People v. Ortiz
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Manuel Fernandez Yanson, a newspaper man writing under the pseudonym 'Flagelo,' authored a melodramatic work entitled 'From Magallanes to Polavieja.' This work was reviewed by 'La Revista Catolica,' a newspaper directed by Federico Ortiz, managed by Francisco Benavent, printed by Jose Gonzalez Paramos, and edited by Anastasio Montes. In response to a controversy between 'La Revista Catolica' and 'El Tiempo' (where Yanson wrote), 'La Revista Catolica' published an article on February 6, 1904, containing defamatory terms such as 'coward,' 'vile soul,' 'dirt-sucker,' 'savage,' and 'hogs always look toward the ground,' which were alleged to refer to Yanson. Procedural History: A complaint for libel was filed by M. Fernandez Yanson. The justice's court ordered the admission of the complaint, and a demurrer was overruled. The provincial fiscal filed an information accusing Federico Ortiz, Francisco Benavent, Jose Gonzalez Paramos, Juan Llorente, and Anastasio Montes. During the proceedings, Anastasio Montes died, and the charge against Juan Llorente was withdrawn. The trial court acquitted Francisco Benavent and convicted Federico Ortiz and Jose Gonzalez Paramos, sentencing each to pay a fine of P200 and one-third of the costs. The condemned parties appealed. The Appeal: The accused Federico Ortiz and Jose Gonzalez Paramos appealed the judgment of the lower court, which convicted them of libel. They likely argued that the article was not libelous, that they lacked malicious intent, or that they were not responsible for its publication. The Supreme Court reviewed the evidence and the applicable law, Act No. 277, to determine the culpability of the appellants.
Issue(s)
Whether Federico Ortiz, as the director of 'La Revista Catolica,' is criminally liable for the publication of a libelous article. Whether Jose Gonzalez Paramos, as the proprietor of the printing office that printed 'La Revista Catolica,' is criminally liable for the publication of a libelous article. Whether the article published in 'La Revista Catolica' constitutes libel under Act No. 277.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the lower court, finding Federico Ortiz and Jose Gonzalez Paramos guilty of libel. The penalty of subsidiary imprisonment in lieu of payment of fine was revoked. Costs of the instance were assessed against Ortiz and Paramos in equal parts.
Ratio Decidendi
On Whether Federico Ortiz is criminally liable for the publication of a libelous article: The Court held that Federico Ortiz, as the responsible director of 'La Revista Catolica,' was liable for the libelous article. His name appeared on the front page of the issue containing the libel. As director, he was appointed by the 'Centro Catolico' and was duty-bound to direct, inspect, and revise all matter published in the paper. The presumption of law is that he was cognizant of and authorized the publication of the libelous matter, thus assuming criminal responsibility as if he were the author. His negligence in performing his duties rendered him responsible. On Whether Jose Gonzalez Paramos is criminally liable for the publication of a libelous article: The Court found Jose Gonzalez Paramos culpable because he was the proprietor of the printing plant that printed 'La Revista Catolica.' By virtue of a contract, he was the printer and editor of the weekly, and with his express consent, the issue containing the libelous matter was printed and published. This direct connection and his cognizance of the contents rendered him liable for publishing the libel, in accordance with Section 6 of Act No. 277, which holds proprietors chargeable with the publication of any words contained in their serial publications. On Whether the article published in 'La Revista Catolica' constitutes libel under Act No. 277: The Court ruled that the article constituted libel. The words employed, such as 'coward, vile soul, dirt-sucker, savage, hogs always look toward the ground,' when read, produced an unmistakable conviction of the writer's intent to impeach and injure the honesty, virtue, credit, and reputation of Manuel Fernandez Yanson, exposing him to public hatred, contempt, and ridicule. While the accused had the right to criticize the literary work, they had no right to cast aspersions upon the author without reason, especially when the argument of the drama had no reference to them. The Court found that the article was libelous per se.
Main Doctrine
The Court affirmed the conviction of Federico Ortiz and Jose Gonzalez Paramos for libel. Ortiz, as the director of the newspaper 'La Revista Catolica,' was held responsible for the libelous article because it was his duty to direct, inspect, and revise all published matter, and his negligence in doing so rendered him liable. Paramos, as the proprietor of the printing office that printed the newspaper, was also held liable for publishing the libelous content with his express consent. The Court emphasized that under Act No. 277, editors, authors, and proprietors are chargeable with the publication of any words contained in their publications, and the printer is liable due to direct connection and cognizance of the contents.