Introduction

Oral defamation, commonly known as slander, is a criminal offense in the Philippines that involves the spoken imputation of dishonor or discredit to another person. It falls under the broader category of defamation, which protects an individual's reputation from unjustified attacks. In Philippine jurisprudence, slander is distinguished from libel, which pertains to written or published defamatory statements. The offense is rooted in the principle that every person has the right to honor and good name, as enshrined in the Civil Code and the Revised Penal Code (RPC). Slander can occur in everyday conversations, public speeches, or even through digital means if the defamatory words are uttered audibly, such as in voice recordings or live streams. This article explores the elements of slander, its penalties, defenses, procedural aspects of filing a case, and related legal considerations, all within the Philippine legal framework.

Legal Basis

The primary law governing slander is found in the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines (Act No. 3815, as amended). Specifically:

Article 358 defines slander as oral defamation and prescribes penalties based on the gravity of the offense.
Article 353 outlines the general elements of defamation, which apply to both libel and slander.
Article 359 addresses slander by deed, a related offense involving acts (not words) that cause dishonor.

Additional relevant laws include:

Republic Act No. 10175 (Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012), which extends defamation to online platforms if the slanderous statements are made through electronic means, potentially classifying it as cyber libel if written, but oral forms in audio could still fall under traditional slander.
Republic Act No. 10951 (2017), which amended the RPC to adjust penalties, including fines for defamation offenses, to account for inflation and modern economic realities.
Civil Code of the Philippines (Republic Act No. 386), particularly Articles 26 and 33, which allow for civil actions for damages arising from defamation, independent of criminal proceedings.
Rules of Court, which govern the procedural aspects of filing and prosecuting cases.

Jurisprudence from the Supreme Court, such as in cases like People v. Larosa (G.R. No. 129074, 1999) and Disini v. Secretary of Justice (G.R. No. 203335, 2014), has clarified the application of these provisions, emphasizing the balance between freedom of expression (Article III, Section 4 of the 1987 Constitution) and the protection of reputation.

Elements of Oral Defamation (Slander)

To establish a case of slander under Article 358 of the RPC, the prosecution must prove the following elements beyond reasonable doubt, as derived from Article 353:

Imputation of a Discreditable Act or Condition: There must be an attribution to the offended party of a crime, vice, defect, or any act, omission, status, or circumstance that tends to cause dishonor, discredit, or contempt. This can be real or imaginary. Examples include accusing someone of theft, immorality, incompetence, or dishonesty in a way that harms their reputation. The imputation must be specific enough to identify the person defamed.
Publicity: The defamatory statement must be communicated to at least one third person other than the offender and the offended party. Unlike libel, which requires publication, slander requires that the words be uttered in the presence of others. If spoken only to the victim in private, it may not constitute slander unless it escalates to another offense like unjust vexation.
Malice: The statement must be made with malice, either actual (intent to harm) or presumed (malice in law). Malice is presumed if the statement is defamatory on its face and not privileged. However, if the words are spoken in the heat of anger or under circumstances where malice is not evident, it may reduce the gravity.
Tendency to Harm Reputation: The words must blacken the honor or reputation of the offended party or expose them to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule. The court assesses this based on the context, the social standing of the parties, and the natural effect of the words.

Slander is classified into two types based on gravity:

Grave Oral Defamation: Involves serious and insulting words, such as grave accusations of criminality or moral turpitude (e.g., calling someone a "thief" in public).
Simple or Slight Oral Defamation: Involves less severe insults, such as minor derogatory remarks (e.g., calling someone "stupid" in a casual setting).

The distinction affects penalties and is determined by factors like the social status of the parties, the manner and circumstances of the utterance, and the degree of publicity.

Penalties for Oral Defamation

Penalties for slander are outlined in Article 358 of the RPC, as amended by RA 10951. The law imposes graduated penalties to reflect the severity of the offense:

For Grave Oral Defamation: The penalty is arresto mayor in its maximum period to prisión correccional in its minimum period (from 4 months and 1 day to 2 years and 4 months) or a fine ranging from P40,000 to P120,000, or both. RA 10951 increased the fine thresholds from the original P200 to P6,000 pesos to align with current values.
For Simple Oral Defamation: The penalty is arresto menor (1 day to 30 days) or a fine not exceeding P40,000.

Additional considerations:

If the slander is committed with publicity or through other means that amplify its impact (e.g., in a public gathering), the penalty may be imposed in its maximum period.
Aggravating circumstances, such as the offender's position of authority or the victim's vulnerability, can increase the penalty.
In cyber-related slander, penalties under RA 10175 may apply, increasing the penalty by one degree.
Civil liability often accompanies criminal penalties, allowing the victim to claim moral damages, exemplary damages, and attorney's fees under the Civil Code. Damages can range from P10,000 to millions, depending on the harm proven.

Repeat offenders may face higher penalties under the RPC's provisions on recidivism.

Defenses Against Oral Defamation Charges

Several defenses can be raised in slander cases:

Truth as a Defense: Under Article 354 of the RPC, truth is a complete defense if the imputation is made in good faith and pertains to a public official's performance of duties or a private individual's qualifications for public office. However, for private matters, truth alone is insufficient unless coupled with good motives and justifiable ends.
Privileged Communication: Statements made in the course of official duties, judicial proceedings, or fair reporting are absolutely or qualifiedly privileged and not actionable. Examples include statements in court, legislative debates, or media reports on public interest matters.
Absence of Malice: If the prosecution fails to prove malice, the case may be dismissed. This includes situations where words were spoken in jest, without intent to defame, or under provocation.
Consent or Waiver: If the offended party consented to the statement or waived their right to complain, it may bar prosecution.
Constitutional Protections: Freedom of speech may protect opinions or fair comments on public figures, as long as they are not malicious falsehoods. The Supreme Court has decriminalized certain forms of expression in landmark cases, but slander remains punishable.

Defendants should gather evidence like witness testimonies, recordings, or contextual proof to support these defenses.

How to File a Case for Oral Defamation

Filing a slander case involves criminal procedure under the Rules of Court and requires the offended party's active participation, as it is a private crime prosecutable only upon complaint by the victim (Article 360, RPC).

Step-by-Step Procedure:

Gather Evidence: Collect proof of the defamatory statement, such as audio recordings, witness affidavits, or transcripts. Establish the elements: imputation, publicity, malice, and harm.
File a Complaint-Affidavit: Submit a sworn complaint to the Office of the City or Provincial Prosecutor in the place where the offense was committed or where the offended party resides (venue under Article 360). Include details of the incident, parties involved, and supporting evidence. Pay minimal filing fees (around P1,000–P5,000, depending on the locality).
Preliminary Investigation: The prosecutor conducts an investigation, allowing the respondent to file a counter-affidavit. If probable cause is found, the prosecutor files an information with the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) or Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) for offenses punishable by less than 4 years and 2 months, or the Regional Trial Court (RTC) for graver cases.
Arraignment and Trial: The accused is arraigned and enters a plea. Trial ensues with presentation of evidence. The burden is on the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Alternative Dispute Resolution: Before trial, parties may settle via mediation or compromise, especially for slight slander, which can lead to dismissal upon payment of damages.
Appeal Process: If convicted, the accused can appeal to higher courts (Court of Appeals, then Supreme Court). The victim can also file a civil suit separately or integrated into the criminal case.

The entire process can take 1–5 years, depending on court backlog. Legal representation is advisable, and indigent parties may seek free legal aid from the Public Attorney's Office (PAO).

Prescription Period

Under Article 90 of the RPC, slander prescribes in 6 months from the date of commission or discovery. The period starts when the offended party learns of the defamatory statement. Filing the complaint interrupts the prescription. For civil actions, the prescription is 1 year under Article 1150 of the Civil Code.

Related Legal Provisions and Considerations

Slander by Deed (Article 359): Punishable by arresto mayor or fine up to P40,000 if it causes dishonor without words (e.g., slapping someone publicly to humiliate).
Distinction from Libel: Libel involves written or visual forms (Article 355), with harsher penalties (prisión correccional or fine up to P120,000).
Impact of Social Media: Oral statements in videos or calls can be slander; if posted online, it may shift to cyber libel.
Public Figures: Higher threshold for defamation; actual malice must be proven (New York Times v. Sullivan doctrine adopted in Philippine cases).
Remedies Beyond Criminal: Victims can seek injunctions to stop further defamation or file for moral damages.
International Aspects: If involving foreigners, jurisdiction follows territoriality, but extradition treaties may apply for offenders abroad.

In practice, slander cases often highlight societal norms on respect and honor in Filipino culture, with courts balancing this against democratic freedoms.