A Comprehensive Legal Overview

I. Introduction

In the Philippines, public humiliation can be more than just a social or moral wrong—it can be a crime and a civil wrong if it falls under defamation (libel, oral defamation, or slander by deed), or related offenses.

Defamation law balances two values:

A person’s right to honor, reputation, and privacy, and
The constitutional right to free speech, free press, and fair comment on matters of public concern.

This article explains, in the Philippine context:

What counts as libel, slander, and slander by deed
How public humiliation (including online/public shaming) fits into these concepts
Criminal and civil complaint procedures
Defenses and practical considerations

II. Legal Bases

Revised Penal Code (RPC)
- Article 353 – Libel (written defamation)
- Articles 355–362 – Forms of libel, venue, penalty, etc.
- Article 358 – Oral defamation (slander)
- Article 359 – Slander by deed
Special laws (related)
- Cybercrime law – treats online libel (“cyber libel”) as a special form of libel with higher penalty
- Safe Spaces Act – penalizes some forms of public sexual or gender-based harassment, including online humiliating conduct
- Anti-Bullying, Anti-Hazing, and certain labor and school regulations – address public humiliation in specific settings
Civil Code
- Articles on human relations and defamation, e.g.:
  - Art. 19, 20, 21 – Abuse of rights, acts contrary to law, morals, good customs
  - Art. 26 – Privacy and respect for dignity (e.g., vexing or humiliating a person)
  - Art. 33 – Independent civil action for defamation, fraud, and physical injuries
- These provisions allow claims for damages even aside from criminal liability.

III. Defamation and Public Humiliation: Basic Concepts

A. Defamation defined

Defamation is an imputation of a discreditable act, condition, or status that tends to:

Dishonor, discredit, or put a person in contempt
Lower a person in the estimation of the community
Destroy or damage their reputation

For criminal liability, defamation must meet certain elements (explained below). For civil liability, the standard is whether the act unlawfully caused injury to another’s rights.

B. Public humiliation vs. defamation

Public humiliation is broader than defamation. Examples:

A boss shouting insults at an employee in front of co-workers
A teacher berating a student in class
Viral social media posts calling someone names or shaming personal details

Some of these will clearly be defamation (e.g., falsely accusing someone of theft), while others might be:

Unjust vexation,
Grave coercion or threats,
A violation of the Safe Spaces Act or internal company/school policies, even if they don’t fit neatly into libel or slander.

IV. Types of Defamation Under Philippine Criminal Law

1. Libel (Article 353, usually written)

Libel is:

A public and malicious imputation of a crime, vice, defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status, or circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, discredit, or contempt of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who is dead.

Typically written or in a form “similar to writing,” including:

Newspapers, magazines, printed leaflets
Facebook posts, comments, blogs, tweets, public online posts
Emails or group chats that reach multiple people
Radio/TV broadcasts (broadcast libel)

Key elements of libel:

Defamatory imputation – The content must be defamatory, not just annoying or rude.
Publication – It must be communicated to someone other than the person defamed (even just one third person suffices).
The person is identifiable – By name, photo, description, or context that insiders would recognize.
Malice – Presumed by law once defamation and publication are shown, unless it’s a privileged communication or clearly protected opinion.

2. Oral Defamation or Slander (Article 358)

Oral defamation is defamation expressed by spoken words or transitory gestures.

Typical examples:

Calling someone a thief or adulterer in front of others
Shouting “magnanakaw” in public about a person
Insulting someone’s moral character at a family gathering

The law distinguishes:

Grave oral defamation – Serious imputations (e.g., crimes involving moral turpitude, serious character attacks)
Slight oral defamation – Lesser insults or vulgarities

Penalty depends on whether it’s grave or slight and on circumstances like provocation.

3. Slander by Deed (Article 359)

Slander by deed is committed when a person performs any act (not just words) that:

Casts dishonor, discredit, or contempt upon another person
Is done in the presence of others (publicly or in the presence of third parties)

Examples:

Slapping or spitting on someone in public mainly to humiliate, rather than to cause physical injury
Stripping someone of their clothing in public
Performing a degrading “prank” in front of many people

The focus is on public insult via action, not just physical harm.

V. Cyber Libel and Online Public Shaming

When public humiliation happens online, especially on social media, it often falls under cyber libel:

The basic elements of libel still apply (defamatory imputation, publication, identifiability, malice).
Posting on a public Facebook wall, TikTok, YouTube, or viral group chat messages can be “publication.”
Tagging or sharing content that repeats the defamation may create separate liability, depending on circumstances and proof of malice.

Penalties for cyber libel are generally higher than ordinary libel. The online nature also affects:

Venue (where to file)
Issues of multiple publication and jurisdiction

Because cyber libel is complex and evolving, it’s common to seek specific legal advice when the humiliation occurs online.

VI. Elements to Prove in a Criminal Complaint for Libel or Slander

A. Defamatory Imputation

An imputation is defamatory if it:

Attributes a crime (e.g., theft, adultery, fraud)
Implies a serious moral defect (e.g., “prostitute,” “corrupt”)
Attacks a person’s professional reputation or business
Exposes a person to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule

Mere name-calling or strong language, without imputation of a specific discreditable act, might not always be criminal defamation, though it can still be actionable in some civil or administrative contexts.

B. Publication

Publication means at least one other person (aside from the speaker and the offended party) received or heard the statement.

In libel: distribution of written or online content to others
In oral defamation: spoken in the presence of third parties
In slander by deed: the humiliating act is done before at least one witness (or in a public place)

Private one-on-one communication generally lacks “publication,” though it could fall under other offenses (e.g., threats, unjust vexation).

C. Identity of the Offended Party

The offended person must be identifiable, either:

By name or picture, or
By description and surrounding facts that reasonably point to them (even if not named).

Group defamation can be tricky: if the group is small and identifiable, each member may be considered defamed.

D. Malice

The law presumes malice once a defamatory statement is published, but this presumption can be:

Rebutted by showing good intention and justifiable motive (e.g., reporting a crime in good faith).
Excluded when the communication is privileged (see below).

In cases involving public officials or public figures, courts look more closely at whether there was actual malice—knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth—especially when speech concerns public issues or official conduct.

VII. Privileged Communications and Defenses

Not all defamatory statements are punishable. The law recognizes privileged communications, which are either absolutely or qualifiedly privileged.

1. Absolutely privileged

No criminal or civil liability arises even if the statements are defamatory, provided they are within scope:

Statements made by members of Congress in the discharge of their functions (e.g., in sessions or committee hearings)
Statements in judicial proceedings by parties, lawyers, and witnesses, if relevant to the case

2. Qualifiedly privileged

Protected unless actual malice is proven, such as:

Fair and true report of official proceedings or public documents (e.g., true, balanced reporting of a court case in the news)
Communications made in the performance of a legal, moral, or social duty, e.g.:
- Reporting misconduct to a manager or school authority in good faith
- Giving employment reference in good faith
Fair comment on matters of public interest or on public figures, based on facts, and made without malice

3. Other common defenses

Truth + good motive – Truth alone is not always an absolute defense in criminal libel; it must be shown that the imputation was made with good motives and justifiable ends (e.g., exposing wrongdoing for public interest, not pure malice).
Lack of publication – If no third person learned of it.
Opinion vs. fact – Pure opinions (“I think he is a bad manager”) are generally protected more than factual assertions (“He stole company funds”), although context matters.
Consent – In rare cases where the “victim” consented to publication or exposure, it may negate liability.

VIII. Filing a Criminal Complaint: Libel, Slander, Slander by Deed

A. Where and how to file

Affidavit-Complaint
- The complainant (or lawyer) prepares a notarized Affidavit-Complaint containing:
  - Personal details of complainant and respondent
  - Detailed narration of facts (what was said/done, when, where, how, who witnessed it)
  - Legal basis (libel, oral defamation, slander by deed, cyber libel, etc.)
- Attach evidence:
  - Screenshots/printouts of posts, messages, emails
  - Videos, audio recordings
  - Affidavits of witnesses
  - Any relevant documents (police reports, company memos, etc.)
Office to file with
- Usually the Office of the City/Provincial Prosecutor where the offense was committed or where the offended party resides (for libel, specific venue rules apply under the RPC).
- For cyber libel, venue often includes the place where the offended party resides at the time of the offense.
Barangay conciliation?
- Many interpersonal disputes go first to the Barangay Justice System (Lupong Tagapamayapa) if both parties are individuals residing in the same city/municipality and the offense is within its jurisdiction.
- Some criminal offenses (especially those punishable by higher penalties or involving government officials) may be exempt from barangay conciliation.
- Even where barangay conciliation is not strictly required, parties sometimes attempt settlement at the barangay as a practical step.

B. Preliminary Investigation

Once the complaint is filed:

Subpoena to respondent – The prosecutor issues a subpoena and copies of the complaint to the respondent.
Counter-Affidavit – The respondent submits a sworn counter-affidavit, with evidence and possibly the assistance of counsel.
Reply/Rejoinder – May be allowed.
Clarificatory hearing – At the prosecutor’s discretion.

After evaluating all submissions, the prosecutor issues a Resolution:

Dismissal of the complaint (if no probable cause), or
Filing of an Information in the proper trial court (if probable cause is found).

C. Trial Court Proceedings

Libel cases (written or broadcast) are typically within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court (RTC).
Oral defamation/slander by deed may be filed in the first level courts (MTC/MTCC/MCTC), depending on the penalty.

If an Information is filed:

The court may issue a warrant of arrest or summons.
The accused may post bail.
The case proceeds to arraignment, pre-trial, and trial.
After trial, the court decides whether to acquit or convict, and if convicted, imposes the penalty (imprisonment, fine, or both).

IX. Civil Actions for Public Humiliation and Defamation

Apart from (or in addition to) criminal complaints, a victim may file a civil action for damages.

A. Independent Civil Action (Article 33, Civil Code)

For defamation (as well as fraud and physical injuries), the offended party may file a separate civil action, independent of the criminal case.

Standard of proof is preponderance of evidence (lower than proof beyond reasonable doubt).
Relief can include:
- Actual damages – For quantifiable loss (e.g., lost job, medical expenses due to emotional distress)
- Moral damages – For mental anguish, social humiliation, wounded feelings
- Exemplary damages – To set an example or correct a particularly egregious act
- Attorney’s fees

This civil action may proceed independently of the criminal case and does not need a prior conviction.

B. Civil Liability Ex Delicto

If a criminal case is filed:

The offended party may join civil liability with the criminal case (by not reserving a separate action), or
Reserve the right to file a separate civil case later.

The court trying the criminal case may also award civil damages upon conviction.

C. Actions Based on Human Relations (Articles 19, 20, 21, 26)

Even if conduct doesn’t neatly meet all elements of criminal defamation, a person may still sue for damages when:

Acts are contrary to law, morals, good customs, public policy;
There is deliberate intention to injure;
A person’s privacy, dignity, or peace of mind is intentionally and unjustifiably attacked.

This is especially relevant for public humiliation that may not involve a specific defamatory imputation but is clearly abusive and unreasonable.

X. Public Humiliation in Specific Contexts

1. Workplace

Public shaming by a supervisor (e.g., calling an employee names over a loudspeaker, posting “shame lists”) can lead to:
- Labor complaints (constructive dismissal, harassment, unsafe work environment);
- Civil damages;
- In serious cases, criminal complaints for defamation or related offenses.

2. Schools

Teachers publicly humiliating students may face:
- Administrative liability (DepEd/CHED rules, school policies);
- Civil liability;
- In extreme cases, criminal liability (e.g., child abuse, slander by deed, other offenses).

3. Social Media / Online Communities

“Call-out posts,” “exposé threads,” and online “name-and-shame” campaigns can constitute cyber libel or other violations, especially if:
- Statements are false or unverified;
- They attribute serious wrongdoing;
- They use degrading language and encourage dog-piling.

At the same time, legitimate whistleblowing or public interest criticism may be protected, provided it is factual and done in good faith.

XI. Practical Considerations Before Filing a Complaint

Evidence Strength
- Do you have clear proof of what was said or done and who said/did it?
- Are there screenshots, recordings, or witnesses?
Time Limits (Prescription)
- Defamation crimes have relatively short prescriptive periods (particularly for oral defamation and slander by deed; libel has its own specific period).
- It is important to consult promptly because delay can bar the criminal complaint.
Potential Counter-Cases
- The other party may file their own criminal or civil case (e.g., alleging your complaint is malicious).
- If you publicly respond in anger, you might also risk committing defamation yourself.
Settlement and Apologies
- Many disputes arising from public humiliation are resolved via:
  - Barangay mediation,
  - In-house HR processes, or
  - Private settlements, written apologies, and retractions.
- In criminal cases, even if the offense is public in nature, amicable settlement (affidavit of desistance, compromise on civil liability) often influences whether the case proceeds or how penalties are imposed.
Chilling Effect vs. Protection of Reputation
- Libel and slander provisions can be misused to silence criticism, especially against public officials or powerful individuals.
- On the other hand, they provide remedies to people genuinely injured by malicious falsehoods.
- Courts try to balance these competing interests case by case.

XII. Summary

Public humiliation, if it involves defamatory imputations and is made in public or in the presence of others, can amount to:
- Libel (written/online),
- Oral defamation (slander), or
- Slander by deed.
The punished conduct must generally include:
- A defamatory act or statement,
- Publication to at least one third person,
- A clearly identifiable victim, and
- Malice, presumed by law in many cases but subject to defenses.
Victims have several possible avenues:
- Criminal complaints with the prosecutor (leading to possible trial and penalties),
- Civil actions for damages, independently or alongside the criminal case,
- Administrative and institutional remedies in workplaces, schools, and organizations.
Accused persons may defend themselves by invoking:
- Truth with good motive,
- Privileged communication,
- Lack of publication,
- The distinction between opinion and fact, and other recognized defenses.

Because defamation law involves criminal penalties, constitutional rights, and evolving interpretations—especially in the context of social media—people dealing with serious public humiliation issues are usually best served by:

Preserving all evidence,
Avoiding impulsive retaliatory statements, and
Seeking individualized legal advice on the best course of action, whether criminal, civil, administrative, or a combination of these.