1 
Republic of the Philippines 
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
Batasan Hills, Quezon City 
NINETEENTH CONGRESS 
First Regular Session 
HOUSE BILL No. _____ 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Introduced by  
ACT Teachers Party-List Rep. FRANCE L. CASTRO,  
GABRIELA Women’s Party Rep. ARLENE D. BROSAS,  
and KABATAAN Party-List Rep. RAOUL DANNIEL A. MANUEL 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
AN ACT 
DECRIMINALIZING LIBEL, REPEALING FOR THE PURPOSE ARTICLES 
353, 354, 355, 356, 357, 360, 361, AND 362 OF ACT 3815 AS AMENDED, 
OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE REVISED PENAL CODE 
EXPLANATORY NOTE 
The Constitution, in Section 4 of Article III, guarantees that “No law shall be 
passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press…”  The 
people’s right to information and its importance to the nation are also enshrined in our 
fundamental law (Section 24 of Article II and Section 10 of Article XVI). 
Despite this present constitutional fiat, the law on libel—introduced by the 
Spanish Codigo Penal then reenacted through the American Revised Penal Code—
remains in our penal statues under Articles 353 to 362 of the Revised Penal Code.   Libel 
statutes and jurisprudence clearly obviate these fundamental rights, muffling 
journalists, progressives, and ordinary citizens alike. 
In part, the libel law might have been originally enacted to protect private 
citizens from unwarranted damage to reputation.  But historically, it has been used as a 
repressive tool by the Spanish and American colonial governments, as well as their 
Philippine descendants.  Today, the law has been increasingly used by public officials 
and public figures as a tool to cow and muzzle an independent press, usually to shield 
themselves from critical reportage and even innocent comment in their acts and 
decisions.  It has become the convenient and predominant way for those in power to 
July 11, 2022
2:43 pm
1769


2 
harass and silence critical and opposing voices.  With the passage of Republic Act 
10175 or the Cybercrime Law of 2012 and its criminalization of “cyberlibel,” the threat 
to the people’s right to free expression and free press has even become more serious 
and real. 
The growing number of cases filed against journalists highlights how the mighty 
and the powerful in our land regularly abuse the libel law to curtail the democratic right 
of the press to delve into the truth behind matters of public interest, and consequently, 
the peoples’ right to know.  In fact, even as Philippine media has the distinction of 
having produced a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, Rappler’s Maria Ressa, the Philippine 
government on the other hand has the notorious distinction of being the hand behind the 
cyberlibel cases against her. 
Dangling libel law as a sword of Damocles has resulted in the prevalence of 
onion skins amongst government officials and public figures.  It caused the gagging of 
media practitioners, the concealment of the truth from public knowledge, prior restraint 
and chilling effect, and the resulting incapacitation of the people from gaining a 
meaningful understanding of the various public issues that are of paramount concern. 
As part of its sworn duty to uphold and strengthen the democratic rights of the 
Filipino people, Congress should now repeal the law on libel in order for the press to 
enjoy the free exercise of its duties and functions, and corollarily, for the people to have 
an unfettered access to information involving matters of public concern.  As Supreme 
Court Senior Associate Justice Marvic Mario Victor Leonen said in 2014:   
Libel law now is used not so much to prosecute but deter speech.  What 
is charged as criminal libel may contain precious protected speech.  There 
is very little to support the majority view that the law will not continue to 
have this effect on speech. 
x  x x 
It is time that we now go further and declare libel as provided in the 
Revised Penal Code and in the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, as 
unconstitutional.1 
It must be stressed that a free press is an essential component of a democratic 
society. A free press ferrets out graft and corruption wherever it may occur and exposes 
its perpetrators, reveals dishonest and inept administrations, contributes to the exchange 
of ideas, and advances communication between the governed and those who govern.  In 
other words, a free press acts as the watchdog for the governed. 
1 
Dissenting and Concurring Opinion in Disini, et. al. vs. Secretary of Justice (GR No. 203335, 
February 11, 2014) 


3 
Decriminalizing libel is also in accord with the October 2011 declaration of the 
United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC), which states that the Philippines’ 
Revised Penal Code penalizing libel is “incompatible with Article 19, Paragraph three 
of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights [ICCPR] to which the 
Philippines is a signatory.’’  The international trend of the decriminalization of libel, in 
fact, follows the ICCPR and other instruments on free press and human rights. 
The decriminalization of libel does not mean that a person libeled by media (or 
anyone else, for that matter) can no longer seek redress for the wrong done against him 
or her.  The remedy of filing an action for damages based on the Civil Code of the 
Philippines, such as Articles 19 and 26, and other related provisions thereof, remains. 
The repeal of the libel law, without derogating the right of a person to enjoy 
privacy, dignity, good reputation and a peace of mind, will be a big step towards 
strengthening democracy in our land, when freedom of expression shall be enshrined 
not just in books but more so in practice. 
First filed during the 14th Congress by Bayan Muna Representatives led by Rep. 
Satur Ocampo, this bill was refiled in the 15th until the 18th Congresses.  This refiling in 
the 19th Congress, along with the refiling of the proposal of ACT Teachers Party-List 
to repeal several provisions of the Cybercrime Law, including cyberlibel (House Bill 
569), is an obstinate yet hopeful stance that Congress will finally recognize the ever-
growing need to protect press freedom and uphold the people’s democratic rights. 
Thus, the approval of this bill is earnestly sought. 
________________________________ 
Rep. FRANCE L. CASTRO 
ACT Teachers Party-List 
________________________________ 
Rep. ARLENE D. BROSAS 
GABRIELA Women’s Party 
________________________________ 
Rep. RAOUL DANNIEL A. MANUEL 
KABATAAN Party-List 


4 
Republic of the Philippines 
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
Batasan Hills, Quezon City 
NINETEENTH CONGRESS 
First Regular Session 
HOUSE BILL No. _____ 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Introduced by  
ACT Teachers Party-List Rep. FRANCE L. CASTRO,  
GABRIELA Women’s Party Rep. ARLENE D. BROSAS,  
and KABATAAN Party-List Rep. RAOUL DANNIEL A. MANUEL 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
AN ACT 
DECRIMINALIZING LIBEL, REPEALING FOR THE PURPOSE ARTICLES 
353, 354, 355, 356, 357, 360, 361, AND 362 OF ACT NO. 3815 AS AMENDED, 
OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE REVISED PENAL CODE 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress 
assembled: 
SECTION 1. Articles 353, 354, 355, 356, 357, 360, 361, and 362 of Act No. 3815 as 
amended, otherwise known as the Revised Penal Code are hereby repealed, thereby 
decriminalizing libel. 
SEC. 2. Repealing Clause. – All laws, presidential decrees, letters of instruction, and 
other issuances, orders, rules and regulations inconsistent with this Act are hereby 
likewise repealed. 
SEC. 3. Effectivity Clause. - This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its 
publication in two (2) national newspapers of general circulation. 
Approved, 
1769