Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

_1sea

HOUSE BILL No.

Introduced by BAYAN MUNA
Reps. CARLOS ISAGANI T. ZARATE and NERI J. COLMENARES

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

EXPLANATORY NOTE

The Constitution guarantees freedom of expression and freedom of the press. Specifically,
Section 4, Article ITI of our fundamental law, in part, provides that “(N)o law shall be passed
abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press...”

Notwithstanding this present constitutional fiat, the law on libel which was enacted during the
American colonial regime by the United States Philippine Commission as Act No. 277 on
October 24, 1901, and which clearly obviates these fundamental rights, continues to be
enshrined in our penal statutes under Article 353 to Article 362 of the Revised Penal Code.

Accordingly, our libel law was enacted to protect private citizens from unwarranted damage to
reputation. Today, however, the law has been increasingly used by public officials as a tool to
cow and muzzle an independent press. Indeed, the law is meant to shield the subjects of
reporting and comment from media abuse. Yet, it has become the convenient and predominant
way for those in power to harass and silence critical and opposing voices.

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 people's right to
know

Truly, the libel law has been increasingly used to stifle press freedom and inhibit media criticism
of government officials and their acts and decisions. Journalists critical of government officials
ot government acts and decisions speak or write under the threat of criminal prosecution. The
net effect of this abuse of the libel law by the powers-that-be is the gagging of media
practitioners, the suppression of the truth from becoming public, and the resulting inability of
the people to gain a meaningful understanding of the various public issues that are of paramount

concern.



As part ofits sworn duty to uphold and strengthen the democratic rights of the Filipino people,
Congress must immediately work to repeal the law on libel in order for the press to enjoy the
free exercise of its duties and function, and as a corollary, for the people to have an unfettered
access to information involving matters of public concern.

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 administration, 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

Decriminalizing libel, then, will remove much of its potency as an instrument to intimidate and
harass. It will allow journalists to do their work without fear of being jailed because of criminal
complaints by those who are offended by their reporting. Without doubt, the decriminalization
of libel is a step in favor of freedom of speech, of expression, and of the press.

However, this does not mean that a person who has indeed been libeled by the media can no
longer seek redress for the wrong done against him or act to enforce his right. The victim has the
remedy of filing an action for damages based on the Civil Code of the Philippines, such as
Article 19, Article 26, and other related provisions thereof.

A media practitioner may be held civilly liable for damages if he/she violates Article 19 of the
Civil Code which enjoins him/her to act with justice and to observe honesty and good faith
when exercising his/her rights and while performing his/her duties.

On the other hand, Article 26 of the Civil Code should remind the media of their duty to respect
the dignity, personality, privacy, and peace of mind of others, otherwise, they may be held civilly
liable for damages for violations thereof.

‘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
Jand, when freedom of expression shall be enshrined not just in books but more so in practice.

‘Thus, the approval of this bill is earnestly sought.

Approved,

Ye
AF 3 2K

Rep. CARLOS ISAGANI T. ZARATE Rep> J. COLMEN?
Bayan Muna Party-list Bayan Muna Party-list


Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Quezon City

SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

HOUSE BILLNo. __ 132 4

Introduced by BAYAN MUNA.
Reps. CARLOS ISAGANI T. ZARATE and NERI J. COLMENARES

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 the House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled:
SECTION 1. Articles 353, 354, 355, 356, 357, 360, 361, and 362 of 4

amended, otherwise known as the Revised Penal Code are hereby repealed th
dectiminalizing libel.

t No. 3815 as
-b

SECTION 2. All laws, presidential decrees, letters of instruction, and other issuances,
orders, rules and regulations inconsistent with this Act are hereby likewise repealed.

SECTION 3. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its publication in two (2)
national newspapers of general circulation.

Approved,