Transcript: Senate Bill 1593 Decriminalizing Libel

S.B. No. 1593

INTRODUCED BY SENATOR RISA HONTIVEROS

AN ACT DECRIMINALIZING LIBEL, REPEALING FOR THIS PURPOSE ARTICLES 353, 354, 355,356, 357, 360, 361 AND 362 OF ACT NO. 3815, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS “THE REVISED PENAL CODE” AND SECTION 4 (c) 4, CHAPTER II OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10175, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE “CYBERCRIME PREVENTION ACT OF 2012”

EXPLANATORY NOTE

The conversation on whether or not libel should be decriminalized has been a longstanding one. The discussion has mostly revolved around the rights embodied in Article III, Section 4 of the Constitution which 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.”

According to Supreme Court Justice Marvic Leonen, libel laws originated from the government’s objective to protect itself from undue criticism, and then evolving to protect both the government and its citizens from malicious defamatory utterances. However, in recent years, libel laws have been used and abused by private parties to advance their various interests, and by public personalities to shield themselves from scrutiny, even on matters of public concern. The rise and prevalence of social media as a primary medium of communication has led to the further weaponization of libel laws against the press and active citizenship.

In his dissenting opinion in the case of Disini, et. al. vs. Secretary of Justice (GR No. 2033335), February 11,2014, he opined:

Libel law now is used not so much to prosecute but deter speech. What is charged as criminal libel may contain precious protected speech. There is very little to support the majority view that the law will not continue to have this effect on speech.
xxx
It is time that we now go further and declare libel as provided in the Revised Penal Code and in the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, as unconstitutional.

Further, the avalanche of cyberlibel cases has only resulted in the clogging of our court dockets. The abundance of litigation spurred by scorned private citizens (from restaurants litigating against patrons who left unpleasant reviews, to homeowners disagreeing in Viber groups, to parents fighting with teachers on social media) all collectively contribute to the overburdening of both the executive and judicial branches and the draining of their respective resources.

The National Prosecution Service¹ and the courts of justice² are now at the mercy of these private litigants who fall to think before they type, and the trigger-happy citizens who deem themselves entitled to pursue litigation for every minor inconvenience. The result is a penalty too harsh and absurd: to mandate imprisonment for something one has posted online. Hence the need to decriminalize libel.

Worldwide, there has been a strong sentiment among the international community to decriminalize libel and this view is embodied under Article XIX, General Remarks number 47 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), of which the Philippines is a state party. It provides:

“Defamation laws must be crafted with care to ensure that they comply with paragraph 3, and that they do not serve, in practice, to stifle freedom of expression. XXX States parties should consider the decriminalization of defamation and, in any case, the application of the criminal law should only be countenanced in the most serious of cases and imprisonment is never an appropriate penalty. It is impermissible for a State party to indict a person for criminal defamation but then not to proceed to trial expeditiously - such a practice has a chilling effect that may unduly restrict the exercise of freedom of expression of the person concerned and others.” (Underscoring supplied.)

As such, the immediate passage of this bill is earnestly sought.

RISA HONTIVEROS
Senator