Defenses - Libel
Defenses - Libel
Defenses - Libel
Libel
1. Concept:
A. In general: if the accused proves the absence of any of the elements, then
he is not liable. Thus he may show: the material is not defamatory; there is
no publicity; it is impersonal and does not refer to the plaintiff; or that
there is no malice.
B. There are however specific defenses which may refer to any of the
elements of libel or are independent defenses in themselves. These defenses
were established by jurisprudence, particularly by United States Decisions,
as our Libel law is based primarily on American concepts.
(i). The person who made the communication had a legal, moral or social
duty to make the communication, or at least, had an interest to protect,
which interest may either be his own or of the one to whom it is made
(iii). The statements in the communication are made in good faith and
without malice ( Binay vs. Sec. of Justice, Sept. 08, 2006)
Legal duty: presupposes a provision of law imposing upon the accused the
duty to communicate. Such as the complaint by a citizen concerning the
misconduct of a public official to the latter‘s superior even if, upon
investigation, the matters are not substantiated. But it may be shown that
the charges were maliciously made without reasonable ground for
believing them to be true.
Also, a report to the police by a citizen about the suspected criminal
activities of another person, even if latter it is proved the suspicions were
groundless, is privileged.
(e). The sender must have an interest in the subject of the communication
and the recipient must be a proper person who can act on the subject to the
communication.
(f). In Alcantara vs. Ponce (Feb. 28, 2007) the court adopted the ruling in the
U.S case of Borg vs. Borg in that a “written charge or information filed with
the prosecutor or the court is not libelous although proved or be false and
unfounded. Furthermore, the information given to a prosecutor by a
private person for the purpose of initiating a prosecution is protected by
the same cloak of immunity and cannot be used as a basis for an action for
defamation.“
(a). The proceeding must not be confidential, such as the hearings before
the Senate, as opposed to the close door executive sessions of the senate.
Thus if the report is with respect to a public record, it refers only to those
made accessible to the public which may be revealed for public interest or
protection of the public.
(b) The report must be without any unnecessary comment or libelous
remarks ( i.e. no editorializing)
(c).The report must be accurate and should not intentionally distort the
facts. If there is error in the facts reported, the report is still privilege if
made in good faith
(e). This defense apply most often to members of the media who write on
said matters or report them as news
2-B. Fair and True Report of the Official Acts of a Public Official
(a). The public and official acts of a public official, including his policies,
are legitimate subjects of comments and criticisms, though they may be
unfair. Public officials are not supposed to be onion-skinned. “Public
officials, like Ceasar’s wife, must be beyond reproach and above
suspicion”.
(iii) As stated in the U.S. case of New York Times vs. Sullivan, a public
official may recover damages if he proves that : “the statement was made
with actual damage, that is, with knowledge that it was false or with
reckless disregard of whether it was false or not”
(a) In Borjal vs. Ct. of Appeals, (301 SCRA 1, Jan. 14, 1999) it was held that
the enumeration in Article 354 is not an exclusive list of qualifiedly
privileged communications because “fair comments on matters of public
interest are privileged and constitute a valid defense in an action
for libel or slander”
Examples
(ii). An editorial criticizing the owner of a ship which sunk, for his delay in
extending financial help to the family of the victims, is not libelous as the in
action is a matter of public interest.
(iii). The arrest and prosecution of law violator is a matter in which the
public has a right to know. Thus there is no liability for reporting that a
lady was arrested for selling shabu or that a person was charged in court or
convicted by a court for Estafa. The persons in question cannot file a case
for libel.
(iv). A radio announcer lambasts a family for their adamant refusal to
vacate and remove their structure inside a park.
(a) Public figures refer to people who place themselves in the public
limelight or attention either: by nature of their business or activity, or
mode of living, or by adopting a mode of profession or calling which gives
the public a legitimate interest in his doings, his affairs and in his character
or which affect public interest (these are the celebrities), or because they
participate in public affairs or regularly and publicly expound their views
on public affairs.
Examples of the first: movie stars; national athletes; those representing the
Philippines in world beauty pageants, Manny Pacquiao; hosts of TV
shows/programs such as the Tulfo brothers, musicians, novelists. The
spouse of the President is a public figure.
A. It is not enough that what was publicized about another is true. The
accused must also prove good motives or intentions and justifiable ends, in
order to disprove malice.
A. This is a defense available to one charged not as the author but as a
republisher of a libelous material