Case Summary (G.R. No. 225010)
Factual Background
On July 31, 1998 petitioner, then anchorman of a religious radio program, broadcast a prepared taped program on DZAL that contained statements describing Evangelist Wilde E. Almeda and his congregation in derogatory terms. The informations quoted petitioner calling the pastor and pastors of the Jesus Miracle Crusade, International Ministry (JMCIM) by epithets such as "gago", "tarantadong pastor", "pastor ng demonyo", and "bulaang propeta", among other insulting phrases. The informations alleged that the broadcast exposed the persons comprising JMCIM to public ridicule, dishonor, and discredit and that the tape was circulated to areas within the station’s coverage.
Criminal Informations and Arraignment
Criminal Case No. IR-4848 charged libel arising from the July 31, 1998 broadcast and alleged the statements were aimed at the persons comprising JMCIM. Criminal Case No. IR-5273 charged libel specifically against Evangelist Wilde E. Almeda and attached the taped broadcast as annex. Upon arraignment petitioner pleaded not guilty in both cases and posted cash bonds for provisional liberty.
Trial Evidence
The prosecution presented as witnesses Eudes Cuadro, Joel Cortero, Jerry Cabanes, and Liza Martinez in Criminal Case No. IR-5273, and relied on Joel Cortero as sole witness in Criminal Case No. IR-4848. The defense presented one witness, Marlon Igana. Petitioner filed a Demurrer to Evidence on December 22, 2008, which the RTC denied in a Resolution dated January 6, 2008. Trial proceeded and the RTC rendered a consolidated judgment after evaluation of the evidence.
Ruling of the Regional Trial Court
The RTC found petitioner guilty of two counts of libel and imposed a fine of SIX THOUSAND PESOS (P6,000.00) for each case pursuant to Administrative Circular No. 08-2008, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency. The RTC declined to award civil damages and ordered no costs. The consolidated judgment was dated June 8, 2012.
Appeal to the Court of Appeals
Petitioner appealed the consolidated judgment to the Court of Appeals. The CA, in its Decision dated August 17, 2015, affirmed the RTC’s consolidated judgment in Criminal Case Nos. IR-4848 and IR-5273 and denied the appeal. The CA later issued a Resolution dated May 18, 2016.
Issues Presented on Review
Petitioner argued that the CA erred by affirming conviction because: (a) the prosecution failed to prove that private complainant suffered dishonor or discredit; (b) statements lacked malice or ill will; (c) no identifiable person was the subject of the imputations; (d) petitioner lacked knowledge or consent in publication of the tape; and (e) the conviction unduly chilled constitutionally protected freedom of expression.
Legal Framework for Libel
The Court restated that Article 353 of the Revised Penal Code defines libel as a 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 dishonor, discredit, or contempt. The requisites for actionable imputation are: (a) defamatory character; (b) malice; (c) publication; and (d) identifiability of the victim. The Court cited precedent for construing words in their plain, natural, and ordinary meaning to determine defamatory content.
Defamatory Character and Qualified Privilege
The Court found that the words used by petitioner—including the quoted epithets—were defamatory in ordinary meaning and were not accompanied by any showing of a good intention or justifiable motive to rebut the presumption of malice under Article 354. The Court observed that fair comment and other qualified privileges are exceptions to the presumption of malice, but that petitioner did not establish a protected fair commentary on a matter of public interest. The Court held that the statements degraded and insulted the pastor and did not fairly debunk alleged falsities in the JMCIM’s teachings.
Malice
The Court affirmed the factual finding of actual malice by the CA and the RTC. It explained that malice or bad faith implies a conscious and intentional design to do a wrongful act for a dishonest purpose, and that no good motive could be inferred from petitioner’s language. The Court accepted the CA’s conclusion that petitioner’s apparent objective was to discredit and humiliate private complainants and to encourage transfer of membership to petitioner’s religion.
Publication
The Court found that publication had occurred when the taped broadcast was aired on petitioner’s radio program. It reiterated the rule that libel is published when a defamatory matter is made known to a person other than the author and the offended party, and that broadcast over radio constituted publication within the meaning of the law.
Identification and Group Libel
The Court differentiated the two informations on the issue of identifiability. With respect to Criminal Case No. IR-4848, the Court concluded that the information referred broadly to "persons comprising the Jesus Miracle Crusade, International Ministry" and did not identify a specific pastor or member. Citing MVRS Publications, Inc., et al. v. Islamic Da’wah Council of the Phils., Inc., the Court reiterated that declarations about a large class cannot be interpreted to refer to an identifiable individual absent circumstances pointing to a particular
...continue reading
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 225010)
Parties and Posture
- Petitioner Eliseo Soriano appealed by petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45, Rules of Court from the Court of Appeals' affirmance of the Regional Trial Court judgment convicting him of two counts of libel.
- Respondent is the People of the Philippines as criminal complainant in the consolidated criminal prosecutions.
- The consolidated criminal cases are Criminal Case Nos. IR-4848 and IR-5273 before Branch 60, RTC, Iriga City.
- The Court of Appeals rendered a Decision dated August 17, 2015 and a Resolution dated May 18, 2016 in CA-G.R. CR No. 35052 which affirmed the RTC Consolidated Judgment dated June 8, 2012.
- The Supreme Court rendered a decision dated November 21, 2018 that partially granted the petition and modified the lower courts' rulings.
Key Facts
- The charged broadcasts were taped radio broadcasts aired by petitioner on July 31, 1998 over program "Ang Dating Daan" on DZAL, Iriga City.
- The broadcasts contained statements calling persons associated with Jesus Miracle Crusade International Ministry “GAGO,” “TARANTADONG PASTOR,” “PASTOR NG DEMONYO IYAN,” and “BULAANG PROPETA.”
- Criminal Case No. IR-5273 alleged the statements were directed at Evangelist Wilde E. Almeda and sought to expose him to public hatred, contempt and ridicule.
- Criminal Case No. IR-4848 alleged the statements were directed at the persons comprising the JMCIM and sought to cause dishonor, discredit and ridicule of the group.
- Petitioner pleaded not guilty, posted cash bonds for provisional liberty, presented one defense witness, and filed a Demurrer to Evidence which the RTC denied.
Procedural History
- The RTC conducted trial, found petitioner guilty of two counts of libel, and sentenced him to a fine of P6,000 for each case pursuant to Administrative Circular No. 08-2008 with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency.
- The RTC did not award civil damages and ordered no costs.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC Consolidated Judgment in its Decision dated August 17, 2015.
- Petitioner filed the instant petition for review under Rule 45 to the Supreme Court which issued the challenged decision of November 21, 2018.
Issues Presented
- Whether the prosecution proved the elements of libel beyond reasonable doubt.
- Whether the statements caused dishonor, discredit or ridicule to the private complainant.
- Whether petitioner acted with malice or whether a justifiable motive or qualified privilege negated malice.
- Whether the alleged victims were identifiable persons sufficient to sustain libel convictions.
- Whether petitioner had knowledge or consent in the publication of the alleged libelous statements and whether conviction infringed freedom of expression and religious liberty.