Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

House eit No, 290.4

Introduced by Honorable Giorgidi 8. Aggabao

EXPLANATORY NOTE

Criminal libel status, embodied in the pertinent articles of the Revised Penal Code, were
‘enacted for the vindication of private reputations. For this reason, libel is classified in the Penal
Code as a crime against honor.

Unfortunately, criminal libel laws have been used by many, notably high ranking public
officials, to silence or threaten critics. Thus, there is a growing clamor to decriminalize libel, either
by deleting it altogether from the criminal statute books, or limiting punishment thereof exclusively
to fine.

This bill aims to review libel as a criminal statute, by developing a different standard for
ordinary private libel and political libel. Under the proposed law, discussions of matters of public
concems and criticisms of officials are considered privileged. This means that accusations, even
if defamatory, would not be presumed malicious. The complaint must show the defendant acted
with malice i.e. knowledge of the falsity of the imputation or reckless disregard of truth.

In short, what this bill aims to accomplish is to remove the presumption that every
imputation that is defamatory is malicious. This will make truth a complete defense and thus
enrich freedom of speech and of the press without impairing the right to a good name.

This bill also seeks to increase the penalty of fine from the current minuscule amount
(Php 200.00 to Php 2,000.00) to Php 100,000.00 to Php 300,000.00, to adjust the penalty to a
more contemporary level.

This bill further seeks to limit those responsible for libel. As proposed, publishers, editors
and business managers may be made responsible only if said persons actually passed upon and
approved the publication of the libelous material.

Finally, this bill seeks to curb the practice of filing libel cases anywhere. Against a

‘community journalist, venue for libel will now be limited to the place where the principal office of
the offending publication is located.

GIORGIDI B-AGGABAO.


Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

House Bilno.__ 2901

Introduced by Honorable Giorgidi B. Aggabao

AN ACT
MAKING ANY DISCUSSION OF ANY MATTER OF PUBLIC CONCERN, OR CRITICISM OF
OFFICIAL CONDUCT OF PUBLIC FIGURES, QUALIFIEDLY PRIVILEDGED, INCREASING
FINES FOR THE CRIME OF LIBEL, AND PROVIDING FOR THE VENUE OF LIBEL CASES
FILED AGAINST COMMUNITY JOURNALISTS, THEIR EDITORS, BUSINESS MANAGERS
OR PUBLISHERS, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE ARTICLES 354, 355, 356, 357, 360 AND
361 OF ACT NO. 3815, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE REVISED PENAL CODE OF THE
PHILIPPINES

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of representatives of the Philippines in Congress
assembled:

SECTION 1. Article 354 of Act No. 3815, otherwise known as the Revised Penal Code, is
hereby amended to read as follows.

ART. ** 354. Requirement of Publicity AND MALICE. — Every defamatory imputation PUBLICLY
MADE is presumed to be malicious, even if it be true, if no good intention and justifiable motive
for making it is shown, except in the following cases:

1. A private communication made by any person to another in the performance of any legal, moral
or social duty; {and}

2. 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 confidential in 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; AND

3. ANY DISCUSSION OF ANY MATTER OF PUBLIC CONCERN, OR CRITICISM OF OFFICIAL

CONDUCT OR THE CONDUCT OF PUBLIC FIGURES, UNLESS SUCH MATTER IS SHOWN

BY THE PROSECUTION TO BE FALSE AND TO HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE DEFENDANT

KNOWING ITS FALSITY OR WITH RECKLESS DISREGARD OF WHETHER IT IS FALSE OR
oT”


SECTION 2. Article 355 of the same Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

“ART. 355 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 prison correccional in its
minimum and medium periods or fine ranging from [ 200 to 6,000] ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND
TO THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND pesos, or both, in addition to the civil action which may be
brought by the offended party.” THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLES 90 AND 91 TO THE
CONTRARY NOTWITHSTANDING, THE CRIME OF LIBEL AND THE CORRESPONDING
PENALTY IMPOSED ABOVE SHALL PRESCRIBE IN SIX (6) MONTHS COUNTED FROM THE
DATE OF THE FIRST PUBLICATION, AIRING OR EXHIBITION OF THE LIBELOUS
MATERIAL.

‘SECTION 3. Article 356 of the same Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

“ART. 356. Threatening to publish and offer to present such publication for a compensation. ~ The
penaity of arresto mayor or a fine from { 200 to 2,000] FIFTY THOUSAND TO ONE HUNDRED
THOUSAND pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon any person who threatens another to publish
a libel conceming him or the parents, spouse, child , or other members of the family of the latter
of upon anyone who shall offer to prevent the publication of such libel for a compensation or
money consideration.”

SECTION 4, Article 357 of the same Code is hereby 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 [ of ] RANGING from [ 200 to 2,000 ] ONE HUNDRED
THOUSAND TO THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND 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.”

SECTION 5. Article 360 of the same Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

“ART. 357. 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 THE
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, PROVIDED, THAT SAID
DEFAMATORY ARTICLE PASSED THROUGH SAID PUBLISHER, EDITOR OR BUSINESS
MANAGER FOR EDITING AND REQUIRED THE LATTER'S APPROVAL FOR PUBLICATION.


The criminal and civil action for damages in cases of written defamations as provided for in this
chapter, shall be filed simultaneously or separately with the [ Court of First Instance ] REGIONAL
‘TRIAL COURT of the province or city where the libelous article is printed and first published or
where any of the offended parties actually resides at the time of the commission of the offense:
Provided, however, That where one of the offended parties is a public officer whose office is in the
ity of Manila at the time of the commission of the offense, the action shall be filed in the [ Court
of First Instance ] REGIONAL TRIAL COURT of the City of Manila, or the city or province where
the libelous article is printed and first published, and in case such public officer does not hold
office in the City of Manila, the action shall be filed in the [ Court of First instance ] REGIONAL
TRIAL COURT of the Province or city where he held office at the time of the commission of the
offense where the libelous article is printed and first published and in case one of the offended
parties is a private individual, the action shall be filed in the [ Court of First Instance ] REGIONAL
TRIAL COURT of the province or city where he actually resides at the time of the commission of
the offense or where the libelous matter is printed and first published; Provided, further, That the
civil action shall be filed in the same court where the criminal action is filed and vice versa;
Provided, furthermore, That the court where the criminal action or civil action for damages is first
filed, shall acquire jurisdiction to the exclusion of other courts; And provided, finally, That this
amendment shall not apply to cases of written defamations, the civil and/or criminal actions to
which have been filed in court at the time of the effectivity of this law.

THE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING PARAGRAPH NOWITHSTANDING, IN CASE OF LIBEL
FILED AGAINST A COMMUNITY JOURNALIST, HIS OR HER EDITOR, BUSINESS MANAGER
OR PUBLISHER, THE VENUE SHALL BE THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF THE
PROVINCE OR CITY WHERE THE PRINCIPAL OFFICE OF THE PUBLICATION IS LOCATED.
THE COURT WHERE THE CRIMINAL OR CIVIL ACTION IS FIRST FILED SHALL ACQUIRE
JURISDICTION TO THE EXCLUSION OF OTHER COURTS.

Preliminary investigation of criminal action for written defamations as provided for in the chapter
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 such action may be insulted in accordance with the
provisions of this article,

No criminal action for defamation which consists in the imputation of a crime which cannot be
prosecuted de oficio shall be brought except at the instance of and upon complaint expressly filed
by the offended party.

SECTION 6. Article 361 of the same Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

“ART. 361. Proof of the truth. - In every criminal prosecution for libel, the truth OF THE
IMPUTATION OF THE ACTS OR OMISSIONS CONSTITUTING THE CRIME may be given in
evidence to the court and if it appears that the matter charged as libelous is true, and, moreover,
that it was published with good motives and for justifiable ends, the defendants shall be acquitted

Proof of the truth of an imputation of act or omission WHETHER OR not constituting a crime, [
shall not be admitted, unless the imputation shall have been } IF made against Government
employees with respect to facts related to the discharge of their official duties, MAY BE GIVEN
BY THE DEFENDANT TO REBUT EVIDENCE THAT THE DEFAMATORY IMPUTATION WAS
MADE BY HIM WITH ACTUAL MALICE.


[In such cases if the defendant proves the truth of the imputation made by him, he shall be
acquitted. }*

SECTION 7. Repealing Clause. — All laws, decrees, executive orders, rules and
regulations inconsistent with this Act are hereby repealed, amended or modified accordingly.

SECTION 8. Effectivity Clause. — This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its
publication in at least two national newspapers of general circulation.

Approved.