The Severity of Slander: Differentiating Grave and Simple Slander by Deed

G.R. No. 103174, July 11, 1996

Imagine a heated argument escalating to physical aggression. In the Philippines, this act could lead to a charge of slander by deed. But is it a minor offense, punishable by a small fine, or a grave one with potential imprisonment? The distinction lies in the severity and context of the act, as illustrated in the case of Teodoro v. Court of Appeals. This case clarifies how Philippine courts determine whether slander by deed constitutes a grave or simple offense, impacting the penalties imposed.

Understanding Slander by Deed in Philippine Law

Slander, in general, involves making defamatory statements that damage another person’s reputation. Slander by deed takes this a step further, involving physical acts intended to insult or demean someone. The Revised Penal Code distinguishes between grave and simple slander by deed, with the severity influencing the punishment.

Article 359 of the Revised Penal Code is central to understanding this distinction. It states:

“Art. 359. Slander by deed. – The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period or a fine ranging from 200 to 1,000 pesos shall be imposed upon any person who shall perform any act not constituting serious physical injuries, which shall cast dishonor, discredit or contempt upon another person. If said act is not of a serious nature, the penalty shall be arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos.”

The determination of whether the slander is serious hinges on factors such as the social standing of the offended party, the circumstances surrounding the act, and the nature of the deed itself. For example, slapping a pregnant woman could be considered grave slander due to her vulnerable condition and the potential for emotional distress.

The Case of Teodoro vs. Court of Appeals: A Detailed Look

The case revolves around an incident at DBT-Marbay Construction, Inc. where Amado Teodoro, the corporate secretary, slapped Carolina Tanco-Young, the treasurer, during a heated discussion. The Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) initially found Teodoro guilty of simple slander by deed and imposed a fine of P110.00. Teodoro appealed, then attempted to withdraw his appeal after realizing the Regional Trial Court (RTC) might impose a harsher penalty.

The procedural journey involved several key steps:

• The MeTC initially convicts Teodoro of simple slander by deed.
• Teodoro appeals to the RTC.
• Before the RTC renders a decision, Teodoro tries to withdraw his appeal.
• The RTC denies the withdrawal, finding that the act constituted grave slander.
• The Court of Appeals affirms the RTC’s decision.

The RTC, and subsequently the Court of Appeals, disagreed with the MeTC, finding the slander to be grave due to the fact that Tanco-Young was a pregnant woman. The Supreme Court ultimately upheld the Court of Appeals’ decision.

The Supreme Court emphasized the RTC’s discretion in allowing the withdrawal of an appeal. The Court quoted, “The Regional Trial Court may also, in its discretion, allow the appellant from the judgment of a Municipal Trial Court, Municipal Circuit Trial Court, or Metropolitan Trial Court to withdraw his appeal, provided a motion to that effect is filed before judgment of the case on appeal…”

Furthermore, the Court highlighted that Teodoro’s attempt to withdraw his appeal was a strategic move to avoid a potentially adverse decision. “It was apparent that petitioner’s motion was intended to frustrate a possible adverse decision on his appeal. That is what exactly happened in this case.”

Practical Implications and Key Lessons

This case underscores the importance of considering the context and potential impact of one’s actions. Slapping someone, even in the heat of an argument, can have serious legal consequences, especially if the victim is in a vulnerable state.

Key Lessons:

• Context Matters: The social standing of the victim and the circumstances surrounding the act are crucial in determining the severity of slander by deed.
• Withdrawal of Appeal: The withdrawal of an appeal is not an absolute right but is subject to the court’s discretion.
• Potential for Harsher Penalties: Appealing a lower court’s decision can result in a more severe penalty if the appellate court finds the offense to be more serious.

Hypothetical Example: Imagine a scenario where an employee publicly throws water on their supervisor during a disagreement. If the supervisor holds a high-ranking position and the act is deemed highly disrespectful, it could be considered grave slander by deed, leading to potential imprisonment for the employee.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: What is the difference between slander and slander by deed?

A: Slander involves defamatory statements, while slander by deed involves physical acts intended to insult or demean someone.

Q: What factors determine whether slander by deed is grave or simple?

A: Factors include the social standing of the offended party, the circumstances surrounding the act, and the nature of the deed itself.

Q: Can I withdraw my appeal in a slander case?

A: The withdrawal of an appeal is subject to the court’s discretion and is not an absolute right.

Q: What is the penalty for grave slander by deed?

A: The penalty is arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period, or a fine ranging from P200.00 to P1,000.00.

Q: What is the penalty for simple slander by deed?

A: The penalty is arresto menor or a fine not exceeding P200.00.

Q: What should I do if I am accused of slander by deed?

A: Seek legal advice immediately to understand your rights and options.

ASG Law specializes in criminal defense, including slander and defamation cases. Contact us or email hello@asglawpartners.com to schedule a consultation.