(A practitioner-oriented explainer in Philippine context)

Snapshot

Slander (oral defamation): a public and malicious statement, spoken (or otherwise ephemeral), that imputes a discreditable act/condition to a person. It sits within the Revised Penal Code (RPC) provisions on defamation, calumny, and insults.
Unjust vexation: a catch-all offense punishing unwarranted acts that annoy, irritate, humiliate, or disturb another without lawful or justifiable purpose. It is found in the RPC under other similar coercions.

Why the distinction matters: The same altercation can yield different charges. A stinging insult shouted in public points to slander; persistent, purposeless harassment that doesn’t cleanly fit another crime can be unjust vexation.

Legal Foundations & Elements

1) Slander (Oral Defamation)

Core idea: Oral (spoken) defamation; writing/print is libel, and online publication is commonly pursued as cyber libel (separate law). Slander includes face-to-face tirades, microphone announcements, viral voice notes, or live streams whose essence is speech rather than fixed writing.

Elements (what prosecutors prove):

Imputation of a discreditable act, condition, trait, or crime against a person (e.g., calling someone “a thief,” “corrupt,” “adulterer”).
Publication—communication to at least one third person (the target plus one listener already counts).
Identifiability—the victim is sufficiently identified, expressly or by clear innuendo.
Malice—presumed by law in defamation cases, but may be negated by privilege or valid defenses.

Grave vs. Simple Slander:

Grave slander: words/setting are serious and highly insulting (e.g., imputing a severe crime; hurling vile insults during a public event).
Simple slander: lesser insults in less weighty settings.

The classification affects the penalty range (after penalty adjustments under later laws). Courts look at word choice, tone, context, audience, social standing of parties, and the occasion.

Slander by Deed: A sister offense where the act (not words) casts dishonor (e.g., spitting on someone in public). Different label, similar rationale.

2) Unjust Vexation

Core idea: Punishes any act that annoys or irritates another without legal justification, when no other specific felony applies.

Elements:

Act committed without lawful or justifiable purpose;
That annoys, vexes, humiliates, or disturbs another;
Intent to cause annoyance (dolus) can be inferred from circumstances; and
Not subsumed by a more specific offense (e.g., threats, slander, physical injuries, grave coercion).

Typical patterns:

Repeated needless interference with someone’s work or movement;
Petty but persistent harassment;
Offensive pranks that do not constitute physical injuries or serious coercion;
Vulgar catcalling historically landed here (today, many such acts fall under the Safe Spaces law, but unjust vexation is still used in appropriate scenarios).

Defenses & Doctrinal Guardrails

For Slander

Truth + good motives & justifiable ends: Truth alone is not always a shield; it must be shown to have been uttered with good motives and for justifiable ends (e.g., reporting wrongdoing to proper authorities, consumer warnings made responsibly).
Privileged communications:
- Absolute privilege: statements in legislative debates or judicial proceedings (if relevant to the issues) cannot be the basis of defamation liability.
- Qualified privilege: fair comment on matters of public interest and public figures, reports of official proceedings, job references—if made in good faith, without malice, and on a proper occasion to a proper audience.
Lack of publication: if no third person heard/received the imputation, slander fails.
Lack of identifiability: vague or indeterminate references that do not reasonably point to the complainant.
Consent / provocation / heat of passion: may mitigate or negate liability depending on facts.
Opinion vs. fact: Pure opinions (not asserting provable facts) are generally protected; mixed opinion that implies undisclosed defamatory facts can still be actionable.

For Unjust Vexation

Lawful exercise of a right or duty: (e.g., a lawful security check, a supervisor’s reasonable directives).
Lack of intent to annoy: bona fide conduct without the purpose or natural effect of vexation.
De minimis non curat lex: trifles that society tolerates may not be criminal.
Specific offense supersedes: if facts actually constitute a different, specific felony, unjust vexation should not be used as a fallback.

Penalties (Overview)

Note: The penalty ranges for these crimes were recalibrated by later statutes that updated fines and durations. What follows is a practical map, not a line-by-line codal table.

Grave slander: generally punished more severely (higher end of arresto mayor to prisión correccional range).
Simple slander: typically arresto menor (shorter jail range) and/or a fine.
Unjust vexation: usually within light to lower correctional penalties (short jail terms and/or a fine), depending on specifics and subsequent statutory adjustments.

Probation & penalties: First-time offenders often qualify for probation in lieu of imprisonment, subject to court discretion and statutory thresholds.

Venue, Jurisdiction, and Prescription

Venue (slander & unjust vexation): ordinarily where the offense was committed (i.e., where the defamatory words were uttered/heard or where the vexatious act occurred).
Court: First-level courts (Municipal/Metropolitan Trial Courts) typically have jurisdiction given the penalty brackets, unless reclassified by law.
Prescription (time bar):
- Libel (written defamation) has a one-year prescriptive period from publication.
- Oral defamation and unjust vexation follow the RPC rules keyed to the gravity of the penalty (shorter for light offenses, longer for correctional). Compute carefully from date of commission (or discovery, where applicable), considering tolling rules (e.g., filing of complaint for preliminary investigation).

How Cases Progress (Complaint to Trial)

Assess Barangay conciliation (Katarungang Pambarangay):
- Required for many private complaints where parties live in the same city/municipality and the case is not among the exceptions (e.g., offenses punishable by >1 year imprisonment, parties are corporations, urgent legal actions). Check residence and exceptions.
Prepare a Sworn Complaint-Affidavit:
- For slander: quote the exact words (vernacular and English translation), date, time, place, who heard, and context (why the words are defamatory).
- For unjust vexation: describe the specific acts, the lack of legitimate purpose, the annoyance/embarrassment caused, and intent inferred from conduct.
- Attach witness affidavits, recordings, screenshots (for live audio streams), and medical/psych reports if there are psychological effects.
Filing with the Office of the City/Provincial Prosecutor:
- Preliminary investigation (for offenses not covered by inquest); respondent submits counter-affidavit with evidence; possible clarificatory hearing.
- Prosecutor resolves to file an Information (criminal charge in court) or dismiss. Some cases can be downgraded (e.g., grave to simple slander) or referred to mediation.
Arraignment & Pre-Trial:
- Accused enters plea; parties mark exhibits; stipulate facts; explore plea-bargaining or amicable settlement (particularly for light offenses).
Trial:
- Prosecution proves elements beyond reasonable doubt;
- Defense raises privilege, truth/good motives, lack of publication/identifiability, absence of intent, or other exculpations.
Judgment, Penalties, Civil Liability:
- Conviction leads to penal sanctions and civil damages (moral, exemplary, actual, attorney’s fees).
- Probation may be sought if eligible.
- Appeals escalate to the Regional Trial Court and higher, as allowed.

Evidence Playbook

Verbatim words matter (for slander). Paraphrases are weak; provide exact quotes, language used, and who heard them.
Corroboration: Eyewitnesses who actually heard the slur; multiple independent accounts strengthen publication.
Recordings: Audio/video may be admissible if lawfully obtained and authenticated (who recorded, device, chain of custody).
Context exhibits: Event programs, CCTV, chat logs that show the occasion and audience size.
For unjust vexation: demonstrate the absence of legal purpose, pattern (if repeated), and effect on victim (embarrassment, disruption).

Civil Remedies Alongside—or Independent of—Criminal Action

Damages under the Civil Code (Articles 19, 20, 21) for acts contrary to law, morals, good customs, or to human relations.
Depending on strategy, the offended party may:
- Reserve the right to file a separate civil action in the criminal case;
- Waive it; or
- File independently (especially for privacy or human-relations violations).
Injunctions/Protection: In recurring harassment, seek protection orders (where applicable) or injunctive relief in civil proceedings.

Charging Strategy & Common Pitfalls

When to charge slander:

The sting is in the spoken words; there were listeners; the content imputes moral turpitude or crime; the setting amplified the insult.

When to charge unjust vexation:

Conduct is annoying/harassing but not clearly defamatory; or facts don’t fit the elements of other specific felonies; intent to annoy can be shown.

Avoid these missteps:

Filing libel for an entirely oral episode—or slander for a written post.
Ignoring prescription; light offenses can time-bar quickly.
Vague affidavits without exact words/dates/places.
Overlooking barangay conciliation when required (can be fatal to the case).
Neglecting privileged settings (e.g., courtroom exchanges relevant to the case).

Practical Checklists

A. Slander (Oral Defamation) – Complainant’s Checklist

Exact words (vernacular + translation)
Date/time/place and occasion
List of listeners (with contact details)
Why defamatory (explain imputation)
Evidence: recordings, photos, event programs
Barangay conciliation (if applicable)
Complaint-affidavit & witness affidavits

B. Unjust Vexation – Complainant’s Checklist

Specific act(s) and frequency
No legitimate purpose (explain)
Effect on you (annoyance, disruption, humiliation)
Intent inferred from circumstances
Proof: messages, CCTV, emails, witnesses
Barangay conciliation (if applicable)

C. Defense Toolkit

Privilege (absolute/qualified)
Truth + good motives/justifiable ends
No publication/identifiability (slander)
Lawful purpose / no intent to annoy (unjust vexation)
Prescription and venue objections
Plea-bargain to lower offense where apt

Model Affidavit Skeleton (for Slander)

Title: Affidavit-Complaint for Oral Defamation (Slander) I. Personal data of complainant. II. Facts:

On [date/time] at [place], the respondent [name] uttered the following words against me: “[exact words in original language],” which mean [English translation].

The statements were heard by [A, B, C], who can testify.

The words impute [crime/immorality/defect] and have caused me [humiliation, anxiety, reputational harm].

The incident occurred during [context/event], amplifying the harm. III. Charges and Prayer: I charge respondent with slander under the Revised Penal Code and pray for appropriate criminal action and damages. IV. Attachments: witness affidavits, recordings, photos, IDs. Verification/Jurat.

(Adapt similarly for unjust vexation: replace the defamatory words with the vexatious acts and why they lacked lawful purpose.)

Frequently Asked Questions

1) If the words are true, is slander impossible? Not automatically. Truth must typically come with good motives and justifiable ends. Gratuitous public shaming often fails that test.

2) Is a single listener enough? Yes. Publication exists if one third person hears or receives the statement.

3) Someone yelled at me online (audio room/live). Is that slander or libel? If the content is spoken and ephemeral, it’s usually treated as oral defamation; once fixed in writing or a post, prosecution commonly proceeds as (cyber) libel. Facts drive the classification.

4) Can we settle? Yes. Many slander/unjust vexation cases settle at barangay or court-annexed mediation, often with apology and damages terms.

5) How fast must I file? Defamation-related crimes have short prescriptive periods. Act promptly; compute from the date of utterance/act and consider any tolling when a complaint for preliminary investigation is correctly filed.

Practical Tips

Document immediately: write down the exact words/acts, date, place, names of witnesses.
Mind your remedies: consider criminal + civil tracks; decide on reservation strategy early.
Choose the right box: oral slander vs. libel vs. unjust vexation vs. Safe Spaces or other special laws.
Be realistic: weigh proof strength, costs, and collateral consequences (e.g., countersuits).
Seek counsel: nuances on privilege, truth defenses, venue, prescription, and penalty recalibration can decide outcomes.

Final word

“Slander” protects reputation from spoken attacks; “unjust vexation” safeguards everyday peace from purposeless harassment. The line between ordinary friction and crime is drawn by malice, context, and harm—and by filing the right case, the right way, at the right time.