Disclaimer: The following discussion provides general information on slander (oral defamation) under Philippine law. It is not intended as legal advice. For specific concerns, please consult a licensed attorney in the Philippines.

1. Introduction

In the Philippines, defamation is generally governed by the Revised Penal Code (RPC), specifically Articles 353 to 364. The law classifies defamation into two main forms:

Libel – Defamation by means of writing, printing, lithography, radio, television, painting, theatrical exhibition, or any other similar means.
Slander (Oral Defamation) – Defamation committed by spoken words.

Since your inquiry pertains specifically to slander, this article focuses on the relevant legal provisions, elements, potential defenses, penalties, and procedures involved in a slander case in the Philippine context.

2. Definition and Elements of Slander (Oral Defamation)

2.1 Definition under the Revised Penal Code

Article 353 (Definition of Libel and Defamation) of the RPC defines defamation as:

“...the public and malicious imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status, or circumstance tending to cause dishonor, discredit, or contempt of a natural or juridical person...”
Article 358 (Slander or Oral Defamation):

“Oral defamation or slander shall be punished by arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period if it is of a serious and insulting nature; otherwise the penalty shall be arresto menor or a fine...”

In simpler terms, slander is a spoken statement, addressed to a third party (or parties), that injures or damages another person’s reputation or good name.

2.2 Elements of Slander

For an act to qualify as slander (or oral defamation), the following elements must generally be present:

Imputation of a Discreditable Act or Condition
The statement must charge or imply that another person has committed a criminal act, has a vice, or some real or imaginary defect that is discreditable.
Publication (Communication to a Third Person)
It is essential that the defamatory statement was communicated to someone other than the offended party. A personal insult said directly and privately to the offended person (and to no one else) may not automatically constitute slander if there is no publication to a third person.
Identifiability
The person defamed must be identifiable, either by name, reference, or clear context.
Malice
In Philippine defamation law, malice is presumed when a defamatory statement is made without a justifiable motive. However, malice in fact (i.e., actual malice) may need to be proven if the statement is considered privileged under the law.

3. Degrees of Oral Defamation

Under Philippine jurisprudence, oral defamation can be further classified into:

Serious (Grave) Oral Defamation
Punishable by arresto mayor in its maximum period (4 months and 1 day to 6 months) to prision correccional in its minimum period (6 months and 1 day to 2 years and 4 months).
- Determining whether oral defamation is “serious” depends on several factors, including the words used, the personal relations between the parties, the social standing and circumstances of the offended party, and the occasion on which the words were spoken.
Slight Oral Defamation
Punishable by arresto menor (1 day to 30 days) or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos under the RPC.
- This applies to statements that are still defamatory but are considered less grievous or insulting, taking into account the surrounding context and how the statements were made.

4. Slander vs. Libel

While both slander and libel are types of defamation, the key difference lies in the medium used to convey the defamatory statement:

Slander (Oral Defamation): Defamatory statements are spoken.
Libel (Written Defamation): Defamatory statements are written, broadcast, or otherwise recorded in a permanent or semi-permanent medium.

In the digital age, libel can also apply to statements published online, such as on social media platforms, blogs, or online news websites. This is governed by the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 (Republic Act No. 10175).

5. Penalties and Remedies

5.1 Criminal Penalties

Serious Oral Defamation:
- The penalty is arresto mayor in its maximum period (4 months and 1 day to 6 months) to prision correccional in its minimum period (6 months and 1 day to 2 years and 4 months).
Slight Oral Defamation:
- The penalty is arresto menor (1 day to 30 days) or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos (as stated in the RPC; actual amounts may be subject to updates, judicial discretion, or additional damages in civil actions).

5.2 Civil Liability

Apart from criminal liability, the offended party may also seek civil indemnity (damages). Under the Civil Code of the Philippines (particularly Articles 19, 20, 21, 26, and 2176), a person who suffers injury because of defamatory statements may claim:

Moral damages for mental anguish, besmirched reputation, social humiliation, etc.
Exemplary damages if the act was done in a wanton, fraudulent, or oppressive manner.
Nominal damages in some instances to vindicate or recognize a violated right.

6. Defenses in Slander Cases

1. Truth (Justification)

If the accused can prove the truth of the defamatory statement and demonstrate that it was made with good motives and for justifiable ends, criminal liability may be avoided under certain conditions. However, “truth” is generally not a defense in private matters unless it involves a public official’s conduct or a matter of public interest.

2. Privileged Communication

Certain communications are considered absolutely or qualifiedly privileged under Philippine law. For instance:
- Absolutely Privileged: Statements made in the course of legislative or judicial proceedings, official communications by public officers in the performance of their duties, etc.
- Qualifiedly Privileged: Fair comments on matters of public interest, performance of a public official’s functions, or a private communication made in good faith for a justifiable purpose (e.g., in a complaint setting).

3. Lack of Malice

Malice is presumed in defamatory statements. However, if the accused can prove that the statement was made under a qualified privileged occasion (and without actual malice), the charge may fail.

4. Absence of Publication

If the allegedly defamatory statement was not communicated to a third person (i.e., there is no publication), there can be no defamation.

5. Not Defamatory per se

The defense may argue that the words uttered do not impute a crime, vice, or defect and thus cannot be considered defamatory per se.

7. Procedure for Filing a Slander Complaint

Execution of a Sworn Statement (Complaint-Affidavit)
- The offended party (complainant) must file a complaint-affidavit in the Office of the City or Provincial Prosecutor where the offense was allegedly committed or where any of its essential elements occurred.
Preliminary Investigation
- The prosecutor evaluates the complaint-affidavit and supporting evidence (including affidavits of witnesses, if any).
- The respondent will be required to submit a counter-affidavit.
- The prosecutor determines whether probable cause exists.
Information and Filing in Court
- If the prosecutor finds probable cause, an Information for oral defamation (slander) is filed in the appropriate trial court.
Arraignment and Trial
- The accused is arraigned and enters a plea.
- Trial ensues; the prosecution must prove the elements of slander beyond reasonable doubt.
Judgment and Possible Appeal
- If found guilty, the accused may be punished according to the prescribed penalties.
- The convicted individual may appeal the decision through the appropriate channels (Regional Trial Court, Court of Appeals, Supreme Court, depending on jurisdiction and nature of the case).

8. Prescriptive Period

Under Act No. 3326 (as amended) and the Revised Penal Code:

The prescriptive period for oral defamation (slander), being a crime punishable by arresto mayor to prision correccional in its minimum period, is 6 months (if considered a light offense) or 1 year (if considered a more serious offense). However, interpretations and applicable periods can vary depending on the exact classification (serious or slight) and the relevant rules of the Revised Penal Code.

It is crucial to file the complaint within this prescriptive period; otherwise, the right to prosecute is lost.

9. Notable Jurisprudence

Philippine courts have issued a number of rulings clarifying what constitutes serious vs. slight oral defamation, the context in which words were said, and the importance of who heard them. Some highlights include:

Cases emphasizing the context of the utterance: Courts look at the social standing of both parties, the relationship between them, and the circumstances that provoked the utterances.
Cases on qualified privilege: Rulings highlight that if the statements were made out of a moral or legal duty (e.g., a complaint to proper authorities), the speaker may be protected by qualified privilege, absent actual malice.

10. Practical Considerations

Evidence:
- In slander cases, testimony from the person(s) who heard the defamatory words is critical. Audio or video recordings, if lawfully obtained, can also be strong evidence.
Out-of-court Settlements:
- Many defamation cases in the Philippines are resolved amicably through apologies, retractions, or settlements. This is partly due to the desire to avoid lengthy litigation and the relatively small fines involved in slight oral defamation cases.
Potential Civil Suit:
- Even if the criminal aspect does not proceed or is dismissed, the offended party might still pursue a civil action for damages based on the same facts (consistent with the “independent civil action” doctrine under the Civil Code).
Public Figure vs. Private Individual:
- Public officials or celebrities often face stricter standards for proving malice in defamation suits because they are deemed to have knowingly exposed themselves to public scrutiny. However, oral defamation suits by private individuals have a lower threshold for demonstrating harm since the protection of their personal reputation is paramount.

11. Conclusion

Slander (oral defamation) in the Philippines is a criminal offense characterized by a public and malicious imputation of a discreditable act or condition spoken to a third person. Depending on the gravity of the offense, it may be classified as serious or slight oral defamation, each carrying corresponding penalties under the Revised Penal Code. Alongside criminal prosecution, aggrieved parties may also pursue civil damages for moral, exemplary, and other forms of compensation.

Key points to remember:

Malice is generally presumed, though it can be rebutted by showing good faith, privileged communication, or lack of publication.
Time is critical: a complaint must be filed within the prescriptive period.
Defamation suits can be complex and fact-specific, often decided based on the precise context, words used, and relationships involved.

If you believe you have a slander claim or are facing one, it is best to seek professional legal advice from a Philippine attorney who can provide counsel tailored to the specifics of your situation.