Cyber libel is a criminal offense in the Philippines, primarily governed by Republic Act No. 10175, otherwise known as the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012. It is essentially the traditional crime of libel—defined under the Revised Penal Code (RPC)—committed through a computer system or any other similar means which may be devised in the future.

Because the penalties for cyber libel are significantly higher than traditional libel, understanding the legal framework, the elements of the crime, and the procedural requirements for filing a case is critical for both complainants and defendants.

1. Legal Basis and Definition

Under Section 4(c)(4) of R.A. 10175, cyber libel is 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."

To understand cyber libel, one must look at Article 353 of the RPC, which defines libel as a public and malicious imputation of a:

Crime;
Vice or defect (real or imaginary);
Act, omission, condition, status, or circumstance.

This imputation must tend to cause the dishonor, discredit, or contempt of a natural or juridical person, or blacken the memory of one who is dead.

2. The Four Elements of Cyber Libel

For a cyber libel charge to prosper, the prosecution must prove the existence of all four elements beyond reasonable doubt:

Imputation of a Discreditable Act or Condition: There must be an allegation of a crime, vice, or defect that harms a person's reputation.
Publication: The defamatory material must be made public. In the context of cyber libel, this includes posting on social media (Facebook, X, Instagram), blogs, websites, or sending via email/messaging apps.
Identity of the Victim (Person Defamed): The person being attacked must be identifiable. Even if the name is not explicitly mentioned, if the description allows a third person to recognize the victim, this element is met.
Existence of Malice: This is the most critical element. Malice exists when the offender makes the defamatory statement with the intention to humiliate or injure the reputation of the victim.
Note: If the victim is a private individual, malice is generally presumed. If the victim is a public figure, the "Actual Malice" doctrine applies, requiring proof that the offender knew the statement was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth.

3. Jurisdictional Rules and Venue

Unlike traditional libel, which has very specific venue rules (usually where the complainant resides or where the article was printed), cyber libel offers more flexibility but follows the Rules on Cybercrime Warrants:

Where the offense was committed: This includes where the computer system used is located.
Where any of its elements occurred: This includes where the defamatory post was accessed or read by the complainant.
Where the victim resides: Often, the case is filed in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of the city or province where the complainant lived at the time of the offense.

4. Procedural Requirements for Filing

Step 1: Preservation of Evidence

Digital evidence is ephemeral. Before filing, the complainant must secure:

Screenshots of the defamatory post, including the profile of the author, the date/time stamp, and the URL.
Comments or Engagements: Evidence showing that others have seen or interacted with the post.
Electronic Evidence: Under the Rules on Electronic Evidence, screenshots must be authenticated. It is highly recommended to have these posts verified by a notary public or recorded via video to show the "live" status of the post.

Step 2: Filing the Complaint-Affidavit

The complainant must prepare a Complaint-Affidavit detailing the facts of the case. This is filed with the Office of the City or Provincial Prosecutor or through specialized units like:

The NBI Cybercrime Division (NBI-CCD)
The PNP Anti-Cybercrime Group (PNP-ACG)

These agencies help in identifying the "John Doe" if the perpetrator used a pseudonym or a fake account.

Step 3: Preliminary Investigation

The Prosecutor will determine if there is probable cause. The respondent (the person who made the post) will be given a chance to file a Counter-Affidavit. If the Prosecutor finds merit, an Information (criminal charge) will be filed in court.

5. Penalties and Prescription Period

Penalty: Cyber libel is punished with prision mayor in its minimum period (6 years and 1 day to 8 years) to its medium period (8 years and 1 day to 10 years). This is one degree higher than the penalty for traditional libel.
Prescription Period: There was a long-standing debate regarding how long a victim has to file a case. In Tolentino v. People (2023), the Supreme Court clarified that the prescription period for cyber libel is one (1) year, aligning it with the prescription period for traditional libel under the Revised Penal Code.

6. Notable Legal Defenses

A defendant in a cyber libel case may argue:

Truth and Good Motives: If the statement is true and published for justifiable ends.
Privileged Communication: Statements made in the performance of a legal, moral, or social duty (e.g., a formal complaint filed with a government agency).
Fair Commentary: Expressions of opinion on matters of public interest or concerning public figures, provided they are not purely malicious.
Online Libel vs. Sharing: The Supreme Court ruled in Disini v. Secretary of Justice that only the original author of the defamatory post is liable. Those who simply "Like," "Share," or "Retweet" the post are generally not liable for cyber libel unless they add their own defamatory comments.