o a  
. 
.- 
. 
"_ \ , .: 
.
,
 
.*? 
.
.
 
.
I
 
- .?,<. 
,-?;%.$ 
kt i; 
i
t
 f 
THIRTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC 
First Regular Session 
4 
) 
1 
OF THE PHILIPPINES 
S E N A T E  
S. No. 1082 
IPztroduced by Senator Edgardo 1. 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 right 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. 
EDdARDO J. ANGARA 


Introduced by Senator Edgardo J. 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 FbR OTHER PURPOSES 
Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representafives of the Philippines in 
Congress assembled: 
SECTION 1. Article 355 of Act No. 3815, as amended, is hereby amended 
as to read as fdllows: 
";ART. 355. Libel by means of writings or similar means. - A libel 
committed by means of writing, printing, lithography, engraving, radio, 
phonogkaph, 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 
IMPOS D ABOVE SHALL PRESCRIBE IN SIX (6) MONTHS COUNTED 
FROM THE DATE OF THE FIRST PUBLICATION, AIRING OR 
EXHIBITION OF THE LIBELOUS MATERIAL." 
SECTION 2. Article 356 of Act No. 3815, as amended, is hereby amended 
b 
as follows: 


"ART. 356. Threatening to publish and ofer to present such publication 
for compensation. - The penalty of [arresto mayor or] 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". 
SECTION 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 
oflcial 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. 
SECTION 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.] 
SECTION 5, All provisions of existing laws, orders, rules and regulations 
contrary to or inconsistent with this Act are hereby repealed or modified 
acc or ding1 y . 
SECTION 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,