Kinds and Definition of Slander or Oral Defamation

Definition:
Speaking of base and defamatory words which tend to prejudice another in his reputation, office,
trade, business or means of livelihood

Two kinds of oral or verbal defamation:

(1) Grave Slander

(2) Simple Slander

A. Factors to consider:
1. The expression used including their sense, grammatical significance and accepted ordinary
meaning

2. The personal relations of the accused and the offended party, as when both are bitter enemies

3. The special circumstances of the case and its antecedents, such as the time, place and occasion
of the utterances, persons present

4. The social standing and position of the offended party

B. Words uttered in the heat of anger or in a quarrel, with some provocation on the part of the
victim, is simple slander.
> The victim may not have heard the words, it is enough that a third person heard them.
> Words uttered in one occasion and place and directed at several persons not mentioned
individually constitute only one offense.
> Words used as expletives (to express anger, displeasure, are not defamatory)

What is Slander By Deed?

The performance of any act which shall cast dishonor, discredit or contempt upon another
person. Depending upon the seriousness of the act, the time, place, occasion, the character of the
victim, it is either Grave or Light.

LIBEL

Forms of Libel
a). The facilities of the mass media i.e print and broadcast media such as articles, news items,
columns, caricatures, editorials in newspapers and magazines; comments, opinions, news aired
over the television or radio stations

b). Modern communication facilities such as through the internet or cellphones, CDs, DVDs
b). Literary outlets such as through letters, books, poems, songs, stage plays, movies, paintings,
drawings, pictures, sculpture and the like

Elements

A. First Element: There must be a defamatory imputation

1. This means that the matter claimed to be libelous must impute a crime, vice, defect, or any act,
or omission, condition, status or circumstance, tending to cause the dishonor, discredit or
contempt to a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who is dead.

The purpose is to lower the esteem or honor, or respect, in which a person is regarded, such as :

a). The victim is humiliated or publicly embarrassed

b). The victim is vilified, hated, becomes the subject of gossip, nasty stories, suspected of
wrongdoings, is avoided

c). The victim losses face, becomes a laughing stock, is the object of ridicule

2. Rules to determine whether the language is defamatory or not:

a). What should be considered is what the matter conveyed to a fair and reasonable man and not
the intention of the author or the accused.

b). Statements should not be interpreted by taking the words one by one out of context; they must
be taken in their entirety.

c). Words are to be given the ordinary meaning as are commonly understood and accepted in the
in daily life. The technical meanings do not apply. This is especially true to idiomatic sayings.
Thus “Babae ng Bayan “ does not mean a heroine. “Hayok sa Laman” does not mean a meat
eater. “Adu client nya nga pagbigasan”

3. How the imputation is made:

a). By the use of direct and express defamatory words, descriptions or accusations. Examples: (i).
He is a thief, swindler, “babaero”, ugly, wife beater, a crook (ii) drawing a caricature of a person
depicting him as a crocodile

b). By the use of Figures of Speech such as:

(i) Hyperbole - exaggeration according to which a person is depicted as being better or worse, or
larger or smaller than is actually the case. Example: (a). Mr. X is the gambling lord (b) She is
the mother of all cheaters. (c) Praise undeserved is slander in disguise

(ii) Irony or sarcasm or where words are used to convey a meaning contrary to their literal sense.
Examples: (a). “Maria belongs to the ladies called “Kalapating mababa ang lipad” (b). Don’t
bother asking him for a treat. He is boxer ( i.e stingy or a miser) (c) He has a face only a mother
can love (d) She is my wife when she is beside me, yours when she is near you. (e). She is very
famous because she is a public sweetheart.

(iii) Metaphor or the use of words or phrases denoting one kind of idea in place of another word
or phrase for the purpose of suggesting a likeness between the two. Examples: (a) He is Satan
personified on earth. (b) She has an angelic face but covered with a skin as thick as the hide of
a carabao
c) Or words or phrases with double meanings such as those which apparently are innocent but
are deliberately chosen because in reality they convey a different and a derogatory meaning.
Example: “He will make a good husband. He is a mama’s boy”.

(i) Where the alleged libelous matter is susceptible of two or more interpretations, one libelous
and the other not libelous, the courts are justified in holding that the real purpose of the writer
was to have the public understand what he wrote in the light of the worst possible meaning

4. What are not defamatory

a). Words commonly used as expletives, denoting anger or disgust rather than as defamation,
such as the expressions “Putang inaka, tarandado ka”, “Ulol”, “Punyeta ka”.

b). Expressions of an opinion made by one who is entitled to state an opinion on a subject in
which he is interested. Examples:

(i) An heir writes that their was unfairness in the distribution of the properties

(ii) A lady complains over the radio that there was discrimination against Cordillera girls women
in the selection of candidates to the Miss Baguio Pageant

(iii). A law student writes in the school news organ that he believes the faculty in the college of
law are generally lazy and are not kept abreast with new jurisprudence

(iv). A teacher declared in an interview that the students of one school are less intelligent than
those in another school

c). Words which are merely insulting are not actionable as libel or slander per se, and mere
words of general abuse however opprobious, ill-natured, or vexatious whether written r spoken,
do not constitute a basis for an action for defamation in the absence of allegation for special
damages. The fact that the language is offensive to the plaintiff does not make it actionable by
itself ( MVRS Pub. Inc. vs Islamic Da’wah Council of the Phil. 444 Phil. 20; Binay vs. Sec. of
Justice Sept. 8, 2006)

B. Second Element: Publicity of the Libelous Matter

1. This means the accused caused the libelous material to be known or read or seen or heard by a
third person, other than the person to whom it has been written i.e. the victim. Somebody must
have read, seen or heard the libelous material due to the acts of the accused.

(A). The addressing of defamatory words directly to the person concerned, and to no other
person, does not constitute an actionable libel.

(B). If it was the victim himself and not the accused, who showed, informed or relayed the
libelous material to others, then the accused is not liable.

(C). Circulation or publicity is not necessarily through the newspaper.

(D). Examples:

i). Posting the material in the internet or posting in a bulletin board

ii). Showing the caricature, or naked picture, of the victim to another

iii) Announcements in the radio, or paid advertisements such as “The public is warned not to
purchase the skin lotion products of ABC Corp. to prevent possible cancer”
iv). Asking someone to write a defamatory letter about the victim

iv). Sending the letter to the victim through a messenger but it is in an unsealed envelope ( the
presumption is that the letter is intended to be read by anyone other than the victim). Thus if the
letter is sent in a sealed envelope, the element of publicity is missing.

2. Effect: Each separate publication of a libelous matter is a separate crime, whether published in
part, or in the same newspaper. Example: (i) There as many crimes of libel as there are various
showing or staging of a libelous drama or stage play in different venues and at various times.

(ii) If the same libelous news is published in two or more newspapers, then there be such number
of separate libels corresponding to the different newspapers which published the material.

C. Third Element: The Person libeled must be identified. (Identity of victim)

1. This means the complainant or plaintiff must prove he is the person subject of the libelous
matter, that it his reputation which was targeted.

2. This element is established by the testimony of witnesses if the complainant was not directly
mentioned by name. They must be the public or third persons who can identify the complainant
as the person subject of the libel. If third persons can not say it is the plaintiff or complainant
who is the subject, then it cannot be said that plaintiff’s name has been tarnished.

a). Where the publication is ambiguous as to the person to whom it applies, the testimony
of persons who read the publication is admissible for the purpose of showing who is intended to
be designated by the words in said publication

3. How the identification or referral to the plaintiff is made

a). Directly by his name

b). By descriptions of his person, his address, nature of his office or work, his actions, or any
other data personally connected or related to the plaintiff; or identification from similar other the
circumstances

c) From the likeness of his face or features to the libelous drawing, caricature, painting or
sculpture

4. The victims maybe natural persons who are alive or juridical persons, or deceased persons as
to their memory.

5. Rule if several persons were defamed or libeled

a). If several persons were libeled in one article, but all are identifiable, then there are as many
charges of liable as there are persons libeled

b). If the article is directed to a class or group of several persons in general terms only without
specifying any particular member, there is no victim identified or identifiable, hence there is no
actionable libel. No person can claim to have been specifically libeled as to give that person the
right to file charges of libel.
Examples:

(i). Some lady students in the 4th year law class section A, are ugly

(ii). Two thirds of the law students are cheaters

(iii). Majority of the policemen are crooks

(iv). Most lawyers are thieves disguised in coat and tie

c). If the defamation is directed against a group or class and the statement is so sweeping or all-
embracing as to apply to every member of that group or class, then any member can file an
action for libel in his own name, not in the name of the group/class. (Note: Philippine laws do
not recognize group libel). Or if the statement is sufficiently specific so that each individual can
prove that the statement specifically point to him then he may bring an action in his own name.

Examples:

(i). All those belonging to 4th year law class section A are sex perverts

(ii) Each and every employee in the accounting office is secretly taking home part of the tuition
fees paid.

(iii) If you are a faculty member of the college of law of U.B. then you have no integrity but you
are a yes-man of the school President

d). But even if directed against a group or class but the statement is directly and personally
addressed to a member or members thereof, then only such member(s) can bring an action.

Example: A radio announcer addresses himself to Mr. X and Mr. Y and says: “ Mr. X, and you
Mr. Y. You Pangalatoks are sex maniacs”. Only Mr. X and Mr. Y can file an action for libel.

D. Fourth Element: That there be malice on the part of the accused.

1. Malice is the legal term to denote that the accused is motivated by personal ill-will, spite,
hatred, jealousy, anger, and speaks not in response to duty but to do ulterior and unjustifiable
harm. The purpose is really to destroy, to injure, to inflict harm.

2. There are two kinds of malice

a). Malice in Law or Presumed Malice.

(i) The plaintiff need not prove the existence of malice. It is for the accused to disprove this
presumption

(ii) This presumption, that accused was actuated with an evil purpose or malice, arises if the
article is defamatory on its face, or due to the grossness of the defamatory imputation even if the
facts are true, but there was no good intention or justifiable motive.

(iii) Examples:

(a). X writes an article about the sexual escapades of a society matron complete with the details
of time, place, and supported by pictures. In such case the law presumes that X was actuated by
malice even if what he wrote is true.

(b). X calls the radio and announces that the family of Juan de la Cruz is a family of thieves and
crooks.

b). Malice in Fact or Malice as a Fact. -. It is the malice which must be proven by the plaintiff.
He must prove the purpose of the accused is to malign or harm or injure his reputation. This
arises either because:

(i) the article is not defamatory on its face or if libelous it is ambiguous

(ii) the accused was able to overcome the presumption of malice.

Prosecution for Libel

A. Remedies of the Victim: (i) the person libeled may file a criminal case or a separate civil case
for damages (ii) but he may opt to recover damages in the same criminal case

B. Jurisdiction and Venue of the criminal action

1. a). Actions based on libel, whether civil or criminal, are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the
Regional Trial Court even if the penalty is within the Jurisdiction of the Municipal Trial Courts.

b).The civil case must also be tried in the RTC trying the criminal case (No separate civil action)

c) If the libel imputes any of the private crimes, the Prosecution must be upon a complaint filed
by the offended party

2. Venue: as a general rule the action for libel shall be in the RTC of the province/city where the
article was first printed and published ( Rule of Place of First Print and Publication) but it may
also be filed elsewhere as follows:

a). If a private person: in the RTC of the province/city where he resides

b). If a public official and holding office in Manila: In the RTC of Manila

c) If a public official holding office outside Manila: in the RTC of the province/city where he
holds office

C. Persons Liable for Libel

1. In case of written libel:

a). The Authors of the written defamatory article, the artists, sculptor, or painter

b). Any person who shall publish, exhibit or cause the publication or exhibition thereof ( i.e.
those persons other than the author, who make known the libelous matter to a third person)

c). the editor or business manager of the print media where the article was published

2. In case of non-written libel

a). the speaker, announcer or utterer of the defamatory statements aired over the broadcast
media; the host of the show where the libelous statement is made

b). the producers and makers of the libelous cinematographic film, stage show, play or drama

3. Other persons under the principle of “Libel by Republication” i.e. a person is liable, though he
is not the author of has nothing to do with the libelous matter, if he knowingly republishes or
circulates the said libelous matter.

Defenses Allowed in Libel

1. Concept:
A. In general: if the accused proves the absence of any of the elements, then he is not liable.
Thus he may show: the material is not defamatory; there is no publicity; it is impersonal and
does not refer to the plaintiff; or that there is no malice.

B. There are however specific defenses which may refer to any of the elements of libel or are
independent defenses in themselves. These defenses were established by jurisprudence,
particularly by United States Decisions, as our Libel law is based primarily on American
concepts.

II. The Doctrine of Privilege Communication

A. This is a defense against the element of malice and it applies to both libel and oral
defamation. This means that even if the material is considered libelous still there is no malice in
the eyes of the law. These consist of two kinds: (a) Absolutely Privilege Communication and the
(b) Qualifiedly Privileged Communication.
B. Absolutely Privileged Communication: this refers to a communication, whether oral or written
which is defamatory and may even be made in bad faith but which cannot give rise to either
criminal or civil liability. This is because there are higher considerations involved which are
considered more paramount than the damage to the reputation of a person.
1. Privilege Speeches in the halls of Congress
2. Communications made by public officers in the performance of their duties, such as the
explanations on a matter made by a public officer to his superior though it contains harsh
language
3. Statements made in judicial proceedings if pertinent and relevant to the case involved, such as
the allegations in the pleadings
4. Statements and evidence submitted in a Preliminary Investigation.
C. Qualifiedly/Conditionally Privileged Communication: this refers to communications in which
the law presumes the absence of malice, thus they are initially not actionable. The burden
therefore is on the plaintiff to prove the existence of actual malice.
D. Two Kinds of Qualifiedly Privileged Communications Under Article 354.
1. Private Communications, made by one to another in the performance of a legal, moral or
social duty provided that: (i). The one making the communication must have an interest in the
subject and (ii) the person to whom the communication was made is one who can act on the
matter

(a). This communication maybe oral or written, private, public or official document which are
sent for redress of grievances or to request for appropriate action. But it must be private in that it
is intended to be only between the sender and the recipient. Undue publicity removes the
privilege.

Hence a so called “Open Letter” is not privileged. Also, accusations made in a public gathering
are not privileged.

(b). The communication must meet these elements:

(i). The person who made the communication had a legal, moral or social duty to make the
communication, or at least, had an interest to protect, which interest may either be his own or of
the one to whom it is made

(ii). The communication is addressed to an officer or a board, or superior, having some interest
or duty in the matter, and who has the power to furnish the protection sought ( or that the
recipient is a proper person who can act on the communication) and

(iii). The statements in the communication are made in good faith and without malice ( Binay vs.
Sec. of Justice, Sept. 08, 2006)
Legal duty: presupposes a provision of law imposing upon the accused the duty to communicate.
Such as the complaint by a citizen concerning the misconduct of a public official to the latter‘s
superior even if, upon investigation, the matters are not substantiated. But it may be shown that
the charges were maliciously made without reasonable ground for believing them to be true.

Also, a report to the police by a citizen about the suspected criminal activities of another person,
even if latter it is proved the suspicions were groundless, is privileged.

(d). Moral or social duty presupposes the existence of a relationship between the sender and the
recipient of the communication, or the confidential and pressing urgency of the communication.

(e). The sender must have an interest in the subject of the communication and the recipient must
be a proper person who can act on the subject to the communication.

Thus a letter-complaint describing an SLU law professor as lazy incompetent, and an absentee, is
privileged if sent to the SLU President. It is not privileged if sent to the President of U.B.

If a teacher writes to his fellow teacher that a student of his is becoming irresponsible and
possibly a drug user, the same letter is not privileged. But if sent to the parents of the student for
their information and action, it is conditionally privileged.

(f). In Alcantara vs. Ponce ( Feb. 28, 2007) the court adopted the ruling in the U.S case of Borg
vs. Borg in that a ”written charge or information filed with the prosecutor or the court is not
libelous although proved or be false and unfounded. Furthermore, the information given to a
prosecutor by a private person for the purpose of initiating a prosecution is protected by the same
cloak of immunity and cannot be used as a basis for an action for defamation. “

In this Alcantara case, a newsletter submitted by party in a preliminary investigation, which was
defamatory, was considered as a privilege communication.

It was also ruled that under the Test of Relevancy, a matter alleged in the course of the
proceedings need not be in every case material to the issues or be so pertinent to the controversy
that it may become the subject of inquiry in the course of trial, so long as they are relevant.

2.-A: A fair and true report of any official proceeding, or of any statement, report, or speech,
made thereat

(a). The proceeding must not be confidential, such as the hearings before the Senate, as opposed
to the close door executive sessions of the senate . Thus if the report is with respect to a public
record, it refers only to those made accessible to the public which may be revealed for public
interest or protection of the public.

(b) The report must be without any unnecessary comment or libelous remarks ( i.e. no
editorializing)

(c).The report must be accurate and should not intentionally distort the facts. If there is error in
the facts reported, the report is still privilege if made in good faith

(d) Examples: News report of a judicial proceeding, including the filing of a complaint in court;
or what a witness testified; or of a verbal and heated argument between two councilors during the
session of the city council.

(e). This defense apply most often to members of the media who write on said matters or report
them as news

2-B. Fair and True Report of the Official Acts of a Public Official
(a). The public and official acts of a public official, including his policies, are legitimate subjects
of comments and criticisms, though they may be unfair. Public officials are not supposed to be
onion-skinned. “Public officials, like Ceasar’s wife, must be beyond reproach and above
suspicion”.

(b). But the communication may be actionable:

(i) If it contains an imputation which is a false allegation of a fact or a comment based on a false
supposition

(ii). If the attack, criticism or imputation pertains to his private acts or private life, unless these
reflect on his public character and image as a public official.

(iii) As stated in the U.S. case of New York Times vs. Sullivan, a public official may recover
damages if he proves that : “the statement was made with actual damage, that is, with knowledge
that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not”

B. Matters Considered Privileged By Jurisprudence

1. Fair Comments on Matters of Public Interest

(a) In Borjal vs. Ct. of Appeals, (301 SCRA 1, Jan. 14, 1999) it was held that the enumeration
in Article 354 is not an exclusive list of qualifiedly privileged communications because “fair
comments on matters of public interest are privileged and constitute a valid defense in an action
for libel or slander”

(b). They refer to events, developments, or matters in which the public as a whole has a
legitimate interest.

Examples

(i). A news report on the welfare of youth and students in a school allegedly staffed by
incompetents, or a dumping ground of misfit teachers, concerns a matter of public interest.

(ii). An editorial criticizing the owner of a ship which sunk, for his delay in extending financial
help to the family of the victims, is not libelous as the in action is a matter of public interest.

(iii). The arrest and prosecution of law violator is a matter in which the public has a right to
know. Thus there is no liability for reporting that a lady was arrested for selling shabu or that a
person was charged in court or convicted by a court for Estafa. The persons in question cannot
file a case for libel.

(iv). A radio announcer lambasts a family for their adamant refusal to vacate and remove their
structure inside a park.

2. Comments and Criticisms on the Actuations of Public Figures

(a) Public figures refer to people who place themselves in the public limelight or attention
either: by nature of their business or activity, or mode of living, or by adopting a mode of
profession or calling which gives the public a legitimate interest in his doings, his affairs and in
his character or which affect public interest (these are the celebrities), or because they
participate in public affairs or regularly and publicly expound their views on public affairs.

Examples of the first: movie stars; national athletes; those representing the Philippines in world
beauty pageants, Manny Pacquiao; hosts of TV shows/programs such as the Tulfo brothers,
musicians, novelists. The spouse of the President is a public figure.

Examples of the second: candidates for an elective position; columnists of national newspapers,
TV/radio commentators, Cardinal Sin during his time, Jose Maria Sison.

( b) As with public officials, the imputation maybe actionable if it is (i) a false allegation of fact
or (ii) it is based on a false supposition.

3. Justified Libel or the Privilege of a Reply.

This is fighting libel with libel. This refer to communications made in response to a libel in
order to counter and/or remove the libel, provided it is limited to and related to the defamatory
imputation and not unnecessarily libelous.

4. Truth And Good Motives or Justifiable Ends.

A. It is not enough that what was publicized about another is true. The accused must also prove
good motives or intentions and justifiable ends, in order to disprove malice.

B. This defense is available only if: (a) What is imputed to another is a crime regardless if the
victim is a private or public person or (ii) if the victim is a public officer regardless of whether a
crime is imputed, so long as it relates to the discharge of their official duties

C. Illustrations: one writes about the criminal activities of another in order to show that crime
does not pay, or to set an example of what conduct to avoid.

5. The Principle of Neutral Reportage.

A. This is a defense available to one charged not as the author but as a republisher of a libelous
material

B. The republisher who accurately and disinterestedly reports certain defamatory statements
made against public figures, is shielded from liability, regardless of his subjective awareness of
the truth or falsity of the accusation. ( See Fil Broadcasting Net Work vs. AGO Medical and
Educational Center, 448 SCRA 413)

Example: A parent of a student goes on radio to denounce a school teacher as being incompetent,
absentee, bias and prejudiced. A news reporter quoted the accusations in his news article. He is
not liable even if he personally knows the accusations are untrue.

356. Libel As A Threat (Blackmailing)

I. Concept: The law punishes a person who demands a compensation or money consideration by:
1. threatening to publish a libel concerning a person or his family and

2. offering to prevent the publication of a libel

II. Principles:
A. This a form of blackmailing because there is an extortion for money under threat of so called
“exposing” a person. This is often called demand for “Hush Money”

B. If both modes were committed by a single person, there is only one offense. If committed by
two different persons there be two separate offenses, unless both are in conspiracy.

C. The crime is consumated once the threats or offers were made.

III. Examples:
A. The accused threatened to publish in a weekly periodical certain letters written by a married
woman unless she paid a certain sum of money.

B. The producer of a TV Program demanded money from a politician otherwise he would expose
the sexcapades of the politician.

CRIMES AGAINST HONOR

1. A person’s name, honor and reputation, is as sacred to him as his very life. Title 13 seeks to
give protection thereto by defining certain acts injurious to a person’s name and reputation as
crimes and prescribing penalties therefore.

2. These crimes, which are in the nature of character assassination, are classified according to the
manner of their commission into the following:
a). Libel which is by making use of the mass media and literary forms or literary outlets

b). Oral Defamation which is by the use of oral utterances

c). Slander by Deed which is by performing an act intended to cast dishonor, disrespect or
contempt upon a person .

d). Incriminatory machinations which may either be:

(i) Incriminating an innocent person in the commission of a crime by planting evidence
(ii) Intriguing against honor by resorting to any scheme, plot, design, but not by direct
spoken words, to destroy the reputation of another

3. Elements common to crimes against honor

a) That there be a matter, oral written or in whatever form, or of an act, which is defamatory to
another

b).That there is publicity of the defamatory matter

c). That there be malice on the part of the accused

d). That the person defamed is identifiable

4. The foregoing crimes cannot be committed by negligence because all require the element of
malice.

5. Title 13, especially the article on libel constitutes another limitation to the freedom of speech
and of the press as these two freedoms can not be allowed to be used to destroy the good name of
an innocent person.

CRIMES AGAINST THE CIVIL STATUS OF PERSONS

Art. 347. Simulation of Births, Substitution and Abandonment of a Legitimate Child

I. Acts Punished:
1. Simulation of Birth:

2. Substitution of one child for another

3. Concealing or abandoning a legitimate child to cause the lose of civil status

II. Principles
A. In simulation and substitution, the child need not be legitimate.

B. The purpose of the acts punished must be to cause the loss of the civil status of the child or to
obtain the civil status of another.

C. Simulation of birth, the act of making it appear that a woman gave birth to a child, must be in
the record of birth/birth certificate. A birth certificate is obtained indicating that the woman gave
birth to a child when in truth she did not.

1. If the simulation is in any other document, the crime is falsification

2. If the woman feigns or pretends to be pregnant and then makes it appear she gave birth to a
baby when in truth the baby is that of another, such pretense is not punished. But when she
causes the birth to be recorded, said act constitute the crime of simulation of birth.

3. Where the woman pretends to be pregnant and to give birth in order to demand support from
the alleged father, the crime is estafa.

D. The abandonment is not to kill but to cause it to lose its civil status. It consists of the practice
of leaving an infant at the door of a religious or charitable institution, hospitals, or a foster home
or the DSWD. The child be legitimate else it is a crime against security i.e. abandonment by
persons having charge of the education or rearing of the child.

E. Substitution has for its principal element the putting of a child in place of another born of a
different mother. This results to a change of status because a child is introduced into a family
although said child is a stranger thereto. The child acquires a name, situation and rights to which
it is not lawfully entitled.

Example: (i). Placing a different baby in the crib of another

Art. 348. Usurpation of Civil Status.

I. Concept: the crime committed by any person who shall usurp the civil status of another. It is
the act of pretending to be another person so as to enjoy the latter’s rights, filiations, paternity or
conjugal rights, including his profession or public status. It involves the idea of impersonating
another.
A. The penalty is higher if the purpose is to defraud the offended party or his heirs such as
pretending to be the lost son or nephew of a rich man

B. Example: (i) “The Prince and the Pauper” (ii) “The Man in the Iron Mask”. (iii). Pretending to
be the Cesar Oracion in order to be addressed as “Dean”

II. Other Related Crimes involving usurpation/impersonation

A. May be Using Fictitious Name as when the accused another to avoid being arrested for traffic
violations.

B. Estafa as by pretending to be the creditor or collector

C. Falsification as by pretending to be the payee in a check

D. Perjury

ILLEGAL MARRIAGES

I. Kinds of Illegal Marriages ( i.e. those not recognized or prohibited by law)

A. Bigamous Marriages (Art. 349)
B. Those contracted contrary to the Marriage Law (Art. 350)
C. Premature Marriages (Art. 351)

II. Bigamy: the crime committed by a married person who contracts a second or subsequent
marriage before the first has been legally dissolved or before the absent spouse had been
declared presumptively dead.
A. The first marriage must be valid, or at least voidable, and still subsisting and the second
marriage would have been valid were it not for the existence of the first marriage

B. If the first marriage is completely void, there is no bigamy. If the second marriage is void,
there is no bigamy either. But this may give rise to either adultery or concubinage.

Example: H married first wife. Then he marries second wife. The first wife died whereupon H
married third wife. H is guilty of bigamy for the second marriage. But he is not guilty of bigamy
for the third marriage because the second marriage is void.

C. Bigamy may be committed by reckless imprudence as: (i). by failure to ascertain the
whereabouts of the first wife (ii) one who obtains a divorced abroad and thinking it is valid here,
remarries.

D. The prescriptive period commences after discovery of the second marriage as the principle of
constructive notice does not apply to records in the Civil Registry.

E. In case the second marriage is based on the absence of the first spouse, there must first be a
judicial declaration of presumptive death so that the accused can claim good faith and avoid
prosecution for bigamy.

F. Venue. In the courts of the city, province or province where the second marriage was
celebrated

III. Marriage Contrary to the Marriage law

1. Those where the essential requirements have not been complied with such as the requirements
of age, marriage license, consent and authority of the solemnizing officer.

2. These refer to the void, voidable, and annullable marriages

IV. Premature Marriages.

1. Marriage contracted by a woman:

(a) Who marries within 301 days from the date of death of the husband or after the annulment or
dissolution of her marriage or

(b) if being pregnant at the time of his death or at time of the annulment or dissolution, shall
marry before having delivered
2. The purpose of the prohibition is to prevent doubtful paternity in the event she gives birth
during the second marriage. Thus there is no liability in the following instances:

a). If she already gave birth prior to the second marriage

b). There is proof she was not pregnant by the first husband as when the first husband is sterile,
or infertile or was unable to have physical access to the wife

c). The second husband is sterile

d). The woman is sterile or infertile

V. Performance of Illegal Marriage.

1. This is the crime committed by the solemnizing officer.