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 
DEFINING STRATEGIC LAWSUITS AGAINST PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 
(SLAPP), PROHIBITING THE FILING THEREOF, PROVIDING MEASURES 
FOR ITS DISMISSAL, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 
EXPLANATORY NOTE 
The past several years have witnessed the proliferation of a special kind of 
harassment suit called Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP) as a 
powerful mechanism for stifling the cognate rights of freedom of speech, expression, 
or of the press, and the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the 
government for redress of grievances. 
SLAPPs defy simple definition. They are initiated by influential entities like 
corporations, government officials, politicians, landlords, or employers against 
community residents, indigenous peoples, environmentalists, members of the press, 
peasants, workers, students, or even against ordinary citizens to prevent them from fully 
exercising their right to participate in matters of public concern. 
The term SLAPP was coined in the 1980s by University of Denver professors 
Penelope Canan and George W. Pring. It was originally defined as “a lawsuit involving 
communications made to petition for a governmental action or outcome, which resulted 
in a baseless suit filed against individuals or non-governmental organizations, on a 
substantive issue of some public interest or social significance.” It has since been 
defined more broadly to include suits arising from speech on any public issue. 
October 18, 2022
3:21 pm
5592


2 
Essentially, SLAPPs are designed and intended to intimidate and silence certain 
public constituencies by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they 
abandon their advocacies and concerns. Winning the lawsuit is not necessarily the intent 
of the plaintiff or complainant. Their goals are accomplished if the defendant, 
respondent or accused succumbs to fear, intimidation, mounting legal costs or simple 
exhaustion and thereby abandons the public advocacy. 
 
According to New York Supreme Court Judge J. Nicholas Colabella, “Short of 
a gun to the head, a greater threat to First Amendment expression can scarcely be 
imagined.” 
 
SLAPPs are cloaked as claims or accusations for multi-million libel suits, 
slander, grave coercion, nuisance, illegal assembly, direct assault, resistance and 
disobedience, and injunction, to name a few. 
 
 
In the Philippines, for instance, a notable SLAPP case involves the charges 
against fifteen (15) individuals in connection with the evacuation of some 700 Lumads 
to a church sanctuary in Davao City. The Lumads left their homes because of alleged 
human rights violations and militarization in their communities. The Haran 15, as they 
are collectively called, are composed of human rights workers, church people, 
prominent members of indigenous peoples and socio-civic groups, who were charged 
with kidnapping and illegal detention. The case was eventually dismissed by the 
Department of Justice after finding no probable cause for the commission of the accused 
crime. 
 
For all the diversity of SLAPPs, however, their unifying features make them a 
dangerous force: they are brought not in pursuit of justice, but rather to ensnare their 
targets in costly litigation that distracts them from the controversy at hand, and to deter 
them and others from engaging in their rights of speech and petition on issues of public 
concern. 
 
Hence, the poor and the marginalized sectors, who have become the usual 
victims of SLAPPs, find it difficult to continue their work or pursue their livelihood, 
engage in social and participative actions, and assert their civil, political, economic, 
social, and cultural rights as they are being burdened, restrained, threatened, or 
distressed by SLAPPs. 
 
The inequality of wealth and resources between the rich and the poor, the abuse 
of power and processes, the lack of independence and impartiality of prosecutors and 
judges, among other reasons, bring about these SLAPPs. 
 
In other jurisdictions, particularly in Canada, Europe, and twenty-six (26) States 
and one (1) territory of the United States, to name a few, the disturbing increase in 
SLAPPs has led said jurisdictions to either enact anti-SLAPP legislations or promulgate 
rules against SLAPPs.  


3 
Hence, this proposed measure is being filed as a concrete step to address the 
societal problems caused by SLAPPs in the Philippines, particularly the achievement 
of the following purposes:  
a. Promote and protect the constitutional rights of freedom of speech, expression,
and of the press, and the right of the people peaceably to assembly, and petition
the government for redress of grievances;
b. Encourage and strengthen the participation of individuals in matters of public
concern;
c. Prevent any abuse of the judicial process that shall curtail such participation;
d. Prohibit the filing of SLAPPs;
e. Establish the speedy dismissal of SLAPPs;
f.
Award damages, litigation costs, attorney’s fees, and other relief to the
defendant, respondent, or accused, as the case may be, upon the final and
executory dismissal of SLAPPs; and
g. Provide the defendant, respondent, or accused, as the case may be, the right to
recover separate damages, litigations costs, attorney’s fees, and other relief by
filing a SLAPPBack action against the complainant of a SLAPP upon the final
and executory dismissal of such SLAPP.
This Bill was first filed in February 2009, authored by Bayan Muna Partylist 
representatives Satur Ocampo and Teodoro Casiño, aiming to prohibit the filing of 
harassment cases against persons involved in “public interest advocacies.” It was refiled 
by Bayan Muna Partylist representatives Neri Colmenares and Carlos Isagani Zarate in 
the 16th Congress in recognition of the need for the protection against legal harassment 
of people in environment, human rights and other socio-civic advocacies. It was refiled 
by Bayan Muna representatives in the 17th and 18th Congresses where it was referred to 
the Committee on Justice.  
It is in this light that the approval of this proposed measure 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 
DEFINING STRATEGIC LAWSUITS AGAINST PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 
(SLAPP), PROHIBITING THE FILING THEREOF, PROVIDING MEASURES 
FOR ITS DISMISSAL, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in 
Congress assembled: 
SECTION 1. Title. – This Act shall be known as the “Anti-Strategic Lawsuits Against 
Public Participation Act of 2019” or the “Anti-SLAPP Act of 2022”. 
SEC. 2. Statement of Policy. – It is the declared policy of the State to promote and 
protect the freedom of speech, expression, and of the press, and the right of the people 
peaceably to assemble, and petition the government for redress of grievances. The State 
hereby finds and declares that it is in the public interest for people to participate in 
matters of public concern and provide information to the public on issues that affect 
them, and that this participation should not be impeded through abuse of the judicial 
process. Thus, lawsuits that are intended to harass, vex, or silence critics or individuals 
or groups, or exert undue pressure on them, or deplete their resources, thereby deterring 
them from fully exercising such constitutional rights shall not be allowed. To this end, 
this Act shall be construed broadly in favor of the exercise of such constitutional rights. 
SEC. 3. Purposes. – The purposes of this Act shall be the following: 
1. Promote and protect the constitutional rights of freedom of speech, expression,
and of the press, and the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and petition
the government for redress of grievances;
5592


5 
2. Encourage and strengthen the participation of individuals in matters of public 
concern; 
3. Prevent any abuse of the judicial process that shall curtail such participation; 
4. Prohibit the filing of SLAPPs; 
5. Establish the speedy dismissal of SLAPPs; 
6. Award damages, litigation costs, attorney’s fees, and other relief to the 
defendant, respondent, or accused, as the case may be, upon the final and 
executory dismissal of SLAPPs; and 
7. Provide the defendant, respondent, or accused, as the case may be, the right to 
recover separate damages, litigations costs, attorney’s fees, and other relief by 
filing a SLAPPBack action against the complainant of a SLAPP upon the final 
and executory dismissal of such SLAPP. 
 
SEC. 4. Definition of Terms. – For purposes of this Act, the following terms shall be 
defined as follows: 
 
1. “Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation” or SLAPP includes any 
civil complaint, counterclaim, cross-claim, third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint, 
or 
complaint-in-intervention, 
criminal 
complaint 
or 
information, 
or 
administrative complaint filed against individual or individuals, groups, labor 
unions, entity or associations, community residents, or the like by reason or 
arising out of their exercise of freedom of speech, expression, or of the press, or 
of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, or petition the government for 
redress of grievances in matters of public concern, and is intended to harass, vex, 
or silence individual or individuals, groups, labor unions, entity or associations, 
community residents, or the like, or exert undue pressure on them, or deplete 
their resources. 
 
2. “Public Concern” means anything that involves matters of public, social, or 
community issue, significance, interest, importance, or welfare. 
 
3. “Claim” means any civil complaint, counterclaim, cross-claim, third (fourth, 
etc.)-party complaint, or complaint-in-intervention. 
 
4. “Plaintiff” refers to the claiming party, the counter-claimant, the cross-claimant, or 
the third (fourth, etc.)-party plaintiff. 
 
5. “Defendant” refers to the original defending party, the defendant in 
counterclaim, the cross-defendant, or the third (fourth, etc.)-party defendant. 
 
6. “SLAPPBack” means an action for damages filed by the defendant, respondent, 
or accused, as the case may be, of a SLAPP against the plaintiff or complainant 
thereof arising from the final and executory dismissal of the said SLAPP. 
 
SEC. 5. Prohibition on Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation.– It is hereby 
prohibited to file a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) as defined 


6 
in this Act. The courts, prosecutors and public or private officers, as the case may be, 
with the duty to act and decide on civil, criminal or administrative complaints or 
informations, as the case may be, shall immediately order the dismissal of suits 
determined by them to be SLAPPs. 
 
SEC. 6. Duty of the court.– Upon receipt of any complaint or pleading asserting a claim 
or any complaint or information, the court shall have the duty to immediately make a 
determination whether the same is a SLAPP. 
 
If the court finds the same to be a SLAPP, it shall order its dismissal and award 
to the defendant or accused, as the case may be, damages, litigation costs, attorney’s 
fees, and other relief as warranted by the circumstances of the case. 
 
Subject to the right of appeal, an order dismissing the complaint or pleading 
asserting a claim determined to be a SLAPP shall bar the refiling of the same action or 
claim, and an order dismissing the complaint or information determined to be a SLAPP 
shall bar another prosecution for the same offense. 
 
(a) Motion to Dismiss. – In civil cases, the duty of the court to make such a 
determination does not preclude the defendant from filing a motion to dismiss on the 
ground that the complaint or pleading asserting a claim is a SLAPP. Such ground shall 
not be deemed waived even if not included in a motion to dismiss. 
 
(b) Motion for Judicial Determination. – In criminal cases, the duty of the court to 
make such determination does not preclude the accused from filing a motion for judicial 
determination of the complaint or information as a SLAPP within a reasonable period 
of time upon the receipt of the complaint or information by the court. 
 
SEC. 7. Duty of the prosecutor. – Upon receipt of any complaint, or in the conduct of 
inquest proceedings of a person validly arrested without a warrant, the investigating or 
inquest prosecutor, as the case may be, shall have the duty to immediately make a 
determination whether the complaint is a SLAPP.  
 
If the investigating or inquest prosecutor, as the case may be, finds the same to 
be a SLAPP, he shall order its dismissal. Subject to the right of appeal, an order 
dismissing the complaint determined to be a SLAPP shall bar another prosecution for 
the same offense. 
 
(a) Motion for Determination. – The duty of the investigating prosecutor to make such 
determination does not preclude the respondent from filing a motion for determination 
of the complaint as a SLAPP prior to the submission of his counter-affidavit and that of 
his witnesses and other supporting documents relied upon for his defense. 
 
(b) Release for Further Investigation. – If the inquest prosecutor is not certain whether 
the complaint is a SLAPP but that there is a possibility that the same may be a SLAPP 
as reasonably shown during the inquest proceedings by the person arrested, the inquest 


7 
prosecutor shall order the further investigation of the same, and the immediate release 
of the person arrested. 
 
The duties of the investigating prosecutor and the rights of the respondent as stated in 
this section shall be performed and observed with in the conduct of such further 
investigation. 
 
SEC. 8. Administrative cases. – In every administrative case, whether in the public or 
private sector, the public or private officer, as the case may be, having the duty to decide 
the complaint shall have the duty to immediately make a determination whether the 
same is a SLAPP. 
 
In case of a public officer, if he finds the same to be a SLAPP, he shall order its 
dismissal and award to the respondent damages, litigation costs, attorney’s fees, and 
other relief as warranted by the circumstances of the case.  
 
In case of a private officer, if he finds the same to be a SLAPP, he shall order its 
dismissal. 
Subject to the right of appeal, an order dismissing the complaint determined to be a 
SLAPP shall bar the refiling of the same complaint. 
 
The duty of the public or private officer, as the case may be, to make such 
determination does not preclude the respondent from filing a motion to dismiss on the 
ground that the complaint is a SLAPP. 
 
SEC. 9. Non-applicability to action involving public interest. – The right to file such 
motion to dismiss or motion for determination, as the case may be, shall not be 
applicable against any action brought solely and certainly in the public interest or 
involving public concern. 
 
SEC. 10. Right to file legal action and recover separate damages, litigation costs, 
attorney’s fees, and other reliefs. – Upon the final and executory dismissal of a SLAPP, 
the defendant, respondent, or accused thereof, as the case may be, shall have the right 
to file a SLAPPBack, as defined in Section 4 (f) hereof, for damages against the plaintiff 
or complainant, as the case may be, of the SLAPP, and recover separate damages, 
litigation costs, attorney’s fees, and other relief as warranted by the circumstances of 
the case. 
 
The court shall consider only the fact of the final and executory dismissal of the 
SLAPP in granting the right to file legal action: Provided, That the court shall consider 
the circumstances of the case in the determination of the amount of damages, litigation 
costs, attorney’s costs, and other relief that shall be awarded to the plaintiff thereof. 
 
SEC. 11. Motion to dismiss SLAPPBack. – The defendant in a SLAPPBack action may 
file a motion to dismiss a SLAPPBack action on the ground that the dismissal of the 
SLAPP from which the former arises is not final and executory, among other grounds 


8 
that may be available upon the defendant under the Rules of Court: Provided, That if 
the motion to dismiss a SLAPPBack action on any ground is found to be frivolous or 
solely intended for delay,the court shall deny the motion and award to the plaintiff 
damages, litigation costs, attorney’s fees, and other relief as warranted by the 
circumstances of the filing and denial of the motion: Provided further, That the same 
are separate from the damages, litigation costs, attorney’s fees, and other relief that shall 
be awarded to the plaintiff in the SLAPPBack action upon the favorable judgment 
therein becoming final and executory.  
 
SEC. 12. Prohibition of Appeal. – The denial of (a) a motion to dismiss on the ground 
that the complaint or pleading asserting a claim is a SLAPP, (b) a motion for 
determination of the complaint or information as a SLAPP, or (c) a motion to dismiss a 
SLAPPBack action on the ground that the dismissal of the SLAPP is not final and 
executory, is not appealable: Provided, That the movant may file an appropriate special 
civil action under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court.  
 
SEC. 13. Rules and Regulations. – The Supreme Court shall promulgate the rules and 
regulations, administrative orders, and circulars for this purpose. 
 
SEC. 14. Repealing Clause. – All laws, acts, decrees, executive orders, issuances, and 
rules and regulations or parts thereof which are contrary to and inconsistent with any 
provisions of this Act are hereby repealed, amended or modified accordingly. 
 
SEC. 15. Separability Clause. – If any provision of this Act is subsequently declared 
unconstitutional, the validity of the remaining provisions hereof shall remain in full 
force and effect. 
 
SEC. 16. Effectivity Clause. - This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its 
complete publication either in the Official Gazette or in a newspaper of general 
circulation in the Philippines. 
 
 
Approved,