aberasturi v. salvador

7/17/2019 Aberasturi v. Salvador

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/aberasturi-v-salvador 1/13

Republic of the PhilippinesSupreme Court

Manila

FIRST DIVISION

DIONISIO LOPEZ y ABERASTURI, G.R. No. 1722!

Petitioner ,

Present:

CORONA, C.J., Chairperson,

- versus - VELASCO, R!, LEONAR"O-"E CAS#RO,

"EL CAS#$LLO, and

PERE%, JJ.

PEOPLE OF T"E P"ILIPPINES #$%

SALVADOR G. ESCALANTE, &R., Pro&ul'ate(:

Respondents. )ebruar* +, .++/ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - /

D E C I S I O N

DEL CASTILLO, J .'

)ree(o& of e/pression en0o*s an e/alte( place in the hierarch* of constitutional

ri'hts! )ree e/pression ho1ever, is not absolute for it &a* be so re'ulate( that 2its

e/ercise shall neither3 be in0urious to the e4ual en0o*&ent of others havin' e4ual ri'hts,

nor in0urious to the ri'hts of the co&&unit* or societ*!2+3 Libel stan(s as an e/ception to

the en0o*&ent of that &ost 'uar(e( constitutional ri'ht!

5efore the Court is a petition for revie1 on certiorari un(er Rule 6 of the Rules of

Court file( b* "ionisio Lope7 8petitioner9 assailin' the "ecision 23 (ate( Au'ust +, ..6

of the Court of Appeals 8CA9 in CA-;!R! CR No! <+=6! #he CA affir&e( 1ith

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/february2011/172203.htm#_ftn1







&o(ification the "ecision23 ren(ere( b* the Re'ional #rial Court 8R#C9 of Ca(i7 Cit*,

5ranch >. fin(in' petitioner 'uilt* be*on( reasonable (oubt of the cri&e of libel!

Procedural and Factual Antecedents

On April , .., petitioner 1as in(icte( for libel in an $nfor&ation (ate( March +,

.., the accusator* portion of 1hich rea(s in full as follo1s:

#hat on or about the earl* part of Nove&ber .. in the Cit* of Ca(i7,

Philippines an( 1ithin the 0uris(iction of this ?onorable Court, the herein

accuse( (i( then an( there, 1illfull*, unla1full* an( feloniousl* 1ith intent to

i&peach the inte'rit*, reputation an( puttin' to public ri(icule an( (ishonor

the offen(e( part* MA@OR SALVA"OR ;! ESCALAN#E, R!, Cit* Ma*or

of Ca(i7 Cit* an( 1ith &alice an( intent to in0ure an( e/pose the sai(offen(e( part* to public hatre(, conte&pt an( ri(icule put up

billboar(ssi'nboar(s at the fence of Ca(i7 ?otel, Villena Street, Ca(i7 Cit*

an( at ;ustilo 5oulevar(, Ca(i7 Cit*, 1hich billboar(ssi'nboar(s rea( as

follo1s:

CA"$% )OREVER

BBBBBBBBBBBBBB NEVER

thereb* (eliberatel* titillatin' the curiosit* of an( (ra1in' e/traor(inar*

attention fro& the resi(ents of Ca(i7 Cit* an( passers-b* over 1hat 1oul( be place( before the 1or( NEVER! Later on Nove&ber +6, .., accuse(

affi/e( the nicna&e of the herein private co&plainant 5A"$N; an( the

na&e of the Cit* of SA;A@ before the 1or( NEVER thus &ain' the

billboar( appear as follo1s

CA"$% )OREVER

5A"$N; AN" SA;A@ NEVER

)or 1hich the 1or(s in the si'nboar(sbillboar(s 1ere obviousl* calculate( to

in(uce the rea(erspassers-b* to suppose an( un(erstan( that so&ethin' fish*1as 'oin' on, therefore &aliciousl* i&peachin' the honest*, virtue an(

reputation of Ma*or Salva(or ;! Escalante, r!, an( hence 1ere hi'hl*

libelous, offensive an( (efa&ator* to the 'oo( na&e, character an( reputation

of the offen(e( part* an( his office an( that the sai( billboar(ssi'nboar(s

1ere rea( b* thousan(s if not hun(re(2s3 of thousan(s of persons, 1hich





cause( (a&a'e an( pre0u(ice to the offen(e( part* b* 1a* of &oral (a&a'es

in the a&ount 2of3:

P6,...,...!.. as &oral (a&a'es!

AC# CON#RAR@ #O LAD!23

pon arrai'n&ent on Ma* <, .., petitioner, as accuse(, entere( a plea of not 'uilt*!

"urin' the pre-trial, the parties stipulate(, a&on' others, on the i(entit* of the accuse(,

that the private co&plainant is the incu&bent Cit* Ma*or of Ca(i7 Cit* an( is popularl*

no1n b* the nicna&e 5a(in' an( that the petitioner calls the private co&plainant

5a(in'! #henceforth, trial on the &erits co&&ence( in (ue course!

Evi(ence intro(uce( for the prosecution reveals that in the earl* part of Nove&ber ..,

1hile e/ercisin' his official (uties as Ma*or of Ca(i7 Cit*, private respon(ent sa1

billboar(s 1ith the printe( phrase CA"$% )OREVER 1ith a blan space before the

1or( NEVER (irectl* un(er sai( phrase! #hose billboar(s 1ere poste( on the corner of

;ustilo an( Villena streets, in front of Ca(i7 ?otel an( besi(e the ol( Coca-Cola

1arehouse in Ca(i7 Cit*! ?e beca&e intri'ue( an( 1on(ere( on 1hat the &essa'e

conve*e( since it 1as inco&plete!

So&e (a*s later, on Nove&ber +6, .., private respon(ent receive( a phone callrelatin' that the blan space prece(in' the 1or( NEVER 1as fille( up 1ith the a((e(

1or(s 5A"$N; AN" SA;A@!#he ne/t (a*, he sa1 the billboar(s 1ith the phrase

CA"$% )OREVER 5A"$N; AN" SA;A@ NEVER printe( in full! Reactin' an(

feelin' that he 1as bein' &ali'ne( an( (ishonore( 1ith the printe( phrase an( of bein'

a tuta of Sa'a*, private respon(ent, after consultation 1ith the Cit* Le'al Officer, cause(

the filin' of a co&plaint for libel a'ainst petitioner! ?e clai&e( that the inci(ent resulte(

in &ental an'uish an( sleepless ni'hts for hi& an( his fa&il*! ?e thus pra*e( for

(a&a'es!

u(e Martin aropillo 8u(e9 is a licensin' officer of the Per&it an( License "ivision of

Ca(i7 Cit*! Dhile on a licensin' ca&pai'n, he 1as able to rea( the &essa'e on the

billboar(s! ?e 1on(ere( 1hat fault the person allu(e( therein has (one as the &essa'e is

so ne'ative! ?e felt that the &essa'e is an insult to the &a*or since it creates a ne'ative

i&pression, as if he 1as bein' re0ecte( b* the people ofCa(i7 Cit*! ?e clai&e( that he






1as 'ivin' his testi&on* voluntaril* an( he 1as not bein' re1ar(e(, coerce( or force(

b* an*bo(*!

Nenita 5er&eo 8Nenita9, a retire( 'overn&ent e&plo*ee of Ca(i7 Cit*, 1as at "elilahs

Coffee 2Shop3 in the &ornin' of Nove&ber +F, .. 1hen she hear( the petitioner shoutin' 5a(in', 5a(in', Never, Never! She an( the tric*cle (rivers (rinin' coffee 1ere

tol( b* petitioner @ou 1atch out $ 1ill a(( lar'er billboar(s! Dhen she 1ent

aroun( Ca(i7 Cit*, she sa1 lar'er billboar(s 1ith the phrase CA"$% )OREVER

5A"$N; AN" SA;A@ NEVER, thus confir&in' 1hat petitioner ha( sai(! Dith the

&essa'e, she felt as if the people 1ere tr*in' to (iso1n the private

respon(ent! Accor(in' to her, petitioner has an a/ to 'rin( a'ainst the &a*or! Lie u(e,

she 1as not also force( or re1ar(e( in 'ivin' her testi&on*!

5ernar(ita Villaceran 85ernar(ita9 also foun( the &essa'e unpleasant because Ma*or

Escalante is an honorable an( (i'nifie( resi(ent of Ca(i7 Cit*! Accor(in' to her, the

&essa'e is an insult not onl* to the person of the &a*or but also to the people

of Ca(i7 Cit*!

Petitioner a(&itte( havin' place( all the billboar(s because he is a1are of all the thin's

happenin' aroun( Ca(i7 Cit*! ?e &entione( 5A"$N; because he 1as not in

confor&it* 1ith the &an* thin's the &a*or ha( (one in Ca(i7 Cit*! ?e insiste( that he

has no intention 1hatsoever of referrin' to 5a(in' as the Tuta of Sa'a*! ?e conten(e(that it 1as private respon(ent 1ho referre( to 5a(in' as Tutaof Sa'a*! ?e further

&aintaine( that his personal belief an( e/pression 1as that he 1ill never love 5a(in' an(

Sa'a*! ?e conclu(e( that the &essa'e in the billboar(s is 0ust a 1ae-up call

for Ca(i7Cit*!

Ruling of the Regional Trial Court

On "ece&ber +=, .., the R#C ren(ere( 0u('&ent convictin' petitioner of libel! #he trial court rule( that fro& the totalit* of the evi(ence presente( b* the

prosecution vs-a-vs that of the (efense, all the ele&ents of libel are present! #he fallo of

the "ecision rea(s:

D?ERE)ORE, in vie1 of all the fore'oin', this Court fin(s accuse(

"$ON$S$O LOPE% * A5ERAS#R$ 8bon(e(9 ;$L#@ be*on( reasonable



(oubt of the cri&e of Libel (efine( an( penali7e( un(er Article 6 in relation

to Article 66 of the Revise( Penal Co(e an( there bein' no &iti'atin' or

a''ravatin' circu&stances atten(ant thereto hereb* sentences hi& to suffer an

in(eter&inate penalt* of i&prison&ent of )OR MON#?S AN" #DEN#@

"A@S of Arresto Ma*or &a/i&u& as the &ini&u& to #DO @EARS,

ELEVEN MON#?S AN" #EN "A@S of Prision Correccional Me(iu& asthe &a/i&u& an( a )$NE of P6,...!.. 1ith subsi(iar* i&prison&ent in case

of insolvenc*!

#he accuse( is further or(ere( to pa* the private co&plainant the su&

of P6,...,...!.. b* 1a* of &oral (a&a'es!

#he cash bon( poste( b* the accuse( is hereb* or(ere( cancelle( an( returne(

to the accuse(, ho1ever the penalt* of )ine a(0u('e( a'ainst the accuse( is

hereb* or(ere( (e(ucte( fro& the cash bon( poste( b* the accuse( pursuant to

Section of Rule ++ of the Rules of Court an( the re&ainin' balance

or(ere( returne( to the accuse(! #he accuse( is hereb* or(ere( i&&e(iatel*

co&&itte( to the 5MP, Ca(i7 Cit* for the service of his sentence!

Cost a'ainst the accuse(!

SO OR"ERE"!263

Ruling of the Court of Appeals

Petitioner appeale( the "ecision of the R#C to the CA 1hich, as state( earlier, ren(ere(

0u('&ent on Au'ust +, ..6, affir&in' 1ith &o(ification the "ecision of the

R#C! Lie the trial court, the appellate court foun( the presence of all the ele&ents of the

cri&e of libel! $t re(uce( ho1ever, the a&ount of &oral (a&a'es

to P6..,...!..! Petitioner then file( his Motion for Reconsi(eration, 1hich the appellate

court (enie( in its Resolution2>3 (ate( April =, ..>!

"is'runtle(, petitioner is no1 before us via the instant petition! Per our (irective, private

respon(ent file( his Co&&ent2=3 on Au'ust F, ..> 1hile the Office of the Solicitor

;eneral 8OS;9 representin' public respon(ent People of the Philippines, sub&itte( a

Manifestation an( Motion in Lieu of Co&&ent2<3 on even (ate! After the filin' of

petitioners Repl* to private respon(ents Co&&ent, 1e further re4ueste( the parties to











sub&it their respective &e&oran(a! #he OS; file( a Manifestation in Lieu of

Me&oran(u&, a(optin' as its &e&oran(u&, the Manifestation an( Motion in Lieu of

Co&&ent it earlier file(! Petitioner an( private respon(ent sub&itte( their respective

&e&oran(a as re4uire(!

I((ue(

Petitioner raise( the follo1in' ar'u&ents in support of his petition:

$

D?E#?ER G G G #?E COR# O) APPEALS ERRE" $N

?OL"$N; #?A# #?E DOR"S CA"$% )OREVER2,3 5A"$N; AN"

SA;A@ NEVER CON#A$NE" $N #?E 5$LL5OAR"SS$;N5OAR"S

S?OD #?E $NR$OS NA#RE O) #?E $MP#A#$ONS MA"EA;A$NS# #?E PR$VA#E RESPON"EN# AN" #EN"S #O $N"CE

SSP$C$ON ON ?$S C?ARAC#ER, $N#E;R$#@ AN" REP#A#$ON

AS MA@OR O) CA"$% C$#@!

$$

ASSM$N; D$#?O# CONCE"$N; #?A# #?E DOR"S CA"$%

)OREVER, 5A"$N; AN" SA;A@ NEVER CON#A$NE" $N #?E

5$LL5OAR"S EREC#E" 5@ PE#$#$ONER ARE "E)AMA#OR@, "$"

#?E COR# O) APPEALS ERR $N NO# ?OL"$N; #?A# #?E@

COMPR$SE )A$R COMMEN#AR@ ON MA##ERS O) P5L$C$N#ERES# D?$C? ARE #?ERE)ORE PR$V$LE;E"H

$$$

D?E#?ER G G G #?E COR# O) APPEALS ERRE" $N ?OL"$N;

#?A# #?E PRESMP#$ON O) MAL$CE $N #?E CASE A# 5AR ?AS

NO# 5EEN OVER#?RODN!

$V

D?E#?ER G G G #?E COR# O) APPEALS ERRE" $N NO#

ACI$##$N; PE#$#$ONER O) #?E C?AR;E O) L$5EL AN" $N

?OL"$N; ?$M L$A5LE )OR MORAL "AMA;ES $N #?E AMON#O) P6..,...!2F3

Su&&e( up, the focal issues ten(ere( in the present petition boil (o1n to the follo1in':

+9 1hether the printe( phrase CA"$% )OREVER, 5A"$N; AN" SA;A@ NEVER is

libelousJ an( 9 1hether the controversial 1or(s use( constitute( privile'e(

co&&unication!





Our Ru)*$+

De ou'ht to reverse the CA rulin'!

At the outset, onl* 4uestions of la1 &a* be raise( in a petition for revie1

on certiorari un(er Rule 6 of the Rules of Court! #he factual fin(in's of the lo1er

courts are final an( conclusive an( are not revie1able b* this Court, unless the case falls

un(er an* of the follo1in' reco'ni7e( e/ceptions:

+! Dhen the conclusion is a fin(in' 'roun(e( entirel* on speculation,

sur&ises an( con0ecturesJ

! Dhen the inference &a(e is &anifestl* &istaen, absur( or i&possibleJ

! Dhere there is a 'rave abuse of (iscretionJ

! Dhen the 0u('&ent is base( on a &isapprehension of factsJ

6! Dhen the fin(in's of fact are conflictin'J

>! Dhen the Court of Appeals, in &ain' its fin(in's, 1ent be*on( the issues

of the case an( the sa&e is contrar* to the a(&issions of both appellant an(

appelleeJ

=! Dhen the fin(in's are contrar* to those of the trial courtJ

<! Dhen the fin(in's of fact are conclusions 1ithout citation of specific

evi(ence on 1hich the* are base(J

F! Dhen the facts set forth in the petition as 1ell as in the petitioners &ain an(

repl* briefs are not (ispute( b* the respon(entsJ an(,

+.! Dhen the fin(in's of fact of the Court of Appeals are pre&ise( on the

suppose( absence of evi(ence an( contra(icte( b* the evi(ence on recor(!2+.3





$n(ee(, the CA affir&e( the factual fin(in's of the R#C that all the ele&ents of the cri&e

of libel are present in this case! #hus, follo1in' the 'eneral rule, 1e are preclu(e( fro&

&ain' further evaluation of the factual antece(ents of the case! ?o1ever, 1e cannot

lose si'ht of the fact that both lo1er courts have 'reatl* &isapprehen(e( the facts in

arrivin' at their unani&ous conclusion! ?ence, 1e are constraine( to appl* one of thee/ceptions specificall* para'raph above, instea( of the 'eneral rule!

Petitioner taes e/ception to the CAs rulin' that the controversial phrase CA"$%

)OREVER, 5A"$N; AN" SA;A@ NEVER ten(s to in(uce suspicion on private

respon(ents character, inte'rit* an( reputation as &a*or of Ca(i7 Cit*! ?e avers that

there is nothin' in sai( printe( &atter ten(in' to (efa&e an( in(uce suspicion on the

character, inte'rit* an( reputation of private respon(ent!

#he OS;, in its Manifestation an( Motion in Lieu of Co&&ent, asserts that there is

nothin' in the phrase CA"$% )OREVER an( 5A"$N; AN" SA;A@ NEVER 1hich

ascribe to private respon(ent an* cri&e, vice or (efect, or an* act, o&ission, con(ition,

status or circu&stance 1hich 1ill either (ishonor, (iscre(it, or put hi& into conte&pt!2++3

#he prosecution &aintains that the appellate court correctl* sustaine( the trial courts

fin(in' of 'uilt on petitioner! Citin' 1ell-establishe( 0urispru(ence2+3 hol(in' that

213or(s calculate( to in(uce suspicion are so&eti&es &ore effective

to (estro* reputation than false char'es (irectl* &a(e an( that 2i3ronical an( &etaphoricallan'ua'e is a favore( vehicle for slan(er, it ar'ue( that the 1or(s printe( on the

billboar(s so&eho1 bor(ere( on the inco&prehensible an( the lu(icrous *et the* 1ere

so (eliberatel* crafte( solel* to in(uce suspicion an( cast aspersion a'ainst private

respon(ents honor an( reputation!

A libel is (efine( as a public an( &alicious i&putation of a cri&e or of a vice or (efect,

real or i&a'inar* or an* act, o&ission, con(ition, status or circu&stance ten(in' to cause

the (ishonor, (iscre(it or conte&pt of a natural or 0uri(icial person or to blacen the

&e&or* of one 1ho is (ea(!

2+3

)or an i&putation to be libelous, the follo1in' re4uisites&ust concur: a9 it &ust be (efa&ator*J b9 it &ust be &aliciousJ c9 it &ust be 'iven

publicit* an( (9 the victi& &ust be i(entifiable!2+3 Absent one of these ele&ents

preclu(es the co&&ission of the cri&e of libel!

Althou'h all the ele&ents &ust concur, the (efa&ator* nature of the sub0ect printe(

phrase &ust be prove( first because this is so vital in a prosecution for libel! Dere the











1or(s i&pute( not (efa&ator* in character, a libel char'e 1ill not prosper! Malice is

necessaril* ren(ere( i&&aterial!

An alle'ation is consi(ere( (efa&ator* if it ascribes to a person the co&&ission of a

cri&e, the possession of a vice or (efect, real or i&a'inar* or an* act, o&ission,con(ition, status or circu&stance 1hich ten(s to (ishonor or (iscre(it or put hi& in

conte&pt or 1hich ten(s to blacen the &e&or* of one 1ho is (ea(! #o (eter&ine

1hether a state&ent is (efa&ator*, the 1or(s use( are to be construe( in their entiret*

an( shoul( be taen in their plain, natural an( or(inar* &eanin' as the* 1oul( naturall*

be un(erstoo( b* persons rea(in' the&, unless it appears that the* 1ere use( an(

un(erstoo( in another sense!2+63 Moreover, 2a3 char'e is sufficient if the 1or(s are

calculate( to in(uce the hearers to suppose an( un(erstan( that the person or persons

a'ainst 1ho& the* 1ere uttere( 1ere 'uilt* of certain offenses or are sufficient toi&peach the honest*, virtue or reputation or to hol( the person or persons up to public

ri(icule!2+>3

#este( un(er these establishe( stan(ar(s, 1e cannot subscribe to the appellate courts

fin(in' that the phrase CA"$% )OREVER, 5A"$N; AN" SA;A@ NEVER ten(s to

in(uce suspicion on private respon(ents character, inte'rit* an( reputation as &a*or

of Ca(i7 Cit*! #here are no (ero'ator* i&putations of a cri&e, vice or (efect or an* act,

o&ission, con(ition, status or circu&stance ten(in', (irectl* or in(irectl*, to cause his

(ishonor! Neither (oes the phrase in its entiret*, e&plo* an* unpleasant lan'ua'e or so&e1hat harsh an( uncalle( for that 1oul( reflect on private respon(ents

inte'rit*!Obviousl*, the controversial 1or( NEVER use( b* petitioner 1as plain an(

si&ple! $n its or(inar* sense, the 1or( (i( not cast aspersion upon private respon(ents

inte'rit* an( reputation &uch less conve* the i(ea that he 1as 'uilt* of an*

offense! Si&pl* 1or(e( as it 1as 1ith nar* a notion of corruption an( (ishonest* in

'overn&ent service, it is our consi(ere( vie1 to appropriatel* consi(er it as &ere epithet

or personal reaction on private respon(ents perfor&ance of official (ut* an( not

purposel* (esi'ne( to &ali'n an( bes&irch his reputation an( (i'nit* &ore so to (eprivehi& of public confi(ence!

$n(ee(, the prosecution 1itnesses 1ere able to rea( the &essa'e printe( in the billboar(s

an( 'ave a ne'ative i&pression on 1hat it sa*s! #he* i&pl* that the &essa'e conve*s

so&ethin' as if the private respon(ent 1as bein' re0ecte( as cit* &a*or of Ca(i7! 5ut the

trust1orthiness of these 1itnesses is (oubtful consi(erin' the &oral ascen(anc*







e/ercise( over the& b* the private respon(ent such that it is 4uite eas* for the& to (ra1

such ne'ative i&pression! As observe( b* the OS;, at the ti&e the billboar(s 1ere

erecte( an( (urin' the incu&benc* of private respon(ent as &a*or of Ca(i7 Cit*, these

1itnesses 1ere either e&plo*e( in the Ca(i7 Cit* ?all or active in the pro0ect of the cit*

'overn&ent! 5ernar(ita 1as a &e&ber of the Clean an( ;reen Pro'ra& of Ca(i7 Cit*Ju(e 1as e&plo*e( as a licensin' officer un(er the Per&it an( License "ivision of

the Ca(i7 Cit* ?all an( Nenita hel( the position of tilit* Dorer $$ of the ;eneral

Services Office of Ca(i7 Cit*! #hese 1itnesses, accor(in' to the OS;, 1oul( naturall*

testif* in his favor! #he* coul( have verbici(e the &eanin' of the 1or(

NEVER! Pru(entl*, at the least, the prosecution coul( have presente( 1itnesses 1ithin

the co&&unit* 1ith &ore in(epen(ent (isposition than these 1itnesses 1ho are

behol(en to private respon(ent!

Accor(in' to the private respon(ent, the &essa'e in the billboar(s 1oul( lie to conve*

to the people of Ca(i7 that he is a tuta of Sa'a* Cit*!

De (isa'ree! Stran'el*, the OS; a(opte( a position contrar* to the interest of the

People! $n its Manifestation an( Motion in Lieu of Co&&ent, instea( of contestin' the

ar'u&ents of the petitioner, the OS; surprisin'l* 0oine( stance 1ith hi&, vehe&entl*

pra*in' for his ac4uittal! De 4uote 1ith approval the OS;s anal*sis of the issue 1hich

1as the basis for its observation, thus:

"urin' the procee(in's in the trial court, private respon(ent testifie(that the sub0ect billboar(s &ali'ne( his character an( portra*e( hi& as a

puppet of Sa'a* Cit*, #hus:

I: @ou (o not no1 of course the intention of puttin' those billboar(s

5A"$N; AN" SA;A@ NEVERH

A: "efinitel*, $ no1 the intention because to ans1er *our 4uestion, it 1ill not

onl* re4uire those 5A"$N; AN" SA;A@ NEVER billboar(2s3, it 1as after

1hich a((itional billboar(s 1ere put up! #hat stren'then, that $ a& bein' a

#uta of Sa'a*! $ a& bein' &ali'ne( because of those billboar(s that states an(

$ repeat: An' #ubi' san Ca(i7, 'inuha san' Sa'a*, Delco&e to 5r'*! Ca(i7an( there is a s&all 1or( un(er it, %one , ver* s&all, ver* ver* s&all, *ou

cannot see it in 2sic3 a 'lance!

/ / / /



A: #hat is the &eanin' of the si'nboar(2s3! #he &essa'e that the

si'nboar(s 1oul( lie to conve* to the people of Ca(i7, that the Ma*or of

Ca(i7 Cit* is a #uta or Puppet of Sa'a* Cit*!

/ / / /2+=3

Contrar* to private respon(ents assertion, there is nothin' in the sub0ect

billboar(s 1hich state, either (irectl* or in(irectl*, that he is, in his 1or(s,

a tuta or puppet of Sa'a* Cit*! E/cept for private respon(ent, not a sin'le

prosecution 1itness testifie( that the billboar(s portra* Ma*or 5a(in'

Escalante, r! as a tuta or puppet of Sa'a* Cit*! #he billboar(s erecte( b*

petitioner si&pl* sa* CA"$% )OREVER, 5A"$N; AN" SA;A@

NEVER 2+<3

Apparentl*, private respon(ent refers to the circu&stances &entione( in another billboar(

that is not the sub0ect &atter in the present char'e! #he aforesai( facts (is&all* faile( tosupport the alle'ations in the instant infor&ation! 5e that as it &a*, private respon(ent

nevertheless (i( not specif* an* actionable 1ron' or particular act or o&ission on

petitioners part that coul( have (efa&e( hi& or cause( his alle'e( in0ur*! Dhile it &a* be

that the Court is not boun( b* the anal*sis an( observation of the OS;, still, the Court

fin(s that it (eserves &eritorious consi(eration! #he prosecution never in(ul'e( to 'ive

an* reason persuasive enou'h for the court not to a(opt it!

#ruth be tol( that so&eho1 the private respon(ent 1as not please( 1ith the controversial

printe( &atter! 5ut that is 'rossl* insufficient to &ae it actionable b* itself! 2P3ersonal

hurt or e&barrass&ent or offense, even if real, is not auto&aticall* e4uivalent to

(efa&ation,2+F3 1or(s 1hich are &erel* insultin' are not actionable as libel or

slan(er per se, an( &ere 1or(s of 'eneral abuse ho1ever opprobrious, ill-nature(, or

ve/atious, 1hether 1ritten or spoen, (o not constitute bases for an action for (efa&ation

in the absence of an alle'ation for special (a&a'es! #he fact that the lan'ua'e is

offensive to the plaintiff (oes not &ae it actionable b* itself, as the Court rule( in MVRS

Publications, Inc. v. Islamic Da Wah Council o the Phils., Inc!2.3

$n arrivin' at an analo'ous fin(in' of 'uilt on petitioner, both lo1er courts heavil* relie(

on the testi&on* of the petitioner pertainin' to the reasons behin( the printin' of the

phrase CA"$% )OREVER 5A"$N; AN" SA;A@ NEVER!2+3 Our in-(epth scrutin*

of his testi&on*, ho1ever, reveals that the reasons elicite( b* the prosecution &ainl*

relate to the (ischar'e of private respon(ents official (uties as Cit* Ma*or of Ca(i7













Cit*! )or that &atter, 'rantin' that the controversial phrase is consi(ere( (efa&ator*, still,

no liabilit* attaches on petitioner! Pursuant to Article >+ of the Revise( Penal Co(e, if

the (efa&ator* state&ent is &a(e a'ainst a public official 1ith respect to the (ischar'e of

his official (uties an( functions an( the truth of the alle'ations is sho1n, the accuse( 1ill

be entitle( to an ac4uittal even thou'h he (oes not prove that the i&putation 1as publishe( 1ith 'oo( &otives an( for 0ustifiable en(s! As the Court hel( in !nited States

v. "ustos,23 the polic* of a public official &a* be attace(, ri'htl* or 1ron'l* 1ith ever*

ar'u&ent 1hich abilit* can fin( or in'enuit* invent! #he public officer &a* suffer un(er

a hostile an( an un0ust accusationJ the 1oun( can be assua'e( b* the bal& of a clear

conscience! A public 2official3 &ust not be too thin-sinne( 1ith reference to co&&ents

upon his official acts!

$n cri&inal prosecutions, fun(a&ental is the re4uire&ent that the ele&ental actsconstitutin' the offense be establishe( 1ith &oral certaint* as this is the critical an( onl*

re4uisite to a fin(in' of 'uilt!23$n this case, contrar* to the conclusion of the trial court as

affir&e( b* the appellate court, the prosecution faile( to prove that the controversial

phrase CA"$% )OREVER, 5A"$N; AN" SA;A@ NEVER i&putes (ero'ator*

re&ars on private respon(ents character, reputation an( inte'rit*! $n this li'ht, an*

(iscussion on the issue of &alice is ren(ere( &oot!

"EREFORE, the petition is GRANTED! #he assaile( "ecision of the Court of

Appeals (ate( Au'ust +, ..6 in CA-;!R! CR No! <+=6 is REVERSED #$% SETASIDE an( the petitioner is AC-UITTED of the cri&e char'e(!

SO ORDERED

ARIANO C. DEL CASTILLO

#ssociate Justice

DE CONCR:

RENATO C. CORONA







Chie Justice

Chairperson

PRESBITERO &. VELASCO, &R.

#ssociate Justice

TERESITA &. LEONARDO/DE CASTRO

#ssociate Justice

&OSE PORTUGAL PEREZ

#ssociate Justice

C E R T I F I C A T I O N

Pursuant to Section +, Article V$$$ of the Constitution, it is hereb* certifie( that the

conclusions in the above "ecision ha( been reache( in consultation before the case 1as

assi'ne( to the 1riter of the opinion of the Courts "ivision!

RENATO C. CORONA

Chie Justice

aberasturi v. salvador

Documents