Case Digest (G.R. No. 157643)
Facts:
Cristinelli S. Fermin v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 157643, March 28, 2008, Supreme Court Third Division, Nachura, J., writing for the Court.On complaint of spouses Annabelle Rama Gutierrez and Eduardo (Eddie) Gutierrez, two criminal informations for libel were filed against petitioner Cristinelli S. Fermin (publisher of Gossip Tabloid) and co-accused Bogs C. Tugas (editor-in-chief) before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City, Branch 218. The informations charged that the June 14, 1995 issue contained headlines and a lead story imputing serious wrongdoing—including allegations that the complainants had left unresolved financial obligations in the United States, fled from justice, and that Annabelle gambled away earnings—thereby exposing them to public contempt and dishonor.
Petitioner and Tugas pleaded not guilty and were jointly tried. The RTC, in a Joint Decision dated January 27, 1997, convicted both of libel under the Revised Penal Code (RPC), sentenced them to imprisonment (indeterminate penalty) and ordered them to pay moral damages (P500,000 each) and attorney’s fees (P50,000). Petitioner and Tugas appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR No. 20890.
The CA, in its Decision dated September 3, 2002, affirmed the conviction of petitioner Fermin but acquitted Tugas for non-participation in the publication; it modified the moral damages to P300,000 each and deleted attorney’s fees. The CA denied petitioner’s motion for reconsideration in a Resolution dated March 24, 2003. Petitioner then filed a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 before the Supreme Court.
In the Supreme Court petition petitioner argued (1) that precedent requires actual knowledge, participation or complicity of the publisher to sustain conviction under Art. 360, Revised Penal Code, (2)...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Does criminal liability of a publisher under Article 360 of the Revised Penal Code require proof that the publisher had knowledge of, participated in, or approved the preparation and publication of the libelous article?
- Is the publisher’s presumed responsibility under Article 360 a rebuttable presumption that, if successfully rebutted, precludes conviction?
- Was the June 14, 1995 article in *Gossip Tabloid* libelous as defined by the Revised Penal Code?
- If libelous, is the article nevertheless protected by the constitutional freedom of...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)