Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

H.B.No,__478

Introduced by HONORABLE JUAN EDGARDO “SONNY” M. ANGARA.

EXPLANATORY NOTE

In a country where democracy is primarily infringed on the freedom of speech and
expression, in a State where the media is considered the fourth estate, it is a sad reality that
existing laws on libel have not been attuned to the evolving needs of the people under a

democratic rule and the rising importance of media in effecting transparency and accountability
in governance.

While a newspaperman is free to share his views publicly on issues that affect our nation
and our people, he remains unprotected from the risk of imprisonment. While we recognize that
socially-relevant issues must have room for open debate an public discussion, we do not
safeguard the very people who risk their safety and career in order to report events that have
escaped our critical eye, circumstances that would have to led us to think twice before making

our conclusions, and instances that would have made us more aware of what is more important
and what is more relevant.

It is not our intent in this proposal to downplay the importance of one's privacy and the
tight of a person to be free from public and malicious imputation of a crime, or of a vice, or
defect, real or imaginary, or circumstances tending to cause the dishonor, discredit or contempt
of a person or to blacken the memory of one who is dead. But the penalty of imprisonment that
goers with libel is, to our opinion, not commensurate to the act being penalized.

The penalty of fine must be sustained, as we believed that libel must not go unpunished.
But to imprison a person convicted of libel might preclude him in the future from doing his job
with zeal and critical eye. Such person may choose not to look deeply into issues and concerns
that may not seem to affect public interest on face value, but with deep investigation, would
expose anomalies and abuses, for fear of imprisonment.

Libel should therefore be decriminalized in the light of protecting the right to speech and
self-expression.

Such an amendment loosens the restraint on the free flow of information and thus
fosters the growth of a free and open society. Socially-relevant issues must have room for open.
debate and public discussion. With the decriminalization of libel, the safeguards strengthened.

In view of the foregoing, passage of this on speech and expression are bill is earnestly
recommended.

JUAN EDGARDO “SONNY” M. ANGARA
Representative

Lone District, Province of Aurora


FIFTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE +)
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES _)
First Regular Session )

H.B.No,__ 478

Introduced by Honorable JUAN EDGARDO “SONNY” M. ANGARA

AN ACT
TO ABOLISH THE PENALTY OF IMPRISONMENT IN LIBEL CASES, AMENDING
FOR THE PURPOSE ARTICLES 355, 356, 357 AND 360 OF
ACT NO. 3815, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN
AS THE REVISED PENAL CODE AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

Be it enacted b

y the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in
Congress assembled:

SECTION 1. Article 355 of Act No. 3815, as amended, is hereby amended as to read as
follows:
“ART. 385. Libel by means of 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 correctional in its minimum and
medium periods or] a fine ranging from 200 to 6,000, or both, in addition to the

civil action which may be brought by the offended
THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 90 AND 91 TO THE CONTRARY
NOT WITHSTANDING, THE OFFENSE AND PENALTY IMPOSED ABOVE
SHALL PRESCRIBE IN SIX (6) MONTHS COUNTED FROM THE DATE OF

THE FIRST PUBLICATION, AIRING OR EXHIBITION OF THE LIBELOUS
MATERIAL.”

SEC. 2. Article 356 of Act No. 3815, as amended, is hereby amended as follows:
“ART. 356. Threatening to publish and offer to present such publication
for compensation. - The penalty of [arresto mayor of] a fine ranging from 200 to
2,000, [or both,] shall be imposed upon any person who threatens another to
publish a libel concerning him or the parents, spouse, child, or other members
of the family of the latter, or upon anyone who shall offer to prevent the
publication of such libel for a compensation or money consideration.”

SEC. 3. Article 357 of the same Act is likewise amended to read as follows:

“ART. 357. Prohibited publication of acts referred to in the course of official
proceedings. - The penalty of [arresto mayor or] a fine from 200 to 2,000 pesos,
[or both] shall be imposed upon any reporter, editor, or manager of a


newspaper, daily or magazine, who shall publish facts connected with the
private life of another and offensive to the honor, virtue, and reputation of said
person, even though said publication be made in connection with or under the
pretext that it is necessary in the narration of any judicial or administrative
proceedings wherein such facts have been mentioned.

SEC. 4. Article 360 of the same Act is likewise amended to read as follows:

“ART. 360. Persons responsible. - [Any person who shall publish, exhibit, or
cause the publication or exhibition of any defamation in writing or by similar
means,] THE AUTHOR OF THE PRINTED ARTICLE OR ANY PERSON WHO
SHALL CAUSE THE EXHIBITION OF THEATRICAL OR
CINEMATOGRAPHIC EXHIBIT CONTAINING DEFAMATORY WORDS shall
be responsible for the same. [The author or editor of a book or pamphlet, or the
editor or business manager of a daily newspaper, magazine or serial
publication, shall be responsible for the defamations contained therein to the
same extent as if he were the author thereof ]

SEC. 5. All provisions of existing laws, orders, rules and regulations contrary to or
inconsistent with this Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly.

SEC. 6. This Act shall take effect after fifteen (5) days following its publication in the
Official Gazette or in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation.

Approved,