Defamation Laws for Verbal Insults in the Philippines

In the Philippines, verbal insults—whether spoken in person, broadcast over radio/television, or uttered in live streams—constitute the crime of oral defamation or slander, which is governed primarily by the Revised Penal Code (RPC) and supplemented by the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 (R.A. 10175) when committed online.

1. Constitutional and Statutory Framework

• Article 353 of the Revised Penal Code – Definition of Libel and Oral Defamation
  “Libel” refers to written defamation; “oral defamation” is the spoken form. Both are treated as the same species of the crime of defamation.

• Article 358, RPC – Two Kinds of Oral Defamation
  a) Grave oral defamation (graves injurias)
  b) Simple or slight oral defamation (simples injurias)

• Article 353, in relation to Article 355, RPC
  Oral defamation is punished whether committed publicly or privately, but the penalty and classification depend on the nature of the words and the circumstances.

• Article 354, RPC – Presumption of Malice
  Every defamatory imputation is presumed malicious, even if it be true, unless it is shown to have been made with good motives and for justifiable ends, or if it falls under privileged communication.

2. Classification of Oral Defamation

Type	Characteristics	Penalty (as of 2025)	Examples (as recognized in jurisprudence)
Grave Oral Defamation	Words are of a serious and insulting nature; inherently dishonorable or tend to expose the victim to public contempt, hatred, or ridicule	Arresto mayor (1 month and 1 day to 6 months) and/or fine up to ₱40,000 (R.A. 10951 adjustment)	Calling someone “estafador” (swindler), “magnanakaw” (thief), “mangkukulam” (witch who causes illness/death), “puta” or “bayot” when used to impute grave moral turpitude
Slight Oral Defamation	Words are merely offensive but do not seriously impair reputation; mere annoyance or insult	Arresto menor (1 to 30 days) or fine up to ₱20,000	Calling someone “ulol” (crazy), “gago” (stupid), “walanghiya” (shameless) in ordinary circumstances

The classification is determined by the court on a case-to-case basis, considering:

• Social standing and education of the offended party
• Context and occasion
• Presence of third persons
• Tone and manner of delivery

3. Elements of Oral Defamation (Common to Both Grave and Slight)

1. There must be an imputation of a crime, vice, defect, act, or condition that exposes a person to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule.
2. The imputation must be made publicly (i.e., in the presence of persons other than the complainant) or at least capable of being heard by others.
3. It must be directed at a natural or juridical person (corporations can be victims).
4. It must be malicious (presumed unless privileged).

4. Special Forms and Aggravating Circumstances

• Slander by Deed (Article 359, RPC)
  Acts that dishonor or discredit a person without words (e.g., slapping, spitting on the face in public) are punished similarly to grave oral defamation.

• Cyber Slander / Online Libel (R.A. 10175, Section 4(c)(4) + Article 355, RPC)
  Verbal insults made through live streaming (Facebook Live, TikTok Live, YouTube Live), voice calls, or voice messages that are recorded and disseminated are punished one degree higher than ordinary oral defamation.
  Penalty: Prisión correccional in its minimum and medium periods (6 months and 1 day to 4 years and 2 months) plus fine.

• Intriguing Against Honor (Article 364, RPC)
  Saying something offensive about a person to others indirectly, without specifying the identity but with circumstances that make identification easy (e.g., “You know who I’m talking about, the one who sleeps around”). Punished by arresto menor or fine not exceeding ₱20,000.

5. Defenses

1. Truth – Only allowed when the imputation is a crime AND charged with good motives and justifiable ends (rarely accepted in pure insult cases).
2. Absolute Privileged Communication – Statements in Congress, judicial proceedings, or by public officers in official duties.
3. Qualified Privileged Communication – Fair commentary on matters of public interest, private communications made in good faith.
4. Lack of Publicity – If only the complainant heard the insult, no oral defamation.
5. Pardon – The offended party may pardon the offender before prosecution; marriage between offender and offended party extinguishes the action (Article 89, RPC).

6. Prescription Periods (as amended by R.A. 10951, 2017)

• Grave oral defamation: 1 year
• Slight oral defamation: 6 months
• Cyber libel/oral defamation online: 15 years (because it is now considered under the Cybercrime Law)

7. Civil Aspect

• Civil liability ex delicto – The offender may be ordered to pay moral damages (usually ₱50,000–₱300,000 depending on gravity and social status of victim), exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees.
• Independent civil action – The victim may file a separate civil action for damages under Article 33 of the Civil Code (defamation, fraud, physical injuries) even if the criminal case is dismissed.

8. Landmark Supreme Court Decisions (Selected)

• People v. Motilla (1967) – Calling a judge “mono” (monkey) in open court is grave oral defamation.
• Villanueva v. People (2008) – “Putang ina mo” uttered in anger in a private conversation heard only by the complainant does not constitute oral defamation for lack of publicity.
• Disini v. Secretary of Justice (2014) – Upheld the constitutionality of online libel; live streaming insults are covered.
• Ayer Productions v. Capulong (1988) – Fair comment on public figures is privileged.
• MVRS Publications v. Islamic Da’wah Council (2003) – No defamation if the statement does not point to an identifiable person.

9. Practical Notes for 2025

• Most verbal insult cases in Metro Manila are now filed as cybercrime cases if there is any recording or live streaming involved, dramatically increasing the penalty and prescription period.
• Barangay conciliation is mandatory for slight oral defamation and slander by deed before filing in court (Katarungang Pambarangay Law), but not for grave oral defamation or cyber slander.
• Police can arrest without warrant for grave oral defamation if committed in their- in flagrante delicto or if the offender is a fugitive.

In summary, while the Philippines retains criminal defamation (unlike many countries that have decriminalized it), verbal insults remain a potent source of criminal and civil liability, particularly when amplified by social media or live streaming platforms. The line between protected speech and punishable slander continues to be drawn by Philippine courts on a highly contextual, case-by-case basis.