Overview

Online libel (often called “cyber libel”) is libel committed through a computer system—e.g., a post on Facebook/X, a blog, an online news site, or a group chat visible to third parties. Substantively, it borrows the definition of libel from the Revised Penal Code (RPC): a public and malicious imputation of a crime, vice, defect, or any act/condition tending to dishonor or discredit a person. The Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 applies when the medium is digital and, crucially, increases the penalty by one degree compared to ordinary (offline) libel.

“Amicable settlement” covers a range of voluntary resolutions between the complainant and the accused—e.g., apology and retraction, takedown of posts, payment of civil damages, and withdrawal or non-pursuit of the complaint. This article explains how such settlements interact with penalties at every procedural stage, and what practical outcomes typically follow.

Core Penalties for Libel vs. Online Libel

Ordinary (offline) libel (RPC Art. 355, as amended)

Imprisonment: prisión correccional in its minimum to medium periods → 6 months and 1 day up to 4 years and 2 months.
Fine: Courts may impose a fine instead of imprisonment, or both. (Fines were updated by statute; courts regularly consider the circumstances to decide between fine-only, imprisonment, or both.)
Discretion: The trial court has considerable discretion to impose fine-only in appropriate cases (e.g., first-time offenders, retraction/apology, limited circulation, mitigating circumstances).

Online (cyber) libel (Cybercrime Prevention Act, Sec. 4(c)(4) in relation to Sec. 6)

Penalty one degree higher than the base penalty for libel. Practically, that means a range that spans prisión correccional (maximum) up to prisión mayor (minimum) → 4 years, 2 months, and 1 day up to 8 years.
Fine vs. imprisonment: As with offline libel, courts can consider fine-only penalties, depending on the circumstances and jurisprudence applied.
Probation: If imprisonment does not exceed 6 years, the accused may generally be eligible for probation (subject to the Probation Law and usual disqualifications). Sentences over 6 years are not probationable.

Practical takeaway: Amicable settlement (apologies, takedowns, damages) often persuades courts and prosecutors to prefer fines over jail time or to reconsider pursuing imprisonment, especially for first-time offenders, though outcomes remain fact-specific and discretionary.

What “Amicable Settlement” Usually Looks Like

Typical settlement terms include one or more of:

Public or private apology and retraction/clarification.
Takedown of the offending post/article/video and undertaking not to republish.
Payment of damages (moral, nominal, temperate) and sometimes attorney’s fees in the civil aspect.
Non-disparagement and confidentiality clauses (with carve-outs for legal compliance).
Withdrawal of complaint and/or Affidavit of Desistance by the offended party.

Why Settlement Matters for “Penalties”

Libel is a criminal offense with a civil aspect. Settlement can influence both:

Criminal aspect (the penalty)
- Settlement does not automatically erase criminal liability—criminal actions are prosecuted in the name of the People.
- However, libel complaints must be initiated by the offended party (RPC Art. 360). When that party desists or withdraws support for the case, prosecutors and courts frequently reassess proof of malice, interest to prosecute, and overall prosecutorial merit.
- In practice, an amicable settlement often results in dismissal (especially before arraignment) or fine-only outcomes, due to the complainant’s lack of interest and the presence of mitigating considerations (e.g., apology, restitution).
Civil aspect (damages)
- Even if the criminal case proceeds or is dismissed, the civil claim for damages may be settled by compromise.
- The civil aspect can be waived or satisfied by the offended party through the settlement, which courts usually respect and approve.

Stage-by-Stage: Effects of Settlement on Penalties

A. Before any complaint is filed

If parties settle early, no criminal case is commenced; therefore no criminal penalty can be imposed.
Parties typically sign a settlement agreement with apology/retraction and takedown; any compensation paid is purely civil/contractual.

B. During preliminary investigation (PI)

The Affidavit of Desistance or compromise presented to the prosecutor often leads to a dismissal for lack of interest or insufficient evidence to establish probable cause (especially where the apology/retraction undercuts malice).
No penalty attaches because no Information gets filed in court.

C. After filing in court but before arraignment

Courts commonly grant dismissal upon desistance or withdrawal by the offended party—particularly in libel, which requires the offended party’s initiative to proceed.
Since there is no arraignment, jeopardy has not attached; the usual result is that no criminal penalty is imposed.

D. After arraignment but before judgment

Settlement still helps but the terrain changes:
- Courts may dismiss upon motion (e.g., in view of desistance and lack of prosecutorial merit), but dismissal after arraignment is more circumscribed because jeopardy has attached.
- More commonly, settlement mitigates outcomes:
  - Fine-only instead of imprisonment;
  - Lower fines within the lawful range;
  - Recognition of mitigating circumstances (e.g., sincere apology, restitution) to reduce the penalty.
The civil aspect is usually terminated by the compromise.

E. After conviction (trial court or on appeal)

Post-judgment settlement does not automatically vacate a conviction. But it can:
- Support probation (if the sentence is ≤ 6 years) by demonstrating remorse and restitution.
- Lead to modified penalties on appeal (e.g., fine-only) where legally permissible.
- Satisfy or waive civil liabilities (damages, costs).
To erase or commute imprisonment after final conviction, relief typically requires executive clemency; settlement alone is insufficient.

Key Doctrinal Touchpoints That Shape Penalty Outcomes

Medium matters: Because online libel is penalized one degree higher, settlement is especially valuable in cyber cases to persuade prosecutors/courts toward fine-only or toward the lowest possible imprisonment range.
Mitigating circumstances: Apology, retraction, voluntary takedown, restitution, and genuine remorse are often treated as analogous mitigating circumstances under Article 13 of the RPC, reducing the penalty or justifying fine-only.
Qualified privilege and fair comment: If the expression is arguably privileged (e.g., fair and true report, fair comment on matters of public interest), settlement can still be pursued to avoid litigation risk; its existence may also push authorities toward dismissal or nominal penalties.
No automatic liability for “likes/shares”: Liability focuses on authors/original posters or those who adopt the libel with conspiratorial intent. This often narrows criminal exposure and influences settlement calculus.
Prescription: Ordinary libel prescribes relatively quickly (counted in months, not many years). Parties often settle early to avoid racing prescriptive periods. (Jurisdiction-specific prescription rules for cyber libel have been debated; always check the most current jurisprudence before relying on a specific figure.)

Typical Penalty Scenarios After Settlement

Case dismissed before arraignment: No criminal penalty; civil claims resolved by compromise. The settlement usually requires takedown and apology/retraction, plus damages (if any).
Case proceeds but with settlement on record: Court imposes fine-only (within statutory range) and no imprisonment, citing mitigating factors and the parties’ reconciliation. Civil aspect is deemed satisfied.
Conviction already imposed (≤ 6 years): Settlement aids a probation grant and/or reduction/conversion to fine-only on appeal, depending on judicial discretion and controlling precedent.
Conviction already final: Settlement satisfies civil liability but cannot itself remove a custodial sentence; relief would require clemency.

Practical Guidance for Structuring a Settlement That Minimizes Penalties

Lead with remediation: Immediate takedown, apology, and retraction/clarification (ideally as public as the original post).
Address civil exposure cleanly: Provide a clear damages clause (even nominal/temperate) with mutual releases and waiver of further claims.
Align with procedure: If the case is still with the prosecutor, submit the settlement and an Affidavit of Desistance to support dismissal at PI. If already in court, file the appropriate motion to dismiss or ask the court to consider fine-only in light of the settlement and mitigating circumstances.
Protect against future disputes: Include non-disparagement, non-republication, and cooperation clauses (e.g., the complainant will formally withdraw the complaint and refrain from re-filing based on the same facts).
Document sincerity: A well-crafted apology and factual rectification (not just “sorry if you were offended”) helps with both malice analysis and sentencing.
Think probation early (if jail is on the table): Maintain eligibility by avoiding disqualifying factors, and compile evidence of good character, first-offender status, and full restitution.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does an affidavit of desistance automatically end the criminal case? No. It’s persuasive but not controlling. In libel, however, where the law requires initiation by the offended party, desistance commonly leads to dismissal, particularly before arraignment.

If we settle, will the court still impose jail time for cyber libel? It can, but often doesn’t when the settlement shows sincere remorse and full remediation. Courts frequently opt for fine-only or the lowest range of imprisonment, depending on the facts.

Can we settle only the civil aspect and contest the criminal charge? Yes. Parties often compromise the civil aspect while litigating the criminal case. The compromise can still soften potential criminal penalties.

If convicted, can we erase the conviction through settlement? No. Settlement can aid probation or penalty reduction on appeal, but erasing a final conviction generally needs executive clemency.

What if the post was arguably true or privileged? You can still settle to avoid risk and costs. The same settlement terms (apology/takedown/clarification) typically help minimize or avoid penalties if things proceed.

Bottom Line

Online libel carries stiffer statutory penalties than offline libel because it is one degree higher.
Amicable settlement—especially before arraignment—very often means no criminal penalty at all (via dismissal) or at least fine-only outcomes.
Even after conviction, settlement substantially improves the odds of probation or reduced penalties, while fully resolving the civil aspect.

Because details (including fines, prescription, and evolving jurisprudence) can affect strategy and outcomes, parties should tailor any settlement to the exact procedural posture and current case law, and ensure all remedial terms (apology, retraction, takedown, damages, non-republication) are complete, specific, and enforceable.