G.R. No. L-72383 November 9, 1988
MARCELO SORIANO, petitioner, vs. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, HON. AUXENCIO DACUYCUY, and HON. FRANCISCO TANTUICO, JR., respondents.

FACTS

An information for libel was filed against petitioner Marcelo Soriano and others in the Regional Trial Court of Leyte. The charge stemmed from a press release and subsequent newspaper article in “The Guardian,” which imputed to respondent Francisco Tantuico, Jr., then Chairman of the Commission on Audit (COA), the crime of election fraud. The allegations stated that COA personnel, at Tantuico’s behest, tampered with election returns at his Tacloban residence and the COA Regional Office in Palo, Leyte, during the 1984 Batasan elections. The information specifically cited the publication of these imputations in the May 26-June 1, 1984, issue of “The Guardian,” a newspaper circulated in Tacloban City and nationwide.
Petitioner Soriano moved to quash the information on the ground of improper venue. He contended that under Article 360 of the Revised Penal Code, the libel case should have been filed in Quezon City, where the complainant Tantuico held office as a public official and where “The Guardian” was printed and first published. The trial court denied the motion, ruling that the libelous press release was first published in Tacloban. The Intermediate Appellate Court affirmed this decision, prompting the petition to the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

Whether the Regional Trial Court of Leyte acquired jurisdiction over the libel case, considering the rules on venue under Article 360 of the Revised Penal Code.

RULING

The Supreme Court granted the petition, reversing the appellate court’s decision. The legal logic centers on the proper application of Article 360 of the Revised Penal Code, which governs the venue of libel cases. For a public officer as complainant, the action may be filed in the province or city where he held office at the time of the offense. The Court found that respondent Tantuico undisputedly held office in Quezon City. Furthermore, the information and evidence established that the specific libelous publication in “The Guardian” was printed and first published in Quezon City, where its publishing house was located. The press release cited in the information was issued earlier, but the publication in “The Guardian” constituted a separate and distinct libelous act.
The Court emphasized that each separate publication of a libel is a distinct crime. Since the actionable publication for which Soriano was charged was the “The Guardian” issue, and it was first published in Quezon City with the complainant being a public officer stationed there, the mandatory rules of venue under Article 360 were not satisfied by filing in Leyte. The intent of the law is to prevent the harassment of media persons by allowing public officers to file suits in distant locations. Consequently, the venue was improperly laid in Leyte, and the trial court lacked jurisdiction. The Court directed the dismissal of the criminal case against petitioner Soriano.