" 
SIXTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC 
OF THE PHILIPPINES 
First Regular Session 
SENATE 
Senate Bill No. 150 3 
) 
) 
) 
Senah 
~HHt llf HiP ;;'fl'vtary 
,J SEP -4 /\ 9 :16 
HY:_~ (:, 
INTRODUCED BY SEN. JINGGOY EJERCITO ESTRADA 
EXPLANATORY NOTE 
We live in a society that holds paramount the rights of freedom of speech, 
of expression and of the press. Article III Section 4 of the Constitution clearly 
states that: "No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of 
expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and 
petition the government for redress of grievances." 
While the Constitution seems to preclude any exceptions to the exercise 
of the freedoms of speech, expression and of the press, our courts have ruled 
that these constitutional freedoms are not absolute. Indeed, while our society 
accords immense value on freedom of expression and speech, our laws also 
recognize the likewise legitimate need of the individual to protect and defend 
himself where the exercise of these otherwise constitutional freedoms unduly 
injure or compromise a person's good name or standing in the community. 
Among these valid exceptions are the laws on libel as defined in Act No. 
3815, as amended, otherwise known as the Revised Penal Code. Article 353 of 
the Code defines libel as a public and malicious imputation of a crime, or of a 
vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status, or 
circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, discredit, or contempt of a natural or 
juridical person, or to blacken the memory of the dead. Libel laws are classified 
as crimes against honor, which seek to protect an individual against unjust 
attacks against the character and reputation of his person. 
Article 354 of the same Code presumes malice, as a general rule, in every 
defamatory imputation, without regard to its truth or falsity. The person accused 
of libel is required to prove that the imputation was made with good intentions 
and justifiable motives. Exceptions to this are private communications and fair 
comment. 
It is the author's belief that the current political climate demands the 
recognition of legitimate expressions of public opinion as an additional exception 
under Article 354 of the Code Discussions of matters of public concern and 
criticisms of official conduct should be considered privileged, i.e. not presumed to 
be malicious even though they may be defamatory. In other words, the 
prosecution must show that the accused acted with malice in order to prove guilt. 
This bill aims to strike a balance the two legitimate, albeit clashing, social 
interests of between freedom of expression and the freedom or right of the 
individual to protect honor and person, by proposing that the act of political libel 
be differentiated from private libel. The bill specifically introduces amendments to 


Article 354 and 361 of the Revised Penal Code, to the end that different penalties 
may be imposed upon political libel and private libel. 
As an eminent US jurist said: "The life of the law is not logic, but 
experience." In proposing this bill, we are mindful of our collective experience as 
a people and as a society in crafting laws that will be for the benefit of all. For this 
purpose, the passage of this bill is earnestly sought. 
Senator 
r,' 'I 


SIXTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC 
OF THE PHILIPPINES 
First Regular Session 
SENATE 
Senate Bill No. 1503 
) 
) 
) 
INTRODUCED BY SEN. JINGGOY EJERCITO ESTRADA 
AN ACT 
'13 
SEP -4 119 :16 
PRESCRIBING DIFFERENT PENALTIES FOR POLITICAL AND PRIVATE 
LIBEL, AMENDING ARTICLE 354 AND 361 OF ACT NO. 3815, AS AMENDED, 
OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE REVISED PENAL CODE, FOR THIS 
PURPOSE 
Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the Philippines 
in Congress assembled: 
SECTION 1. Article 354 of Act No. 3815, as amended, 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 be 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 of confidential 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 
BYTHE PROSECUTION TO BE FALSE OR TO HAVE BEEN 
MADE BY THE DEFENDANT KNOWING ITS FALSITY OR 
WITH RECKLESS DISREGARD OF WHETHER IT IS TRUE 
OR NOT." 
SEC. 2. Article 361 of Act No. 3815, as amended, otherwise known as the 
Revised Penal 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 OMISSION 


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 defendant shall be acquitted. Proof of the truth 
of an imputation of an 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.]" 
SEC. 3. Repealing Clause. - All laws, decrees, orders, rules and 
regulations or other issuances or parts thereof inconsistent with the provisions of 
this Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly. 
SEC. 4. Separability Clause. - If any portion or provision of this Act is 
declared unconstitutional, the remainder of this Act or any provision not affected 
thereby shall remain in force and effect. 
SEC. 5. Effectivity. - Th.is Act shall take effect after fifteen (15) days 
following the completion of its publication either in· the Official Gazette or in a 
newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines. 
Approved,