TITLE THIRTEEN: CRIMES AGAINST HONOR

Art. 353. Definition of libel

Defamation includes libel and slander
o Injuring a persons character, fame or reputation through
false and malicious statements.
o Tends to injure reputation or to diminish the esteem,
respect, good will or confidence in the plaintiff or to excite
derogatory feelings or opinions about the plaintiff.
o Publication of anything which is injurious to the good name
or reputation of another or tends to bring him into disrepute.
o Defamation is punished because enjoyment of a private
reputation is as much a constitutional right as the possession
of life, liberty or property.

Libel 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 dishonour, discredit or contempt
of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one
who is dead.
o committed by means of writing, printing, lithography,
engraving, radio, phonograph, painting or theatrical or
cinematographic exhibition, or any similar means.

Slander oral defamation

Elements of defamation:
1. That there must be an imputation of a crime, or of a vice, or
defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, status or
circumstance;
2. That the imputation must be made publicly;
3. That it must be malicious;
4. That the imputation must be directed to a natural or juridical
person, or one who is dead;
5. That the imputation must tend to cause the dishonour, discredit
or contempt of the person defamed.

Words used must be construed in their entirety and taken in their
plain, natural and ordinary meaning as they would be understood by
persons of reasonable understanding reading them, taking into
consideration the surrounding circumstances known to the hearer or
reader.

Meaning of writer is immaterial.

First element: Imputation of crime, etc.
An expression of opinion by one affected by the act of another and
based on actual facts is not libellous.
But to escape criminal responsibility for libel or slander, it is not
enough for the writer to say that he expresses no more than his
opinion or belief; the communication must be made in the
performance of a legal, moral or social duty.

Second element: imputation must be made publicly
Publication communication of the defamatory matter to some third
person or persons.
Merely composing a libel is not actionable unless it be published.

Third element: publication must be malicious
Malice prompted by personal ill-will or spite and speaks not in
response to duty, but merely to injure the reputation of the person
defamed.
Malice in fact shown by proof of ill-will, hatred or purpose to injure
o Justifiable motive cannot exist, and the imputations become
actionable.
Malice in law presumed from a defamatory imputation
o Where communication is privileged, malice is not presumed
from the defamatory words.
o Even if publication is injurious, presumption of malice
disappears upon proof of good intention and justifiable
motive.

Fourth element: must be directed at a natural or juridical person or
one who is dead
Not sufficient that the offended party recognized himself as the
person attacked or defamed; it must be shown that at least a third
person could identify him as the object of the libellous publication.
(blind items???)
Defamatory remarks directed at a group of persons is not actionable
unless the statements are all-embracing or sufficiently specific for
the victim to be identifiable.
Libel published in different parts may be taken together to establish
the identification of the offended party.
Innuendo defines the defamatory meaning which the plaintiff set
on the words, to show how they came to have that meaning, and
also to show how they relate to the plaintiff.
Purpose must be to injure the reputation of the offended party.

Fifth element: must tend to cause dishonour, etc to offended party
Dishonour disgrace, shame or ignominy
Discredit loss of credit or reputation; disesteem
Contempt state of being despised.


Art. 354. Requirement for publicity.
Every defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious, even if it
be true, if no good intention and justifiable motive for making it is
shown. Exceptions:
o A private communication made by any person to another in
the performance of any legal, moral or social duty.
o A fair and true report, 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

Privileged communication

Absolutely Privileged Conditionally Privileged
Not actionable Although containing defamatory
imputations, would not be actionable
unless made with malice or bad faith.
Limited to legislative and judicial
proceedings and other acts of state,
including communications made in
the discharge of a duty under
express authority of law, by or to
heads of executive departments.


Private communication made by any person to another in the
performance of any legal moral or social duty
Requisites to be privileged communication:
o Person who made the communication had a legal, moral or
social duty to make the communication, or at least, he had
an interest to be upheld;
o The communication is addressed to an officer or a board, or
superior, having some interest or duty in the matter;
o That the statements in the communication are made in good
faith without malice.

Applying to the wrong person due to honest mistake does not take
the case out of the privilege.
Unnecessary publicity destroys good faith.
The privileged character simply does away with the
presumption of malice.
o When malice in fact is proven, assertions and proofs that the
libellous articles are qualifiedly privileged communications
are futile since being qualifiedly privileged communications
merely prevents the presumption of malice from attaching to
a defamatory imputation
Rule: When actual malice is proven, the privileged character of the
communication is lost.
A privileged communication is matter of defense and must be
established by the accused.
How to overcome defense of privileged communication: Prove that:
o Defendant acted with malice in fact
o There is no reasonable ground for believing the charge to be
true. But Probable cause for belief in the truth of the
matter charged is sufficient.

Fair and true report official proceedings
Following conditions must exist:
o A fair and true report, 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
o made in good faith
o without any comments or remarks
Judicial proceedings
o True report of judicial proceedings is privileged.
o Allegations and averments in pleadings are absolutely
privileged only insofar as they are relevant or
pertinent to the issues.
o An action for libel on a defamatory matter uttered in the
course of a judicial proceeding might be instituted even if
the defamatory matter had not yet been stricken out of the
record. An action for libel accrues from the date of
publication.
o Parties, counsels and witnesses are exempted from liability
in libel or slander for words otherwise defamatory published
in the course of judicial proceedings, provided the
statements are pertinent or relevant to the case.
Only matters which are not of confidential nature may be published.

Remarks and comments on the conduct or acts of public officers
Defamatory remarks and comments on the conduct of public officers
which are related to the discharge of their official duties will not
constitute libel if the defendant proves the truth of the imputation.
Attack upon private character on matters which are not related to
official functions may constitute libel.
For the discreditable imputation to a public official to be actionable,
it must be either a false allegation of fact or a comment based
on false supposition.

Doctrine of fair comment
When the discreditable imputation is directed against a public person
in his public capacity, it is not necessarily actionable.
To be actionable, it must either be a false allegation of fact, or a
comment based on false supposition.
If the comment is an expression of opinion, based on established
facts, then it is immaterial that the opinion happens to be mistaken,
as long as it might reasonably be inferred from the facts.

Fair comments on qualification of candidates
If it appears that its actuated by actual or express malice, and is
defamatory in its nature, the comment or criticism constitutes libel.

Criticism does not follow a public man into his private life; it deals only with
things as shall invite public attention or call for public comment.

Statements made in self defense or in mutual controversy are often
privileged. It must be made in good faith, without malice and is not
unnecessarily defamatory of his assailant.

The person libelled is justified to hit back with another libel. But retaliation or
vindicativeness cannot be a basis of self-defense in defamation.
The answering of libel may be justified, if it is adequate; and it is
inadequate when the answer is unnecessarily scurrilous.
RULE: the defamatory statements made must be a fair answer to the
libel made by the other party and must be related to the imputation
made. The answer should not be unnecessarily libellous.

Art. 355. Libel by means of writing or similar means.

Libel may be committed by means of: writing, printing, lithography,
engraving, radio, theatrical exhibition, cinematographic exhibition or any
similar means.

The court is given the discretion to impose the penalty of imprisonment or
fine or both for the crime of libel. Fine is preferred penalty.

A civil action for damages may be filed simultaneously or separately with the
criminal action.


Art. 356. Threatening to publish and offer to prevent
such publication for a compensation

Acts punished:
1. By threatening another to publish a libel concerning him, or his
parents, spouse, child or other members of his family.
2. By offering to prevent the publication of such libel for compensation
or money consideration.

Blackmail Any unlawful extortion of money by threats of accusation
or exposure; hush money

Felonies where blackmail is possible:
1. Light threats (Art. 283)
2. Threatening to publish, or offering to prevent the publication of a
libel for compensation (Art. 356)


Art. 357. Prohibited publication of acts referred to in the
course of official proceedings.

Elements:
1. That the offender is a reporter, editor or manager of a newspaper
daily or magazine.
2. That he publishes facts connected with the private life of another.
3. That such facts are offensive to the honor, virtue and reputation of
said person.

Prohibition applies even if the facts are involved in official
proceedings.
Facts that are intimately related to ones family and home do not at
all interest or please the intelligent and educated class of newspaper
readers.

RA 1477
Publisher, editor, columnist or any reporter of any newspaper,
magazine, etc cannot be compelled to reveal the source of any news
report or information appearing in said publication which was related
in confidence to such publisher, editor or reporter unless the court or
a house or committee of Congress finds that such revelation is
demanded by the security of the State.


Art. 358. Slander

Slander oral defamation; libel committed by oral or spoken means.
o Two kinds: simple slander and grave slander
Factors that determine gravity
o Expressions used
o Personal relations of the accused and the offended party
o Circumstances surrounding the case
o Social standing and position of offended party.
Slander need not be heard by offended party.


Art. 359. Slander by deed

Slander by deed committed by performing any act which casts
dishonour, discredit or contempt upon another person.

Elements:
1. That the offender performs any act not included in any other crime
against honor.
2. That such act is performed in the presence of other person or
persons.
3. That such act casts dishonour, discredit or contempt upon the
offended party.

Kinds: simple and grave.

Factors: social standing of the offended party, the circumstances under
which the act was committed, the occasion, etc.

Slander by deed vs. Acts of lasciviousness: AL has lewd designs. SD
aims to cast dishonour, discredit or contempt.

Slander by deed vs. Maltreatment: differ upon the effects. SD causes
shame and humiliation.

Unjust vexation, slander by deed and acts of lasciviousness

UJ SD AL
Presence of irritation or
annoyance
Presence of irritation or
annoyance
Presence of irritation or
annoyance
Publicity and dishonor Lewd designs
Circumstances of rape

When offended partys complaint is not necessary
In Art. 360 only defamation imputing crimes which may not be
prosecuted de oficio (adultery, concubinage, seduction, abduction,
rape and AL) must be prosecuted upon complaint by the offended
party.
Where no imputation of any of the crimes mentioned above is made,
complaint by offended party is not necessary.
Imputation of a vice or defect which does not constitute a crime at
all is not within the exception.

Art. 360. Persons responsible

The persons responsible for libel are:
1. The person who publishes, exhibits or causes the publication or
exhibition of any defamation in writing or similar means.
2. The author or editor of a book or pamphlet.
3. The editor or business manager of a daily newspaper magazine or
serial publication.
4. The owner of the printing plant which publishes a libellous article
with his consent and all other persons who in any way participate in
or have connection with its publication.

Municipal court of a municipality cannot conduct preliminary investigation of
criminal action for written defamation. Such shall be conducted by the
provincial or city fiscal of the province or city or by the municipal court of the
city or capital of the province where the action may be instituted.

Venue of criminal and civil actions for damages in cases of written
defamations
Criminal and civil actions for damages shall be filed simultaneously or
separately with the CFI of the province or city
1. Where the libellous article is printed and first published; or,
2. Where any of the offended parties actually resides at the time of the
commission of the offenses.

Where one is a public officer, No. 2 above shall be replaced with the CFI of
the province or city where he held office at the time of the commission of
the offense.

If one of the offended parties is a private individual, No. 2 above shall be
replaced with CFI of the province or city where he actually resides at the
time of the commission of the offense.

Offended party must file complaint for defamation imputing a crime
which cannot be prosecuted de oficio.
Applies not only to written but also to oral defamation.

If action is one based on quasi-delict, exemplary or corrective damages may
also be awarded under Article 2231 of the CC.

For liability in damages to arise from an alleged libellous publication without
offending press freedom, there is need to prove that the publication was
made with actual malice with the knowledge of its falsity or with reckless
disregard of whether it was false or not.

No remedy for damages for slander or libel in case of absolutely privileged
communication.


Art. 361. Proof of the truth

Proof of truth is admissible in any of the following:
1. When the act or omission imputed constitutes a crime regardless of
whether the offended party is a private individual or a public officer.
2. When the offended party is a Government employee, even if the
act or omission does not constitute a crime, provided, it is related
to the discharge of his official duties.

When imputation involves the private life of a government employee which is
not related to the discharge of his official duties, the offender cannot prove
the truth thereof.

Is it necessary to show that the accused who proved the truth of the
imputation published it with good motives and for justifiable ends?
- No, since the accused did the public a service.

Requisites of defense in defamation:
1. The matter charged as libellous is true.
2. It was published with good motives.
3. And for justifiable ends.

Retraction may mitigate damages.

That the publication was an honest mistake is not a complete defense but
serves only to mitigate damages where the article is libellous per se.


Art. 362. Libelous remarks

Libelous remarks or comments on matter privileged, if made with malice in
fact, do not exempt the author and editor.


Art. 363. Incriminating innocent persons

Elements:
1. That the offender performs an act.
2. That by such act he directly incriminates or imputes to an innocent
person the commission of a crime.
3. That such act does not constitutes perjury.

Elements of perjury: (for comparison)
1. That the accused made a statement under oath or executed an
affidavit upon a material matter;
2. That the statement or affidavit was made before a competent
officer, authorized to receive and administer oath;
3. That in that statement or affidavit, the accused made a wilful and
deliberate assertion of falsehood; and
4. That the sworn statement or affidavit containing falsity is required by
law.

Article is limited to planting evidence and the like, which tend
directly to cause false prosecution.
Cannot be done through verbal means because false accusation is
defamation or perjury.

Incriminating an innocent person vs. perjury by false accusations

Incriminating innocent person Perjury by false accusations
Committed by performing an act by
which the offender directly
incriminates or imputes to an
innocent person the commission of a
crime
Gravamen of the offense is the
imputation itself, falsely made,
before an officer
Limited to act of planting evidence
and the like, in order to incriminate
an innocent person
Giving of false statement under oath
or the making of a false affidavit,
imputing to a person the commission
of a crime.

Incriminatory machinations vs. defamation

Incriminatory machinations Defamation
No written or spoken words to
tarnish victims reputation
Written or spoken words are used.
Imputation is public and malicious
Calculated to cause dishonour,
discredit or contempt


Art. 364. Intriguing against honor (gossiping)

How committed
Making intrigue which has for its principal purpose to blemish the
honor or reputation of another person.

Intriguing against honor
Any scheme or plot designed to blemish the reputation of a person
by means which consist of some tricker.
Akin to slander by deed, in that the offender does not avail directly
of written or spoken words, pictures or caricatures to ridicule his
victim but of some ingenious, crafty or secret plot, producing the
same effect.

Slander vs. Intriguing against honor

Slander Intriguing against Honor
Information came from a definite
source
Source or author of derogatory
information cant be determined, and
defendant passes it to others.