9/25/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 005

148 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

Policarpio vs. Manila Times Pub. Co., Inc.

No. L-16027. May 30, 1962.

LUMEN POLICARPIO, plaintiff-appellant, vs. THE MANILA

TIMES PUB.CO., INC., CONSTANTE C. ROLDAN, MANUEL V.
VILLA-REAL, E. AGUILAR CRUZ and CONSORCIO BORJE,
defendants-appellees.

Criminal Complaints; Filing with fiscal's office by the PCAC; Idea

imparted regarding probable guilt of accused.—The filing of criminal
complaints with the city fiscal's office by another agency of the
Government, like the PCAC, particularly after an investigation conducted
by the same, imparts the idea, that the probability of guilt on the part of the
accused is greater than when the complaints are filed by a private individual,
specially when the latter is a former subordinate of the alleged offender,
who was responsible for the dismissal of the complainant from her
employment.
Libel; Publication containing derogatory informations; Requirements
for publication to enjoy immunity.—To enjoy immunity, a publication
containing derogatory information must be not only true, but, also, fair, and
it must be made in good faith and without any comments or remarks.

APPEAL from a decision of the Court of First Instance of Manila.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.

Mario Bengzon for plaintiff-appellant.
Alfredo Gonzales and Rafael M. Delfin for defendants-
appellees.

149

VOL. 5, MAY 30, 1962 149

Policarpio vs. Manila Times Pub. Co., Inc.

CONCEPCION, J.:

Appeal from a decision of the Court of First Instance of Manila

dismissing plaintiff's complaint and defendants' counterclaim,

www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000174c182a254b6b26333003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 1/9
9/25/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 005

without special pronouncement as to costs. Originally certified to the

Court of Appeals, the record on appeal was subsequently forwarded
to us in view of the amount involved in the complaint
(P300,000.00).
Plaintiff Lumen Policarpio seeks to recover P150,000.00, as
actual damages, P70,000, as moral damages, P60,000 as correctional
and exemplary damages, and P20,000, as attorney's fees, aside from
the costs, by reason of the publication in the Saturday Mirror of
August 11, 1956, and in the Daily Mirror of August 13, 1956, "of
two (2) articles or news items which are claimed to be per se
defamatory, libelous and false, and to have exposed her to ridicule,
jeopardized her integrity, good name and business and official
transactions, and caused her grave embarrassment, untold and
extreme moral, mental and physical anguish and incalculable
material, moral, professional and business damages. The defendants
are The Manila Times Publishing Co., Inc., as publisher of The
Saturday Mirror and The Daily Mirror, which are newspapers of
general circulation in the Philippines, and Constante C. Roldan,
Manuel V. Villa-Real, E. Aguilar Cruz and Consorcio Borje, as the
reporter or author of the first article and the managing editor, the
associate editor and the news editor, respectively, of said
newspapers.
After its motion to dismiss the complaint had been denied by the
Court of First Instance of Manila, in which the present action was
initiated, the defendants filed a joint answer admitting the formal
allegations of the complaint, denying the other allegations thereof,
alleging special defenses and setting up a counterclaim for P10,000,
as attorney's fees and expenses of litigation. In due course, later on,
said court rendered the aforementioned decision, upon the ground
that plaintiff had not proven that defen-dants had acted maliciously
in publishing the aforementioned articles, although portions thereof
were inaccurate or false.
Plaintiff is a member of the Philippine bar. On August 11 and 13,
1956, and for sometime prior thereto, she

150

150 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

Policarpio vs. Manila Times Pub. Co., Inc.

was executive secretary of the local UNESCO National

Commission. As such officer, she had preferred charges against
Herminia D. Reyes, one of her subordinates in said Commission,
and caused her to be separated from the service. Miss Reyes, in turn,
preferred counter-charges which were referred to Col. Crisanto V.
Alba, a Special Investigator in the Office of the President. Pending
completion of the administrative investigation, which began in June,
1956, Miss Reyes filed with the Office of the City Fiscal of Manila,
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000174c182a254b6b26333003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 2/9
9/25/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 005

on August 8, 1956, a complaint against the plaintiff for alleged

malversation of public funds and another complaint for alleged
estafa thru falsification of public documents, which were scheduled
for investigation by said office on August 22, 1956, at 2:00 p.m.
Meanwhile, or on August 11, 1956, the following appeared, with a
picture of the plaintiff, in the front page of The Satur-day Mirror:

"WOMAN OFFICIAL SUED

PCAC RAPS L. POLICARPIO ON FRAUDS
Unesco Official Head Accused on
Supplies, Funds Use by Colleague

By Constante C. Roldan

"Lumen Policarpio, executive secretary of the Unesco national commission

here, was charged with malversation and estafa in complaints filed with the
city fiscal's office by the Presidential Complaints and Action Commission
today.
"The criminal action was initiated as a result of current administrative
investigation against the Unesco official being conducted by Col. Crisanto
V. Alba, Malacañan technical assistant, on charges filed by Herminia D.
Reyes, a Unesco confidential assistant. The Unesco commission functions
under the Office of the President.
"Fiscal Manases G. Reyes, to whom the cases were assigned,
immediately scheduled preliminary investigation of the charges on August
22 at 2 p.m. Colonel Alba, in turn, indicated that the administrative phase of
the inquiry will continue Monday and then resume on August 21 at
Malacañan Park. The Palace Investigator said there are other charges, but
would not specify these.
"Alba said Miss Reyes had testified on circumstances supposedly
substantiating the malversation charge. Testimony had allegedly indicated
that the accused had used Unesco stencils for private and personal purposes.
Specification reputedly said that

151

VOL. 5, MAY 30, 1962 151

Policarpio vs. Manila Times Pub. Co., Inc.

Miss Policarpio had taken stencils from the Unesco storeroom and used
these for French lessons not at all connected with Unesco work; for the
preparation of contracts of sale of pianos in her business establishment; for
preparation of invitations sent to members of the League of Women Voters
of which she is one of the officers.
"Cited as witnesses on this charge are Miss Reyes, Francisco Manalo of
Barrio Salabat, Taal, Batangas, Federico Vergara and Pablo Armesto both of
the Unesco.
"Regarding the charge of estafa through falsification of public documents
allegedly also committed sometime in 1955, Miss Policarpio was accused of
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000174c182a254b6b26333003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 3/9
9/25/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 005

having collected expenses for supposed trips. The accusation said the
Unesco official had sought reimbursement of expenses for a trip to Baler,
Quezon, on Aug. 19, last year, representing expenses of her car when in fact
she supposedly rode in an army plane.
"Testimony indicated that a newspaperwoman who was a supposed co-
passenger had even written about the plane trip in her newspaper column.
The same voucher also allegedly collected expenses for going to a Unesco
Bayambang (Pangasinan) project, although records reputedly showed that
she was absent in that conferences.
"Witnesses cited on the charge include Aurelio Savalbaro, a Philippine
Air Force pilot, Lt. Clemente Antonio and others, also of the PAF.
"Miss Policarpio becomes the second high-ranking woman government
official to face charges involving financial disbursements in their office. The
first was Sen. Pacita M. Gonzales who is still under charge of mis-spending
funds of the Social Welfare Administration and the UNAC while she had
charge of these.
"The complainant, Miss Reyes, was earlier ordered relieved from her
Unesco post by Miss Policarpio on charges including conduct 'unbecoming
a lady', and as a result had not been paid her salary. She appealed to
Malacañan which dismissed her suit and later she sued before Judge Rafael
Amparo to compel payment of her salary. The court also rejected her plea
on the ground that she had not exhausted all administrative remedies, the
Palace not having made a clearcut decision on her case."

The Daily Mirror of August 13, 1956, likewise, carried on its first
page—with a picture of plaintiff and of Miss Reyes, taken during the
administrative investigation being conducted by Col. Alba—another
news item, reading:

"PALACE OPENS INVESTIGATION

OF RAPS AGAINST POLICARPIO
Alba Probes Administrative Phase of

152

152 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

Policarpio vs. Manila Times Pub. Co., Inc.

Fraud Charges Against Unesco Woman

Official; Fiscal Sets Prelim Quiz
Of Criminal Suit on Aug. 22.

"The administrative phase of two-pronged investigation of Miss Lumen

Policarpio, head of the Unesco national commission here, opened in
Malacañan before Col. Crisanto V. Alba.
"The judicial inquiry of charges filed by Herminia D. Reyes, also the
complainant in the Malacañan case before the Presidential Complaints and
Action Commission, will be conducted by Fiscal Manases G. Reyes on Aug.
22 at 2 p.m.
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000174c182a254b6b26333003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 4/9
9/25/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 005

"Miss Policarpio stands accused by Reyes of having malversed public

property and of having fraudulently sought reimbursement of supposed
official expenses.
"Colonel Alba, at the start of his investigation at the Malacañan Park,
clarified that neither he nor the PCAC had initiated the criminal action
before the city fiscal's office. The complaint before the fiscal was started by
an information sheet naming Herminia D. Reyes as complainant and citing
other persons as witnesses. Fiscal Reyes set preliminary investigation of
these charges for Aug. 22.
"Miss Reyes, technical assistant of the Unesco, stated at the Palace
inquiry that during 1955 Miss Policarpio allegedly used several sheets of
government stencils for her private and personal use, such as for French
lessons, contracts of sale of pianos and for invitations of the League of
Women Voters of which she (Miss Policarpio) is an officer. The Unesco
commission here functions under the Office of the President.
"The charge was filed with the PCAC, and the PCAC endorsed it to
Colonel Alba for investigation.
"Miss Policarpio this morning was not represented by any lawyer.
Federico Diaz, lawyer representing complainant Miss Reyes, petitioned for
the suspension of Miss Policarpio, executive secretary of the Unesco.
"Alba did not act immediately on the petition. He said he was holding a
hearing on the petition on August 15.
"During this morning's investigation three witnesses appeared. The first
witness was Atty. Antonio Lopez of the PCAC who brought with him 18
sheets of stencil which were allegedly used by Miss Policarpio for her
personal use. These sheets were admitted as temporary exhibits.
"The second witness was Federico Vergara of the Unesco who said that
he received four of the 18 sheets, but he could not identify which of the
sheets he had received.
"The third witness was Francisco Manalo who certified on the charge of
oppression in office against Miss Policarpio.
"The other charge of Miss Reyes corresponded to supposed
reimbursements sought by Miss Policarpio for a trip to

153

VOL. 5, MAY 30, 1962 153

Policarpio vs. Manila Times Pub. Co., Inc.

Quezon Province and to Pangasinan. On the first, Miss Reyes' complaint

alleged the Unesco official had asked for refund of expenses for use of her
car when, Miss Reyes claimed, she had actually made the trip aboard an
army plane.
"Miss Reyes also said Miss Policarpio was absent from the Bayambang
conference for which she also sought allegedly refund of expenses.
"The complainant had previously been ordered relieved of her Unesco
post by Miss Policarpio and had later sued at the Palace and before the
Court for payment of her salary."
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000174c182a254b6b26333003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 5/9
9/25/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 005

The title of the article of August 11, 1956—"WOMAN OFFICIAL

SUED"—was given prominence with a 6-column (about 11 inches)
banner headline of one-inch types. Admittedly, its sub-title—"PCAC
RAPS L. POLICARPIO ON FRAUD"—printed in bold one-
centimeter types, is not true. Similarly, the statement in the first
paragraph of the article, to the effect that plaintiff "was charged with
malversation and estafa in complaints filed with the city fiscal's
office by the Presidential Complaint and Action Commission"—
otherwise known as PCAC—is untrue, the complaints for said
offenses having been filed by Miss Reyes. Neither is it true that said
"criminal action was initiated as a result of current administrative
investigation",as stated in the second paragraph of the same article.
Plaintiff maintains that the effect of these false statements was to
give the general impression that said investigation by Col. Alba had
shown that plaintiff was guilty, or, at least, probably guilty of the
crimes aforementioned, and that, as a consequence, the PCAC had
filed the corresponding complaints with the city fiscal's office. She
alleges, also, that although said article indicates that the charges for
malversation and for estafa through falsification against her referred,
respectively, to the use by her of Unesco stencils allegedly for
private and personal purposes, and to the collection of transportation
expenses, it did not mention the fact that the number of stencils
involved in the charge was only 18 or 20, that the sum allegedly
misappropriated by her was only P54, and that the falsification
imputed to her was said to have been committed by claiming that
certain expenses for which she had sought and secured
reimbursement were incurred

154

154 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

Policarpio vs. Manila Times Pub. Co., Inc.

in trips during the period from July 1, 1955 to September 30, 1955,
although the trips actually were made, according to Miss Reyes,
from July 8 to August 31, 1955. By omitting these details, plaintiff
avers, the article of August 11, 1956, had the effect of conveying the
idea that the offenses imputed to her were more serious than they
really were. Plaintiff, likewise, claims that there are other
inaccuracies in the news item of August 13, 1956, but, we do not
deem it necessary to dwell upon the same for the determination of
this case.
Upon the other hand, defendants contend that, although the
complaints in the city fiscal's office were filed, not by the PCAC, but
by Miss Reyes, this inaccuracy is insignificant and immaterial to the
case, for the fact is that said complaints were filed with said office.
As regards the number of sheets of stencil allegedly misused and the
amount said to have been misappropriated by plaintiff, as well as the
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000174c182a254b6b26333003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 6/9
9/25/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 005

nature of the falsification imputed to her, defendants argue that these

"details" do not affect the truthfulness of the article as a whole, and
that, in any event, the insignificant value of said sheets of stencil and
the small amount allegedly misappropriated, would have had, if set
forth in said article, a greater derogatory effect upon the plaintiff,
aside from the circumstance that defendants had no means of
knowing such "details".
It appears, however, that prior to August 11, 1956, Col. Alba had
already taken the testimony of Antonio P. Lopez, Francisco Manalo
and Federico Vergara, as witnesses for Miss Reyes. Hence,
defendants could have ascertained the "details" aforementioned, had
they wanted to. Indeed, some of the defendants and/or their
representatives had made appropriate inquiries from Col. Alba
before said date, and some "details"—though not those adverted to
above—appear in the article then published, whereas the number of
sheets of stencil allegedly misused was mentioned in the news item
of August 13, 1956.
Moreover, the penalty prescribed by law for the crime either of
estafa or of embezzlement depends partly upon the amount of the
damage caused to the offended party (Articles 315 to 318, Revised
Penal Code). Hence, the

155

VOL. 5, MAY 30, 1962 155

Policarpio vs. Manila Times Pub. Co., Inc.

amount or value of the property embezzled is material to said

offense.
Again, it is obvious that the filing of criminal complaints with the
city fiscal's office by another agency of the Government, like the
PCAC, particularly after an investigation conducted by the same,
imparts the ideal that the probability of guilty on the part of the
accused is greater than when the complaints are filed by a private
individual, specially when the latter is a former subordinate of the
alleged offender, who was responsible for the dismissal of the
complainant from her employment. It is only too apparent that the
article published on August 11, 1956, presented the plaintiff in a
more unfavorable light than she actually was.
It goes without saying that newspapers must enjoy a certain
degree of discretion in determining the manner in which a given
event should be presented to the public, and the importance to be
attached thereto, as a news item, and that its presentation in a
sensational manner is not per se illegal. Newspaper may publish
news items relative to judicial, legislative or other official
proceedings, which are not of confidential nature, because the public
is entitled to know the truth with respect to such proceedings, which,
being official and non-confidential, are open to public consumption.
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000174c182a254b6b26333003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 7/9
9/25/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 005

But, to enjoy immunity, a publication containing derogatory

information must be not only true, but, also, fair, and it must be
made in good faith and without any comments or remarks.
Defendants maintain that their alleged malice in publishing the
news items in question had not been established by the plaintiff.
However, Article 354 of the Revised Penal Code, provides:

"Every defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious, even if it be

true, if no good intention and justifiable motive for making it is shown,
except in the following cases:
"1. A private communication made by any person to another in the
performance of any legal, moral or social duty; and
"2. A fair and true report, made in good faith, without any comments or
remarks, of any judicial, legislative or other official proceedings which are
not of confidential nature, or of any statement, report or speech delivered in
said proceedings,

156

156 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

Policarpio vs. Manila Times Pub. Co., Inc.

or of any other act performed by public officers in the exericse of

other functions."
In the case at bar, aside from containing information derogatory
to the plaintiff, the article published on August 11, 1956, presented
her in a worse predicament than that in which she, in fact, was. In
other words, said article was not a fair and true report of the
proceedings therein alluded to. What is more, its sub-title—"PCAC
RAPS L. POLICARPIO ON FRAUD"—is a comment or remark,
besides being false. Accordingly, the defamatory imputations
contained in said article are "presumed to be malicious".
Then too, how could defendants claim to have acted with good
intentions or justifiable motive in falsely stating that the complaints
had been filed with the Office of the City Fiscal by the PCAC as a
result of the administrative investigation of Col. Alba? Either they
knew the truth about it or they did not know it. If they did, then the
publication would be actually malicious. If they did not, or if they
acted under a misapprehension of the facts, they were guilty of
negligence in making said statement, for the consequences of which
they are liable solidarily (Articles 2176, 2194, 2208 and 2219[I],
Civil Code of the Philippines; 17 R.C.L. sec. 95, p. 349).
We note that the news item published on August 13, 1956,
rectified a major inaccuracy contained in the first article, by stating
that neither Col. Alba nor the PCAC had filed the aforementioned
complaints with the city fiscal's office. It, likewise, indicated the
number of sheets of stencil involved in said complaints. But, this
rectification or clarification does not wipe out the responsibility
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000174c182a254b6b26333003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 8/9
9/25/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 005

arising from the publication of the first article, although it may and
should mitigate it (Jimenez vs. Reyes, 27 Phil. 52). For this reason,
we feel that the interest of justice and of all parties concerned would
be served if the defendants indemnify the plaintiff in the sums of
P3,000, by way of moral damages, and P2,000, as attorney's fees.
WHEREFORE, the decision appealed from is hereby reversed
and another one shall be entered sentencing the defendants herein to
pay jointly and severally to the plain-

157

VOL. 5, MAY 30, 1962 157

People vs. Lumantas

tiff the aforementioned sums of P3,000, as moral damages, and

P2,000, by way of attorney's fees, in addition to the costs. It is so
ordered.

Padilla, Bautista Angelo, Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera, Paredes

and Dizon, JJ., concur.
Bengzon, C.J., is on leave.

Decision reversed.

Note.—See Macleod vs. Philippine Publishing Co., 12 Phil. 427.

____________

© Copyright 2020 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.

www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000174c182a254b6b26333003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 9/9