The Provincial Fiscal of Pampanga v. Reyes
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: The Provincial Fiscal of Pampanga filed two informations for libel against Andres Guevarra, alleging that Guevarra, with malicious intent, published a libelous squib in verse in the weekly paper Ing Magumasid, intended to impeach the honesty, integrity, and reputation of Clemente Dayrit (Criminal Case No. 4501) and Mariano Nepomuceno (Criminal Case No. 4502). Procedural History: Guevarra demurred to the informations on the ground of duplicity, arguing that he published only one libelous article. The court overruled the demurrer. During the joint trial, the fiscal attempted to present as evidence copies of the Ing Magumasid containing the libelous article and its Spanish translation, along with another article. The defense objected, and the court sustained the objection. The prosecution's subsequent petition to amend the information was denied by the court on the ground that the omission of the libelous article in the original information was fatal and that amendment would impair the defendant's rights. The Petition: The Provincial Fiscal of Pampanga filed a petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the respondent judge to admit the aforementioned exhibits as evidence for the prosecution.
Issue(s)
Whether an information charging libel published in an unofficial language, without including a copy of the libelous article but only its translation, is valid. Whether the refusal of the respondent judge to admit the copies of the newspaper containing the libelous article and its translation constitutes an abuse of discretion, warranting the issuance of a writ of mandamus.
Ruling
The petition for a writ of mandamus is granted. The respondent judge is ordered to admit Exhibits A, B, C, and D in criminal cases Nos. 4501 and 4502.
Ratio Decidendi
On the validity of the information: The Court held that while the general rule requires the complaint or information for libel to set out the particular defamatory words as published, this rule has exceptions. When the defamation is published in a non-official language, it is proper and generally necessary to set out the communication as it was originally made, with an exact translation. Since the libelous article was published in the Pampango dialect, it was sufficient to insert a Spanish translation in the information. The Court cited the principle that when defamation is published in a foreign tongue, an exact translation is required, and if no cause of action appears from the translation, the original foreign words are immaterial. This exception is particularly evident when the language used is vastly different from official languages, such as Moro or Chinese characters. On the abuse of discretion in refusing evidence: The Court stated that the general rules regarding the admissibility of evidence apply to libel cases, requiring relevance and prohibiting hearsay. The rule of procedure requiring the production of the best evidence is applicable. Copies of the weekly newspaper containing the libelous article and its translation constitute the best evidence of the libel charged, as the newspaper itself is the best evidence of an article published in it. While the respondent judge has discretion to admit or reject evidence, his refusal in this instance amounted to an abuse of discretion, which this Court can control through mandamus. The Court invoked the doctrine that it has jurisdiction to entertain an application for mandamus to compel a Court of First Instance to permit the admission of evidence when its exclusion constitutes an abuse of discretion.
Main Doctrine
A writ of mandamus may issue to compel a judge to admit evidence in a libel case if the refusal to admit such evidence constitutes an abuse of discretion, particularly when the libelous article is published in a non-official language and the information includes a translation thereof.