologies.
For the purpose of promoting and protecting the collective interests of all
Filipinos in the time of the COVID-19 pandemic, Congress passed RA 11469
or the “Bayanihan to Heal as One Act,” which punishes individuals or
groups creating, perpetrating, or spreading false information regarding the
COVID-19 crisis on social media and other platforms, such information
having no valid or beneficial effect on the population, and are clearly geared
to promote chaos, panic anarchy, fear, or confusion.
However, neither the RPC nor the Bayanihan Law provides a definition
of what constitutes “fake news.” This determination is thus left to the
authorities, without a set of clear guidelines. In Disini v. Secretary of
Justice, G.R. No. 203335, Feb. 18, 2014, the Supreme Court enlightens on
the effect imposed by vague or overbroad laws on free speech: “a person who
does not know whether his speech constitutes a crime under an overbroad
or vague law may simply restrain himself from speaking in order to avoid
being charged of a crime. The overbroad or vague law thus chills him into
silence.”
Source: https://www.conventuslaw.com/report/philippines-free-speech-vs-fake-news/ (with minor
edits by MCN)
LEGISLATIVE FRANCHISE
Decision: In light of the supervening denial of the pending House bills for the
renewal of ABS-CBN's legislative franchise, the Court finds it appropriate
to dismiss this case on the ground of mootness.
Highlights:
- A legislative franchise is both a pre-requisite and a continuing
requirement for broadcasting entities to broadcast their programs
through television and radio stations in the country.