Defamation or Slander Complaint in the Philippines

Written By Harold Respicio

Below is a comprehensive discussion of defamation in the Philippine context, focusing on slander (oral defamation). This article explains the legal framework, essential elements, types of defamation, procedural aspects, defenses, remedies, penalties, and other relevant considerations. This is for informational purposes only and not a substitute for professional legal advice.

1. Definition and Legal Framework

A. Defamation Under Philippine Law

In the Philippines, defamation (libel or slander) is generally governed by the Revised Penal Code (RPC). Specifically, Article 353 defines “libel” as:

“Libel is 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...”

Because “defamation” is an umbrella term that covers both written and oral forms, Philippine jurisprudence distinguishes between:

  1. Libel – if the defamatory statement is written, printed, or similarly recorded (Article 355, RPC).
  2. Slander (Oral Defamation) – if the defamatory statement is spoken (Article 358, RPC).

B. Key Laws and Provisions

  1. Revised Penal Code
    • Article 353: Definition of libel (extended by analogy to any form of defamation).
    • Article 354: Requirement that defamation be presumed malicious unless it falls under exceptions for qualified privileged communication.
    • Article 355: Libel by means of writings, etc.
    • Article 358: Oral defamation (slander).
  2. Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 (Republic Act No. 10175)
    • Provides for a separate offense called “cyber libel” if the defamatory content is published online or through electronic means (though typically considered a form of libel rather than slander).
  3. Civil Code
    • Articles on personal rights and obligations may provide the legal basis for civil damages, independent from criminal proceedings.

2. Elements of Oral Defamation (Slander)

For oral defamation to be established, the prosecution must generally prove:

  1. Imputation of a Discreditable Act or Condition
    • The statement must accuse or impute something dishonorable, criminal, or disgraceful to the offended party.
  2. Publicity of the Statement
    • The oral statement must be heard by a third party (someone other than the complainant and the respondent).
  3. Malice
    • Presumed in law. However, if the accused can show a justifiable motive or a privileged communication, the presumption of malice may be overcome.
  4. Identifiability of the Person Defamed
    • The offensive statement must clearly pertain to an identifiable person.

3. Types of Oral Defamation

A. Simple Slander vs. Grave Slander

Philippine jurisprudence recognizes two degrees of oral defamation:

  1. Simple Slander
    • A light or less serious statement of defamation.
    • Punishable by arresto menor or a small fine.
  2. Grave Slander
    • A serious or insulting attack on one’s character or reputation, often involving vicious or injurious language.
    • Punishable by arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period, depending on the specific circumstances and severity.

Important Note: Determining whether slander is simple or grave depends on:

  • The expression used,
  • The personal relations of the offender and offended parties,
  • The social standing of both,
  • The time and place the statements were made,
  • The effect on the reputation or honor of the complainant.

4. Privileged Communications and Defenses

A. Absolute Privileged Communications

Certain communications are considered absolutely privileged, meaning they cannot give rise to defamation liability, such as:

  • Statements made by members of Congress on the floor of Congress (legislative immunity under the Constitution).
  • Official communications made by public officers in the performance of their duties, in many instances.

B. Qualified Privileged Communications

Article 354 of the Revised Penal Code provides a general presumption of malice in all defamatory imputations. However, if the defamatory statement is considered a “qualified privileged communication,” it may not be presumed malicious. Examples:

  1. Private communication made in the performance of any legal, moral, or social duty
    • E.g., a truthful statement given in good faith to a person having authority over the subject matter (such as an employer).
  2. Fair and true report of any judicial, legislative, or other official proceedings.
    • This requires accuracy and fairness in reporting; malicious embellishments are not protected.

Defendant’s Burden: To avoid liability, a defendant must prove:

  • That the defamatory statement was made on a privileged occasion or under a qualified privileged communication, and
  • The absence of malice or bad faith.

C. Truth as a Defense

Article 361 of the RPC allows proof of truth as a defense when:

  • The imputation is made against a government employee concerning their official duties, or
  • It is shown that the matter charged is true and published with good motives and justifiable ends.

5. Procedure in Filing an Oral Defamation Complaint

A. Where to File

A criminal complaint for slander typically starts with:

  1. Filing a complaint with the Office of the City or Provincial Prosecutor having jurisdiction over the place where the offense was committed.
  2. Alternatively, the complaint may be initially filed with the Philippine National Police (PNP) or the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), which would then refer the matter to the prosecutor for preliminary investigation.

B. Preliminary Investigation

  1. Submission of Complaint
    • Complainant files a sworn affidavit and supporting evidence.
  2. Counter-Affidavit
    • Respondent files a counter-affidavit addressing the allegations.
  3. Resolution by the Prosecutor
    • The prosecutor determines if probable cause exists. If found, an Information (formal charge) will be filed in court.

C. Arraignment and Trial

Once in court:

  1. Arraignment
    • The accused is informed of the charge and enters a plea (guilty or not guilty).
  2. Pre-trial and Trial
    • Evidence is presented, testimonies are given.
  3. Judgment
    • If found guilty, the judge imposes the penalty under the RPC.

D. Prescription Period

For oral defamation, the prescriptive period is generally six months for simple slander, counted from the date of commission or discovery. For grave slander, the prescriptive period may be longer (generally one year), but a careful look at the relevant laws and jurisprudence is necessary to confirm.

6. Penalties and Civil Liability

A. Criminal Penalties

  • Simple Slander:
    Punishable by arresto menor (from 1 to 30 days) or a fine not exceeding a certain amount (the exact figure can vary based on amendments or jurisprudential guidelines).
  • Grave Slander:
    Punishable by arresto mayor (1 month and 1 day to 6 months) in its maximum period to prision correccional (6 months and 1 day to 6 years) in its minimum period, depending on the gravity and the presence of aggravating or mitigating circumstances.

B. Civil Liability

The offended party may also claim damages (moral, nominal, or even exemplary damages) under the Civil Code, independent of or alongside the criminal case. In many instances, the court resolving the criminal case may also rule on civil damages if the complainant so requests.

7. Common Defenses and Strategies

  1. Lack of Publicity: If the statement was never communicated to a third person, it is not slander.
  2. Privileged Communication: As outlined above, if the statement was a qualified or absolute privileged communication, liability might be avoided.
  3. No Malice: Demonstrating the absence of malice where it can be proven that the statement was fair and with justifiable motive.
  4. Truth of the Statement (in certain circumstances): If the imputation is proven true and for the public good or concerning a public official’s performance of duties.
  5. Prescription: If the complaint was filed after the allowable period, the action can be dismissed.

8. Impact of the Cybercrime Prevention Act

While slander is specifically about oral or spoken defamation, the lines can blur with technology (e.g., a recorded spoken statement posted online may be considered cyber libel rather than “cyber slander”). If the defamatory statement appears in text messages, social media, emails, or other electronic means, the offense may fall under cyber libel (not slander), which has stricter penalties.

9. Practical Tips for Complainants and Accused

  1. Gather Evidence
    • For complainants: Obtain witness affidavits or audio/video recordings (if available).
    • For the accused: Keep records that might show the lack of malice or context to prove the statement falls under privileged communication.
  2. Seek Legal Counsel
    • Due to the complexity of defamation laws, it is advisable to consult a qualified lawyer for appropriate legal remedies, defenses, and procedural guidance.
  3. Aim for an Amicable Settlement
    • Many defamation cases can be resolved through compromise or a public apology to avoid drawn-out litigation. However, whether this is feasible depends on the parties’ willingness.

10. Conclusion

In the Philippines, defamation law—encompassing both libel (written) and slander (oral)—aims to protect a person’s honor and reputation against malicious statements. Slander, or oral defamation, is penalized under Article 358 of the Revised Penal Code, with penalties varying based on whether it is deemed “grave” or “simple.” Malice is generally presumed, and the defendant must rely on defenses such as privileged communication, truth (under limited circumstances), or lack of publicity to avoid criminal and civil liability.

Being the subject of or pursuing a slander complaint requires careful attention to legal formalities, deadlines, and evidentiary requirements. Due to the risks of misunderstanding the law or missing procedural steps, both complainants and accused individuals should seek professional legal assistance. In an age of instantaneous communication and digital platforms, it is particularly crucial to keep abreast of evolving laws—such as cyber libel—when spoken comments migrate online.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Individuals with specific questions about defamation or slander in the Philippines should consult a licensed attorney for guidance tailored to their unique circumstances.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Harold Respicio
Previous

Reporting Illegal Drug Activity in the Philippines
Next

Delayed Salary Increase under Local Wage Orders in the Philippines