This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2014-02-18 |
ABAD, J. |
||||
| Petitioners lament that libel provisions of the penal code[37] and, in effect, the libel provisions of the cybercrime law carry with them the requirement of "presumed malice" even when the latest jurisprudence already replaces it with the higher standard of "actual malice" as a basis for conviction.[38] Petitioners argue that inferring "presumed malice" from the accused's defamatory statement by virtue of Article 354 of the penal code infringes on his constitutionally guaranteed freedom of expression. | |||||