Oral Defamation or Slander is libel committed by oral (spoken) means, instead of in writing.

It
is defined as "the speaking of base and defamatory words which tend to prejudice another in his
reputation, office, trade, business or means of livelihood." The elements of oral defamation are: (1)
there must be an imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission,
status or circumstances; (2) made orally; (3) publicly; (4) and maliciously; (5) directed to a natural or
juridical person, or one who is dead; (6) which tends to cause dishonor, discredit or contempt of the
person defamed. Oral defamation may either be simple or grave. It becomes grave when it is of a
serious and insulting nature.

An allegation is considered defamatory if it ascribes to a person the commission of a crime, the

possession of a vice or defect, real or imaginary or any act, omission, condition, status or circumstance
which tends to dishonor or discredit or put him in contempt or which tends to blacken the memory of
one who is dead. To determine whether a statement is defamatory, the words used in the statement
must be construed in their entirety and should be taken in their plain, natural and ordinary meaning
as they would naturally be understood by persons reading them, unless it appears that they were
used and understood in another sense. It must be stressed that words which are merely insulting are
not actionable as libel or slander per se, and mere words of general abuse however opprobrious, ill-
natured, or vexatious, whether written or spoken, do not constitute a basis for an action for
defamation in the absence of an allegation for special damages. The fact that the language is offensive
to the plaintiff does not make it actionable by itself.

Section 94. Article 358 of the same Act is hereby amended to read as follows:
"Art. 358. Slander. - Oral defamation shall be punished by arresto mayor in its maximum
period to prisión correctional in its minimum period if it is of a serious and insulting nature;
otherwise the penalty shall be arresto menor or a fine not exceeding Twenty thousand pesos
(₱20,000)."
Art. 2217. Moral damages include physical suffering, mental anguish, fright,
serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shocks, social humiliation,
and similar injury. Though incapable of pecuniary computation, moral damages may be
recovered if they are the proximate result of the defendant's wrongful act or omission.

Art. 2219. Moral damages may be recovered in the following and analogous cases:

(1) A criminal offense resulting in physical injuries; .

(2) Quasi-delicts causing physical injuries; .

(3) Seduction, abduction, rape, or other lascivious acts; .

(4) Adultery or concubinage; .

(5) Illegal or arbitrary detention or arrest; .

(6) Illegal search; .

(7) Libel, slander or any other form of defamation; .

(8) Malicious prosecution .

MALICIOUS MISCHIEF
Art. 327. Who are liable for malicious mischief. — Any person who shall deliberately cause the
property of another any damage not falling within the terms of the next preceding chapter shall
be guilty of malicious mischief.

Art. 328. Special cases of malicious mischief. — Any person who shall cause damage to obstruct
the performance of public functions, or using any poisonous or corrosive substance; or
spreading any infection or contagion among cattle; or who cause damage to the property of the
National Museum or National Library, or to any archive or registry, waterworks, road,
promenade, or any other thing used in common by the public, shall be punished:

1. By prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods, if the value of the damage
caused exceeds 1,000 pesos;

2. By arresto mayor, if such value does not exceed the abovementioned amount but it is over
200 pesos; and

3. By arresto menor, in such value does not exceed 200 pesos.

Art. 329. Other mischiefs. — The mischiefs not included in the next preceding article shall be
punished:

1. By arresto mayor in its medium and maximum periods, if the value of the damage caused
exceeds 1,000 pesos;

2. By arresto mayor in its minimum and medium periods, if such value is over 200 pesos but
does not exceed 1,000 pesos; and

3. By arresto menor or fine of not less than the value of the damage caused and not more than
200 pesos, if the amount involved does not exceed 200 pesos or cannot be estimated.

Art. 330. Damage and obstruction to means of communication. — The penalty of prision
correccional in its medium and maximum periods shall be imposed upon any person who shall
damage any railway, telegraph or telephone lines.

If the damage shall result in any derailment of cars, collision or other accident, the penalty of
prision mayor shall be imposed, without prejudice to the criminal liability of the offender for
the other consequences of his criminal act.

For the purpose of the provisions of the article, the electric wires, traction cables, signal system
and other things pertaining to railways, shall be deemed to constitute an integral part of a
railway system.

Art. 331. Destroying or damaging statues, public monuments or paintings. — Any person who
shall destroy or damage statues or any other useful or ornamental public monument shall
suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its medium period to prision correccional in its minimum
period.

Any person who shall destroy or damage any useful or ornamental painting of a public nature
shall suffer the penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos, or both such fine
and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court.
Grave coercion is committed by any person who, without authority of law, shall, by means
of violence, prevent another from doing something not prohibited by law, or compel him to do
something against his will whether it be right or wrong.

All the elements of Grave Coercion were extant.

That a person prevented another from doing something not prohibited by law, or that he
compelled him to do something against his will, be it right or wrong. – In this case, Private
Respondents prevented Petitioner and his employees from entering their own premises. They
had also compelled Petitioner’s caretakers to leave the premises against their will.

That the prevention or compulsion be effected by violence, either by material force or such
display of force as would produce intimidation and control of the will of the offended party. – In
this case, when Private Respondents entered the FENICS compound in the evening, they had a
contingent of about 20-30 armed personnel as against Petitioner’s two (2) caretakers. They
forced their way into the gates, threatened the caretakers and a driver, admittedly destroyed
one padlock and welded the gates to prevent entry.

That the person that restrained the will and liberty of another had not the authority of law or
the right to do so (that the restraint shall not be made under authority of law or in the exercise
of a lawful right.)

“ART. 286. Grave Coercions.  – The penalty of prision correccional and a fine not

exceeding 6,000 pesos shall be imposed upon any person who, without any authority of law,
shall, by means of violence, threats or intimidation, prevent another from doing something not
prohibited by law, or compel him to do something against his will, whether it be right or wrong.

“If the coercion be committed in violation of the exercise of the right of suffrage, or for the
purpose of compelling another to perform any religious act, to prevent him from exercising
such right or from so doing such act, the penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed.”

Art. 280. Qualified trespass to dwelling. — Any private person who

shall enter the dwelling of another against the latter's will shall be punished by arresto mayor
and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos.

If the offense be committed by means of violence or intimidation, the penalty shall be prision
correccional in its medium and maximum periods and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos.

The provisions of this article shall not be applicable to any person who shall enter another's
dwelling for the purpose of preventing some serious harm to himself, the occupants of the
dwelling or a third person, nor shall it be applicable to any person who shall enter a dwelling for
the purpose of rendering some service to humanity or justice, nor to anyone who shall enter
cafes, taverns, inn and other public houses, while the same are open.
Article 287 is broad enough to which the Supreme Court has defined unjust vexation as any
human conduct, without violence, that unjustly annoys an innocent person.

The elements of Unjust Vexation are:

1. There is human conduct that unjustly annoys or irritates another person;

2. Such human conduct was not attended with violence;

3. Such human conduct caused annoyance, irritation, torment, distress or disturbance to the
mind of the person to whom it is directed; and

4. Offender acted with criminal intent

The main purpose of the law penalizing coercion and unjust vexation is precisely to enforce the
principle that no person may take the law into his hands and that our government is one of law,
not of men. It is unlawful for any person to take into his own hands the administration of
justice.

It is, however, necessary that in filing the criminal complaint for unjust vexation, the
prosecution must adduce evidence that there must be a positive act on the part of the offender
to have caused annoyance, irritation, torment, distress or disturbance.

Section 73 of Republic Act No. 10951, or “An Act Adjusting the amount or the value of property
and damage on which a penalty is based and the fines imposed under the Revised Penal Code,
amending for the purpose Act 3815, otherwise known as the Revised Penal Code, as amended,”
the penalty for unjust vexation is arresto menor which is punishable by imprisonment ranging
from one day to 30 days and/or a fine of Php1,000.00 to Php40,000.00