Tieng v. Palacio-Alaras, G.R. Nos.

164845, 181732 & 185315,

July 13, 2021
Carandang, J.

Facts:
Larry Henares, a commentator and broadcaster on the radio program
"Make My Day with Larry Henares," was charged with criminal libel charges
by Willy Tieng, the owner of KLG, Inc., and his brother. The charges were
triggered by defamatory statements made by Henares on November 28 and
29, 2001, accusing the Tieng brothers of involvement in smuggling,
corruption, and name-dropping. These statements were broadcasted on
DWBR FM 104.3.

In response to the libel charges, Henares filed a motion to quash the

informations, citing reasons such as defective form, lack of complainant
identification, and jurisdictional concerns. The prosecution contended that the
venue regulations specified in Article 360 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC)
exclusively pertain to written defamation and do not extend to cases involving
radio and television broadcasts. Despite this argument, the Regional Trial
Court (RTC) rejected Henares' motion to quash, asserting that the mere
assertion that the statements were made in Makati City was adequate to
establish jurisdiction for the court. Subsequently, Henares appealed to the
Court of Appeals (CA), which acceded to his petition and nullified the
informations. The CA maintained that Article 360 of the RPC is not applicable
to situations involving radio and television broadcasts.

Issue:
Whether the venue and jurisdiction rules provided in Article 360 of the
Revised Penal Code are applicable to radio and television broadcasts.

Ruling:
No. The venue and jurisdiction rules under Article 360 do not apply to
libel cases involving radio and television broadcasts. Charges of defamation
through radio broadcasts must adhere to the guidelines set forth in Article 360
of the Revised Penal Code (RPC). The court must have jurisdiction over the
location where the offense occurred or where its essential elements transpired.
Jurisdiction, in criminal case, is determined by the allegations in the complaint
or information, and if the evidence reveals that the offense took place
elsewhere, the court lacks jurisdiction.

The court expounded on the specific provisions of Article 360, as

amended by R.A. 4363, pertaining to venue in cases of written defamation.
The venue is stipulated to be in the court of first instance of the province or
city where the libelous article is printed and first published or where any
offended party resides during the commission of the offense. However, the
court categorically declared that these provisions do not extend to radio and
television broadcasts, as they do not fall under the classification of "written
defamations." Consequently, the rules of venue and jurisdiction delineated in
Article 360 are inapplicable to libel cases involving radio and television
broadcasts, aligning with the court's interpretation of the law's language and
its discernment of the distinct nature of defamation through different
mediums.