Cyber Libel: The Supreme Court Clarifies the One-Year Prescription Period

G.R. No. 258524, October 11, 2023

Navigating the digital age comes with its own set of legal challenges, particularly when it comes to online defamation. What happens when libelous statements are made online? How long does someone have to file a case? A recent Supreme Court decision sheds light on these questions, clarifying the prescriptive period for cyber libel in the Philippines. The case of *Berteni Cataluña Causing v. People of the Philippines* establishes that cyber libel, like traditional libel, has a prescriptive period of one year from the date of discovery of the defamatory statements.

Defining Cyber Libel and Its Legal Basis

To understand the ruling, it’s important to define cyber libel and its legal basis. Libel, as defined in Article 353 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), is the public and malicious imputation of a crime, vice, or defect that causes dishonor or discredit to another. Cyber libel, as defined by Section 4(c)(4) of Republic Act No. 10175 (RA 10175), or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, is simply libel committed through a computer system or similar means. Key to note: RA 10175 did *not* create a new crime but rather recognized a new *means* of committing an existing one.

In the Philippines, the elements of libel are:

* **Defamatory imputation:** A statement that harms the reputation of another.
* **Malice:** A wrongful intention to cause harm.
* **Publication:** The statement is communicated to a third person.
* **Identifiability:** The person defamed is identifiable.

Crucially, Section 4(c)(4) of RA 10175 states: “The unlawful or prohibited acts of libel as defined in Article 355 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, committed through a computer system or any other similar means which may be devised in the future.”

In essence, if you write something defamatory about someone online, with malice, and it is published, you could be liable for cyber libel. The penalty, as specified in RA 10175, is one degree higher than that provided for in the Revised Penal Code.

The *Causing v. People* Case: A Step-by-Step Breakdown

The case of *Berteni Cataluña Causing v. People of the Philippines* revolved around Facebook posts made by Causing about Representative Ferdinand L. Hernandez. Hernandez claimed that Causing’s posts implied he stole public funds intended for Marawi siege victims.

Here’s a breakdown of the case:

1. **The Facebook Posts:** In February and April 2019, Causing posted content on Facebook implying Hernandez was involved in stealing funds.
2. **The Complaint:** Hernandez filed a Complaint-Affidavit with the Office of the City Prosecutor of Quezon City (OCP Quezon City) in December 2020, charging Causing with Cyber Libel.
3. **The Information:** After finding probable cause, the OCP Quezon City filed two Informations with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) charging Causing with two counts of Cyber Libel.
4. **Motion to Quash:** Causing filed a Motion to Quash, arguing that the charges had prescribed because the complaint was filed more than one year after the Facebook posts were made. He cited Article 90 of the RPC, which prescribes a one-year period for libel.
5. **RTC Ruling:** The RTC denied the Motion to Quash, arguing that Act No. 3326, which prescribes a 12-year period, should apply because RA 10175, a special law, does not provide for a prescriptive period. The RTC also cited *Tolentino v. People*, which held that Cyber Libel prescribes in 15 years.
6. **Petition for *Certiorari*:** Causing filed a Petition for *Certiorari* with the Supreme Court, arguing that the RTC erred in applying Act No. 3326 and challenging the *Tolentino* ruling.

The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of Causing’s argument that the prescriptive period for cyber libel is one year, counted from the date of discovery of the libelous material. Here are some of the key points:

* RA 10175 did not create a new crime but merely implemented the RPC’s provisions on libel when committed through a computer system.
* Article 90 of the RPC, not Act No. 3326, defines the prescriptive period of Cyber Libel.
* Paragraph 4, Article 90 of the RPC is controlling, making the crime of Cyber Libel prescribe in one year.

The Court noted that “Cyber Libel is therefore a crime defined and penalized by the RPC.”

The Supreme Court emphasized that prescription is a matter of defense and must be proven by the accused. While it agreed with Causing’s legal argument, it upheld the RTC’s denial of the Motion to Quash because Causing did not provide evidence to prove when Hernandez discovered the Facebook posts. “The period of prescription shall commence to run from the day on which the crime is discovered by the offended party, the authorities, or their agents,” the Court stated.

Practical Implications of the Ruling

This ruling has significant implications for both individuals and legal professionals. The clarification of the prescriptive period for cyber libel provides much-needed certainty in this area of law.

**Key Lessons:**

* **One-Year Limit:** Individuals have one year from the date of discovery to file a cyber libel case.
* **Discovery is Key:** The prescriptive period starts from the date the libelous material is discovered, not necessarily the date it was published.
* **Burden of Proof:** The accused bears the burden of proving that the crime has prescribed.

Consider this example: Maria posts a defamatory statement about Juan on Facebook on January 1, 2023. Juan discovers the post on June 1, 2023. Juan has until June 1, 2024, to file a cyber libel case against Maria.

Furthermore, businesses must be mindful of their online presence and the potential for defamatory statements to be made about them. Monitoring social media and promptly addressing any libelous content is crucial to protecting their reputation. Failing to act within the one-year prescriptive period could mean losing the opportunity to pursue legal action.

Frequently Asked Questions

* **What is the difference between libel and cyber libel?**
Libel is the public and malicious imputation of a crime, vice, or defect. Cyber libel is simply libel committed through a computer system or similar means.

* **How long do I have to file a cyber libel case?**
You have one year from the date of discovery of the libelous material to file a case.

* **What if I didn’t discover the libelous statement until long after it was posted?**
The prescriptive period starts from the date of discovery, not the date of publication. You will need to prove when you discovered the statement.

* **Who has the burden of proving prescription?**
The accused has the burden of proving that the crime has prescribed.

* **Does this ruling mean I can’t file a cyber libel case if it’s been more than a year since the statement was posted?**
If you discovered the statement more than a year before filing the case, it may be prescribed. However, it depends on when you discovered the libelous statement. It is best to consult with a lawyer to determine your options.

* **What evidence do I need to prove when I discovered the libelous statement?**
Evidence can include affidavits, emails, screenshots, or any other documentation that shows when you became aware of the statement.

This Supreme Court decision provides clarity on the prescriptive period for cyber libel in the Philippines, ensuring that individuals and businesses are aware of their rights and obligations in the digital age.

ASG Law specializes in defamation and cybercrime law. Contact us or email hello@asglawpartners.com to schedule a consultation.