Carpio wants libel law amended; presume malice if libelous remark made by ‘fictitious user’

Retired Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio (INQUIRER file photo / EDWIN BACASMAS)

MANILA, Philippines — Retired Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio on Wednesday proposed that the country’s libel law be amended to presume malice on the part of an online platform if a libelous comment is made by a fictitious user.

“I propose that [the] existing law be amended so that malice is presumed on the part of the online publishers if they allow fake or fictious users to post on their platforms libelous comments against public officials or public figures,” Carpio said.

Carpio proposed the amendment during a hearing of the Senate Committee on Constitutional Amendments and Revision of Codes, which is reviewing the country’s criminal laws to keep pace with the rise of social media use in the Philippines.

“In the Philippines, public officials or public figures libeled online by fake or fictitious persons can, of course, sue the online platform as publisher. However, these public officials or public figures do not usually file libel cases because they have to overcome the presumption of good faith,” Carpio said.

“The burden of proving malice is on the libeled public officials or public figures. The law must be amended so that malice is presumed on the part of the publisher if the libelous comment is made by a fake or fictitious person. But until the law is amended, online platforms operating in the Philippines are not bothered by libel suits for comments posted by their fake, fictitious users,” he added.

This, according to Carpio, has led to the proliferation of all kinds of disinformation, malicious or not, on online platforms.

“There is a gap between the existing libel law and what should be the ideal justice in case of online libel. The use of fake or fictitious names in online platforms to libel a person is per se proof of malice and this should be written in the law,” he added.

“The use of fake or fictitious names also encourages the spread of disinformation in social media,” he also said.

While he recognized the importance of freedom of expression, Carpio stressed that he is “also for the truth and for a level playing field.”

“Anyone who imputes in social media a crime or derogatory act on another person, must disclose his real identity to allow the libeled person a legal remedy against his or her defamer. The defamer must not be allowed to hide behind the fake of a fictitious name,” he said.

“The burden must be placed on the online platform publishers to require those who post comments on their platforms to disclose their real identities,” he added.

Online platforms, according to Carpio, should also secure the country of residence and addresses of users posting comments on their platforms.

The country of residence of users who made libelous remarks should be given to the libeled person upon request in order to allow him or her to pursue legal remedies, Carpio suggested.

“If the online platform allows a user to use a fake or fictitious name, who refuses to secure the addresses of users who post libelous comments against public officials or public figures, then malice should be presumed,” he added.

Carpio, meanwhile, said that he supports calls to decriminalize libel for online, print and broadcast media.

“But online, print and broadcast publishers should be liable for treble damages if they allow their platforms to be used by fake or fictitious persons to libel other people,” he added.

gsg