Legal Consequences of Slander (Oral Defamation) and Insult in the Philippines
(All laws and jurisprudence cited are in force as of 21 April 2025. This material is for information only and is not a substitute for specific legal advice.)
1 | Overview: “Crimes Against Honor”
Under Philippine law, attacks on a person’s reputation or dignity are crimes against honor (Title 13, Revised Penal Code).
| Mode | Governing Article | Typical Medium | Common term |
|---|---|---|---|
| Libel | Art. 355 RPC | Writing, printing, online posts | “Written defamation” |
| Slander (Oral Defamation) | Art. 358 RPC | Spoken words, sounds | “Verbal defamation” |
| Slander by Deed | Art. 359 RPC | Gestures/acts meant to dishonor | “Insult by act” |
2 | Elements of the Offenses
| Requirement | Slander (Art 358) | Slander by Deed (Art 359) |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Imputation of a discreditable act, vice, defect or circumstance | ✔ | ✔ (by conduct, not words) |
| 2. Publication/communication to a 3rd person | ✔ (must be heard) | ✔ (must be witnessed) |
| 3. Identifiability of the offended party | ✔ | ✔ |
| 4. Malice (presumed under Art 354, subject to defenses) | ✔ | ✔ |
3 | Classification and Penalties (after R.A. 10951, 2017)
| Offense | Gravity | Imprisonment | Fine (₱) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oral defamation | Grave (serious insult, rank, etc.) | Arresto mayor (1 mo 1 d – 6 mo) | 20,000 – 100,000 |
| Simple | Arresto menor (1 d – 30 d) | up to 20,000 | |
| Slander by deed | Grave | Prisión correccional min.–med. (6 mo 1 d – 4 y 2 mo) | 20,000 – 100,000 |
| Simple | Arresto mayor min. or Arresto menor | up to 20,000 |
Courts may impose fine only (Art 77 RPC) or place the accused on probation if the penalty does not exceed 6 years.
4 | Cyber & Special‑Law Extensions
| Statute | Relevant conduct | Key difference |
|---|---|---|
| R.A. 10175 (Cybercrime Prevention Act, 2012) | Defamatory statements “through a computer system” | Penalty is one degree higher than libel → Prisión correccional max. to Prisión mayor min. (4 y 2 m – 8 y). |
| R.A. 11313 (Safe Spaces Act, 2019) | Online gender‑based insults, slut‑shaming, name‑calling | Graduated fines up to ₱500,000 + community service or imprisonment. |
| R.A. 9262 (VAWC, 2004) | Insults causing psychological violence against women/children | 6 y 1 d – 12 y imprisonment + protective orders. |
| Anti‑Bullying Act 2013 & DepEd IRR | Repeated verbal abuse in schools | Administrative sanctions, counseling, liability of school officials. |
5 | Civil Liability
Independent Civil Action (Art 33 Civil Code)
Victim may sue even if the criminal case fails or is not filed, claiming:
- Actual/compensatory damages (lost wages, medical care)
- Moral damages (mental anguish, wounded feelings)
- Exemplary damages (to deter egregious conduct)
- Attorney’s fees and litigation costs
Courts regularly award ₱50,000 – ₱300,000 moral damages in slander cases; higher in cyber‑defamation because of “permanent global reach.”
6 | Procedural Notes
Venue & Filing
- File a complaint‑affidavit with the Office of the City/Provincial Prosecutor where the words were spoken or where any element occurred.
- If parties live in the same city/municipality, Barangay conciliation (Chap. 7, LGC) is mandatory unless an exception applies (e.g., respondent is a public officer acting in official capacity).
Prescriptive periods (Art 90 RPC, as harmonized with special laws)
- Oral defamation – 1 year if penalty ≤ 1 year; 5 years if > 1 year
- Slander by deed – 5 years
- Cyber libel – 15 years (Art 90 + Sec. 6, R.A. 10175; People v. Tulfo, 2021)
Provisional remedies
- Injunction against further defamatory posts (rare; requires strong showing)
- Protection Orders under R.A. 9262 or R.A. 11313
Defenses
- Absolute privilege – statements in legislative sessions, pleadings, or during judicial proceedings.
- Qualified privilege – fair comment on matters of public interest, private communications, employee references.
- Truth + good motives (Art 361)
- Lack of identifiability or no third‑person communication
- Exit doctrine – rhetorical hyperbole not actionable (Borjal v. Court of Appeals, 1999).
7 | Selected Jurisprudence
| Case | G.R. No. & Date | Doctrine / takeaway |
|---|---|---|
| People v. Velasco | L‑4425, 20 Apr 1951 | “Tang‑ina mo” → simple slander; profanity alone not automatically grave. |
| Vasquez v. CA | 118971, 2 Sept 1999 | Community petitions enjoy qualified privilege; public officials must prove actual malice. |
| Disini v. SOJ | 203335 etc., 11 Feb 2014 | Cyber libel constitutional; higher penalty justified by “greater reach.” |
| People v. Tulfo et al. | 235483‑84, 5 Mar 2021 | Cyber libel prescribes in 15 years; publication occurs each time the post is accessed. |
| Maria Ressa & Santos v. People | 256641‑42, 5 Oct 2023 | Reaffirmed conviction; SC reduced maximum penalty to 6 mo – 4 y 2 mo + fines, allowing probation. |
| Datu & Rondaful v. People | 256791, 22 May 2024 | Distinction between unjust vexation and slander by deed hinges on intent to dishonor. |
8 | Administrative & Professional Fallout
- Civil Service – insulting a colleague or subordinate may constitute misconduct (CSC MC 15‑2020).
- Legal profession – slander indicates grossly immoral conduct (Rule 1.01, Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability, 2023).
- Teachers & health‑care workers – PRC can suspend or revoke licenses for acts involving moral turpitude.
9 | Reform & Policy Debates
- Pending bills (19th Congress) seek to decriminalize libel and slander or convert them into civil offenses; media groups cite chilling effects.
- Human‑rights advocates urge recalibration of cyber‑libel penalties (seen as disproportionate vs. international norms).
- Supreme Court’s 2024 Sub‑Committee on Criminal Procedure draft rules propose mandatory mediation for simple slander to unclog dockets.
10 | Practical Tips for Aggrieved Parties
- Preserve evidence – record the utterance (if lawful), list witnesses, transcribe as soon as practicable.
- Send a demand letter – often triggers retraction/apology and may support higher damages if ignored.
- Consider civil suit first when relationship is worth preserving or criminal proof is weak.
- Weigh public exposure – criminal complaints are public records; settlement agreements can remain private.
- Watch prescription clocks – even the strongest case dies when time runs out.
11 | Conclusion
The Philippines retains a dual regime: defamation and certain insults are criminally punishable while also carrying civil consequences. Recent reforms have updated fines, amplified online liability, and opened conversations about decriminalization, but—for now—slander, whether spoken or enacted, can still send a person to jail, saddle them with substantial damages, and imperil careers. Understanding the interplay of the Revised Penal Code, cybercrime statutes, civil‑law remedies, and barangay conciliation is therefore essential for both would‑be complainants and potential respondents.