G.R. No. 35366 - Provincial Fiscal of Pampanga vs. Reyes

The Provincial Fiscal of Pampanga (petitioner) initiated the proceedings by filing two informations for libel against Andres Guevarra.
The informations charged that on July 13, 1930, a libelous article was published on page 9 of the weekly paper, Ing Magumasid.
The libelous article was presented in verse, including a Spanish translation, and was alleged to defame Clemente Dayrit (in criminal cause No. 4501) and Mariano Nepomuceno (in criminal cause No. 4502).
Andres Guevarra demurred on the ground of duplicity, arguing that only one libelous article was published instead of two, but the court overruled this demurrer.

During the joint trial of criminal cases Nos. 4501 and 4502, the petitioner attempted to introduce Exhibits A, B, C, and D as evidence.

These exhibits consisted of copies of the newspaper article containing the libel, an article with an innuendo, another related article in the vernacular, and its Spanish translation.

Counsel for the defendant obstructed the admission of this evidence, and the respondent judge sustained the objection, thereby excluding the exhibits from the trial record.
Both parties submitted memoranda in lieu of an oral argument during the hearing, explaining their positions on the matter.

The petitioner moved for a writ of mandamus to compel the respondent judge (Judge Hermogenes Reyes of the Court of First Instance of Pampanga) to admit the disputed exhibits.
The rationale was that the exhibits represented the best evidence of the libelous publication, thereby being essential to the prosecution’s case.

The petitioner argued that, although the general rule in libel cases requires a precise statement of the defamatory words, an exception should apply when the libelous material is published in an unofficial language.

In this case, the libel was published in the Pampango dialect, and the Spanish translation attached to the information was deemed sufficient to fulfill the evidentiary requirements.

The respondents contended that since the libelous article was not directly quoted in the information, its corresponding exhibits should not be admitted unless the information was amended accordingly.
The prosecution had suggested an amendment to include the article, a motion that was denied by the lower court on grounds that such amendment would impair the rights of the defendant.

Whether an information charging a libel published in an unofficial language (Pampango) but containing only a translation into Spanish is valid.
The applicability of the general rule that requires the exact words of the libelous publication, and whether an exception is justified due to the language used.

Whether the copies of the newspaper (Exhibits A, B, C, and D), including the translated version, constitute the best evidence and should be admitted in the trial.
Whether the respondent judge’s refusal to admit the exhibits constitutes an abuse of discretion that warrants intervention by mandamus.

The extent to which the respondent judge’s exercise of discretion in rejecting the evidence can be controlled by higher courts through the issuance of a writ of mandamus.
Whether precedent supports the petitioner’s relief in compelling the lower court to review the entire written communication, including the contested exhibits.