- Petitioner
- Rogelio Pader
- Respondent
- People
- Citation
- G.R. No. 139157
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Decided
- February 8, 2000
Whether petitioner's defamatory utterances constitute grave or slight oral defamation under Article 358 of the Revised Penal Code
Summary
Petitioner Rogelio Pader was charged with grave oral defamation for shouting defamatory words at Atty. Benjamin Escolango, a vice mayoral candidate, at the latter's residence. The Municipal Circuit Trial Court and Regional Trial Court convicted him of grave oral defamation, while the Court of Appeals affirmed but modified the penalty. The Supreme Court reversed, finding petitioner guilty only of slight oral defamation. The Court considered that the parties were neighbors, petitioner was intoxicated, and his anger stemmed from a previous incident involving his deceased father. The Court ruled that the expression 'putang ina mo' in the circumstances was more an expression of anger than serious insult, citing that defamatory words must be judged not only by their ordinary meaning but also by the special circumstances, antecedents, and relationship between parties. The penalty was reduced to a P200.00 fine, and moral damages were removed for lack of proof of actual suffering.
Focus of dispute
Whether petitioner's defamatory utterances constitute grave or slight oral defamation under Article 358 of the Revised Penal Code
Legal facts
On April 20, 1995, at about 8:00 p.m. in Morong, Bataan, petitioner Rogelio Pader appeared at the gate of Atty. Benjamin C. Escolango's house and shouted 'putang ina mo Atty. Escolango. Napakawalanghiya mo!' Atty. Escolango was conversing with political leaders at his terrace at the time and was a candidate for vice mayor in the May 8, 1995 elections. Petitioner was drunk during the incident, and his anger was allegedly instigated by something Atty. Escolango did when petitioner's father died. The parties were neighbors and political opponents.
Judgement and reasoning
Court of Appeals (CA): Affirmed the Regional Trial Court decision but modified the penalty, sentencing petitioner to serve four months and one day of arresto mayor.
Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC): Convicted petitioner of grave oral defamation under Article 358 of the Revised Penal Code, sentencing him to imprisonment of one month and one day to one year with extenuating circumstances of drunkenness, and ordered payment of P20,000.00 moral damages considering victim's social standing and professional stature.
Regional Trial Court (RTC): Affirmed the Municipal Trial Court decision in toto, finding no reversible error on the penalty imposed and moral damages awarded.
Supreme Court (SC): Found petitioner guilty only of slight oral defamation, not grave oral defamation. Ruled that considering the circumstances (parties were neighbors, petitioner was drunk, anger was instigated by previous incident involving petitioner's father), the oral defamation was not of serious or insulting nature. Cited Reyes vs. People ruling that 'putang ina mo' is often used to express anger rather than to slander. Set aside Court of Appeals decision and imposed only a fine of P200.00, removing the award of moral damages for lack of proof of suffering.