The Supreme Court has clarified that the prescription period for cyber libel is one year from the date of discovery, the same as traditional libel under the Revised Penal Code (RPC). This ruling settles conflicting opinions on whether cyber libel prescribes in 12 or 15 years under the Cybercrime Prevention Act (RA 10175).
Supreme Court En Banc Resolution
In a resolution written by Associate Justice Henri Jean Paul B. Inting, the Court En Banc denied the separate motions for reconsideration filed by Berteni Cataluña Causing and the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) in the case Causing v. People (G.R. No. 258524, April 8, 2026). The Court upheld its earlier ruling that the prescriptive period for cyber libel is one year from discovery.
The case stemmed from a cyber libel complaint filed in December 2020 by Cotabato Second District Rep. Ferdinand L. Hernandez against Causing. Hernandez accused Causing of posting on Facebook that Hernandez pocketed over P200 million in relief goods intended for Marawi war victims. Hernandez claimed he discovered the posts on February 4 and April 29, 2019.
Lower Court Decisions
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) received the criminal informations in May 2021. Causing moved to quash, arguing that the one-year prescription under the RPC had lapsed from the date of uploading. The RTC denied the motion, ruling that cyber libel prescribes in 12 years under RA 10175. Causing appealed to the Supreme Court, which clarified that the prescriptive period is one year from discovery, not from publication.
The Court initially denied Causing's motion to quash for lack of evidence that the crime had prescribed. Both parties filed partial motions for reconsideration.
Arguments and Resolution
The OSG argued that the one-year prescription for traditional libel does not apply to cyber libel, which should prescribe in 15 years under the Cybercrime Prevention Act, citing the unsigned resolution in Tolentino v. People. Causing countered that prescription should run from publication, not discovery, to prevent indefinite exposure to prosecution.
The Supreme Court rejected both arguments. It held that written libel prescribes in one year under the RPC, and no law separates cyber libel from this period, even if the penalty is heavier. When the law is unclear on prescription, interpretation must favor the accused. Thus, the one-year period under the RPC prevails over the 15-year period under the Cybercrime Prevention Act.
The Court also clarified that prescription for cyber libel begins upon discovery, not publication. Unlike documents in public registries, social media posts may not be immediately discoverable due to privacy settings, internet access, and social media connections.
