Aquino: Libel provision must stay but penalty may be changed


President Benigno Aquino III

CITY OF SAN FERNANDO, Pampanga—President Benigno Aquino III said Friday the provision on libel in the controversial Cybercrime Prevention Act should stay but left it to lawmakers to amend the provision on what penalty to impose on violators.

“On the libel provision, I don’t agree that it should be removed. If you write something libelous, you’re liable. If you’re a broadcaster and air it on radio or TV, you’re also liable. When it comes out in the Internet that’s still libelous. Whatever format it is, the person whose rights were impinged should have redress,’’ the President told reporters here following the mass oath-taking of Liberal Party members.

“If the penalty is too high, then it should be amended,’’ he added.

Pressed on the libel provision, Aquino said: “If you write something libelous, you have a libel case, even civil offenses. If you broadcast the same matter on TV or radio, that’s still libelous. If it comes out in the Internet, it’s no longer libelous? If it’s a different format, it shouldn’t be libelous?’’

Since it has been enacted, Mr. Aquino said, the Executive Department should execute the law, and it was up to the Supreme Court to rule on its constitutionality and Congress to amend it.

“If we don’t implement it, I’m liable for dereliction of duty. I can be impeached,’’ he said.

Get Inquirer updates while on the go, add us on these apps:

Inquirer Viber

Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.

  • Edgardo Mendoza


  • Noel Naig

    before this law was passed it could have been better if it was studied…reviewed thoroughly…para wala nang balikan..amendments…etc..ect…yes ang penalty dapat pareho lang para sa lahat n m convicted of the same crime…at saka civil offense lang ito…at d criminal…saka doon sa provision na maski di ikaw ang ngapost ma convicted ka pa rin…dapat di ganoon…imbistigahan kasi marami din ang mga walang hiya dyan na idamay ka sa mga kalokohan nila at gamitin ang account mo…makulong ang walang ka malaymalay na account holder…ito hindi tama….kung sino ang maykasalanan ay sya ang dapat parusahan….ok lang ang  libel law basta di ma abuso ng kahit sino man….dapat ang batas ay patas para sa lahat n mamayang Filipino….

  • LuwigVonMises

    doon niya ibenase ang paggawa sa biwisit na law na yun.  bobo pala to akala niya parang tvpatrol ang internet. kung bastosin ka sa internet defend yourself o bastosin mu rin sila sa tvpatrol di mo magawa yun.  unggoy ka pala akala ko naman mapagkatiwalaan ka.

  • boldyak

    ayaw mapuna na ang tuwid na daan ay patungong Hacienda Luisita?

  • boldyak

    Ang pagpuna sa mga Public officials o mga political candidates dapat hindi libelous…at ang DOJ could never be the Prosecuter and the Judge, na may power to shut down websites you need a court order…yon lang ang concern ko

  • Lolo Mo

    Senator Sotto, I waited until the closing time in the Q.C. Comelec Office hoping to see your showbiz brother to appear and file his COC as Mayor Candidate. The time of filing ended, and I did not see him. He he he. Gimmic na naman………. 

    Come to think of it, Mr. Senator Sotto,,,, it seems you can kiss your Senatorial ambition goodbye  for inserting that heinous provision penalizing those who criticize the government with libel.

  • Lolo Mo

    Takot ang ating Chinese gobyerno sa katutuhanan.

  • Lolo Mo

    This is the first requirement. Otherwise, you would not be able to sleep throughout your term. And it seems, PNoy has an insomnia. Why criminalize those who criticize the government? This is just outrageous. First, these Oligarch made the law on NEPOTISM A JOKE. Now they want to violate the freedom of speech. 

    In the recent selection of Chief Justice, I was surprise why Associate Justice Carpio did not inhibit himself from being a candidate considering that his cousin is the present Head of the Office of the Ombudsman. That is practically NEPOTISM. Imagine, One Carpio is the Chief JUstice of the Supreme Court, and another is the Head of Ombudsman. Yet, even PNoy has overlook what could have happened if another Carpio became the CJ. Had it materialized, we could have entered an “undeclared martial law.” He he he.

    Now, these Chinese government of ours wants to violate the freedom of speech. The right to express of desenting opinion towards our government is guaranteed under our Bills of Human rights. And with all the experts in the Senate and the Lower HOuse they have overlook our 1987 Constitution which states that “No other law will supersede these basic rights.” 

To subscribe to the Philippine Daily Inquirer newspaper in the Philippines, call +63 2 896-6000 for Metro Manila and Metro Cebu or email your subscription request here.

Factual errors? Contact the Philippine Daily Inquirer's day desk. Believe this article violates journalistic ethics? Contact the Inquirer's Reader's Advocate. Or write The Readers' Advocate:

c/o Philippine Daily Inquirer Chino Roces Avenue corner Yague and Mascardo Streets, Makati City,Metro Manila, Philippines Or fax nos. +63 2 8974793 to 94


editors' picks



latest videos