Title
Diaz vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 45934
Decision Date
Apr 20, 1939
Fortunato Diaz convicted for distributing anonymous posters criticizing a candidate, violating Section 2649, emphasizing transparency in electoral discourse.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 45934)

Facts:

Fortunato Diaz v. The People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 45934, April 20, 1939, the Supreme Court, Concepcion, J., writing for the Court (67 Phil. 432). Petitioner Fortunato Diaz was prosecuted under Section 2649 of the Revised Administrative Code for distributing an unsigned poster critical of then-Governor Medina during the 1934 elections.

On June 5, 1934, Diaz delivered to Attorney Esteban D. Rivera, in San Narciso, Zambales, a copy of a poster similar to those he had distributed before the June 6, 1934 elections at a meeting of the group known as Young Philippines in front of the municipal building of San Felipe, Zambales. The poster depicted a caricature of Governor Medina driving an automobile labeled “To Manila” with relatives and retainers on board, a platform borne by two persons representing the people carrying bundles labeled with alleged expenditures, and a figure of a devil accompanied by price comparisons for copra and palay. A printed list titled “The seven mortal sins of Mr. Medina” charged the Governor with seven criticisms. The poster bore no signature; only the words “The Poor” appeared at the bottom.

The Court of First Instance found Diaz guilty under Sec. 2649 and sentenced him to one month imprisonment, a fine of P100 (with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency), payment of costs, and deprivation of suffrage and disqualification to hold public office for the same period. The Court of Appeals (First Division) affirmed that conviction. Diaz sought review by the Supreme Court by petition for certiorari, raising two principal complaints: (1) ...(Subscriber-Only)

Issues:

  • Was the Court of Appeals’ finding that the posters were anonymous a reviewable error of fact?
  • Does Section 2649 of the Revised Administrative Code penalize anonymous criticism per se, or only anonymous criticisms that...(Subscriber-Only)

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.