DCSN07C

• CHAPTER 5 THE BLOGGER'S FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND THE CYBER LIBEL LAW
• DCSN07C SOCIAL ISSUES AND PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
• LEARNING OUTCOMES


  • Defend the rights to freedom of expression
  • Recognize the limitation of the rights to free expression
  • Discuss the tests in which a subsequent punishment may be allowed for a person who has abused his right to free expression
  • Be familiar with the cyber law and its elements
  • Identify the elements of defamation
  • Argue or judge whether a particular exercise of free expression constitute libel and/or defamation
  • Interpret a libelous statement
• Freedom of speech


  Section 4 of 1987 Constitution, Article III – Bill of Rights: "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."
• All Filipinos, celebrities and everyday folks alike, have the right to express their beliefs and convictions and to participate in activities in line with these beliefs. The Constitution guarantees our freedom of thought, expression, and participation.
• How important is freedom of speech


  • Foundation of Democracy
  • Fosters Innovation and Progress
  • Protects Minority Voices
  • Preserves Individual Autonomy
  • Promotes Tolerance and Understanding
  • Safeguards against Tyranny
• A BLOG is a type of web site usually maintained by an individual with regular entries of commentary, descriptions of events, or other material such as graphics or video.
• The Philippine Constitution protect bloggers' right to free speech and expression, however, this does not give them unfettered license to write to the detriment of others.
• Section 4(c)(4) are among the seventeen crimes (17) enumerated by RA10175 or the Cybercrime Law. It was declared valid and constitutional by the Supreme Court. Section 4(c)(4) reads: (4) Libel – The unlawful or prohibited acts of libel as defined by Article 355 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, committed through a computer system or any other similar means which may be devised in the future.
• Barzaga has previously earned the ire of Manila Mayor Isko Moreno, Raffy Tulfo, and many others for his hateful comments.
• Its main message is that President Duterte can do no wrong. This kind of citizen defense of a president is not desirable because it promotes personalistic instead of rational political discourse.
• Scope of the freedom of expression


  • Freedom of expression
  • Freedom from prior restraint or censorship
  • Freedom from subsequent punishment
• Bases of the guarantee of the right of freedom of expression


  • Discovery of Truth (free market of an idea)
  • For Self-Government
• A person is free to comment, "Senators Revilla, Enrile and Estrada should resign!" But the three senators cannot be forced to resign because they were directly elected by the people.
• While the Philippine Constitution protects peoples' right to free speech and expression, this does not give them free license to write to the detriment of others.
• Somebody shouted Fire! Fire! Fire! inside a cinema, the people panicked and ran. As a result, there was a stampede and a number of people died and some were injured. It turned out that the person who shouted was just kidding.
• Our right to free expression is NOT absolute. It has limitations.
• Libel


  The act of knowingly making a false written statement in public

  
• Slander


  The act of knowingly making a false verbal statement in public
• The characterization of libel as constitutionality UNPROTECTED SPEECH is EASILY UNDERSTANDABLE when the object of criticism is NOT a public figure.

  
• A private person is entitled to the protection of his own reputation, and the stupidity and immorality of his acts affecting only his private life is NOT of vital concern to the public.
• But when a person becomes a public figure, either as an occupant of or aspirant to a public office, the wisdom or stupidity of his actions and the absence or abundance of his mental and moral qualifications for office, ARE OF VITAL CONCERN TO THE PUBLIC.
• President Marcos painting Malacañang Palace from time to time as compared with your neighbor who is a paramount of a wealthy businessman painting her house every time she wants to.
• Libel (Revised Penal Code)


  A libel is 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 one who is dead.
• Exceptions where defamatory imputation is presumed to be not malicious


  • A private communication made by any person to another in the performance of any legal, moral or social duty
  • 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
• Libel (Revised Penal Code)


  A libel committed by means of writing, printing, lithography, engraving, radio, phonograph, painting, theatrical exhibition, cinematographic exhibition, or any similar means, shall be punished by prison correccional in its minimum and medium periods or at a fine ranging from to 200 to 6,000 pesos, or both, in addition to the civil action which may be brought by the offended party.
• Elements of defamation


  • There must be an imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status, or circumstance
  • The imputation must be made publicly
  • It must be malicious
  • The imputation must be directed at a natural or juridical person, or one who is dead
  • The imputation must tend to cause the dishonor, discredit, or contempt of the person defamed
  • It must be in writing (for cyber libel: writing must be done through a computer system or any other similar means which may be devised in the future)

  
• In the example where Adolfo Karen posts a status message, some elements of defamation are missing.

  
• In the example where Kapitan Inggo, barangay chairman, posts a status message, he may invoke that he posted the message in good faith with good intention, and justifiable motive for protecting his constituents. If the imputation is true, Kapitan Inggo cannot be held liable for libel.

  
• Personal hurt or embarrassment or offense even if is true, is NOT however automatically equivalent to defamation.

  
• Notwithstanding the presence of all elements of libel, a person cannot be held liable for defamation if such is under privileged communication.

  
• Except for the original author of the assailed statement, the rest (those who pressed Like, Comment and Share) are essentially knee-jerk sentiments of readers who may think little or haphazardly of their response to the original posting. They will not be liable for aiding or abetting under Sec. 5 of RA 10175, unless the person who commented added a NEW Defamatory story on the thread or post under review.
• Prior to RA 10175, jurisdiction for cyber libel was under the Court of First Instance or the Regional Trial Court (RTC). Venue depended on whether all the offended parties were public officials or not.