Can Throwing a Drink Constitute Slander by Deed?

Introduction

Physical acts committed during a board meeting may expose an executive to criminal and civil liability when they publicly humiliate, dishonor, discredit, or hold another person up to contempt. A forceful act such as throwing a drink at a colleague may be treated as slander by deed if the circumstances show that it was intended, or objectively understood, as a public insult.

The charge does not arise merely because the conduct was discourteous or caused embarrassment. The prosecution must establish the statutory elements of the offense, identify the proper classification of the act, and prove the accused’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The presence of physical injury may also affect the proper charge.

What Is Slander by Deed?

Article 359 of the Revised Penal Code punishes a person who performs an act not covered by another crime against honor and which casts dishonor, discredit, or contempt upon another person. The provision distinguishes between a serious act and one that is not serious.

As amended by R.A. No. 10951, the penalty for serious slander by deed is arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period, or a fine ranging from P20,000 to P100,000. If the act is not serious, the penalty is arresto menor or a fine not exceeding P20,000.

The governing provision is Article 359 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Section 95 of R.A. No. 10951.

What Must the Prosecution Prove?

In Villanueva v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 160351, 10 April 2006, the Supreme Court identified the elements of slander by deed as follows:

• The offender performed an act not included in any other crime against honor.
• The act was performed in the presence of another person or persons.
• The act cast dishonor, discredit, or contempt upon the offended party.

The offense is generally described as libel committed through actions rather than words. Examples recognized in jurisprudence include slapping or spitting on a person in public, pushing and slapping someone to ridicule or shame that person, and other acts carrying an insulting meaning in the circumstances.

Can Throwing a Drink During a Meeting Qualify?

It can, depending on the facts. Throwing a drink at a colleague in front of directors, officers, employees, clients, or other attendees may communicate public contempt or humiliation. The setting is significant because an act witnessed by several people may be more damaging to the offended person’s reputation than the same act committed privately.

The prosecution should establish details such as the accused’s words and gestures, the distance and manner in which the drink was thrown, whether the act struck or stained the colleague, the reactions of those present, the parties’ positions, and whether the conduct was intended to ridicule, silence, or degrade the offended person.

A drink thrown accidentally, during an ordinary physical mishap, or without an insulting context would not ordinarily satisfy the elements of the offense. Criminal liability cannot rest solely on the fact that the offended person felt embarrassed.

How Is Seriousness Determined?

The classification of slander by deed as serious or not serious depends on the circumstances. In Villanueva, the Court considered the social standing of the offended party, the occasion, the relationship of the parties, and the manner in which the act was committed.

In Teodoro v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 103174, 21 February 1996, the Court treated a public slap as serious in view of the offended party’s social standing and the humiliating circumstances surrounding the incident. The Court emphasized that the seriousness of the act is not determined by the physical force alone.

For a boardroom incident, relevant circumstances may include:

• Whether the act occurred before a formal meeting or corporate deliberation.
• Whether senior officers, investors, clients, or employees witnessed it.
• Whether the offended person held a position comparable to or higher than the accused.
• Whether the act involved contact, staining, or other degrading consequences.
• Whether the accused used the act to ridicule the person during a disagreement.

Does Provocation Reduce Liability?

Provocation may affect the classification and penalty, but it does not automatically excuse the physical act. In Villanueva, the Court considered the offended party’s provocation and the heated nature of the exchange in finding that the act was less serious than comparable incidents involving an unprovoked slap or more degrading conduct.

Accordingly, insulting remarks made during a meeting may be relevant to the case. They do not, however, give an executive an unrestricted right to throw an object, touch a colleague, or publicly humiliate that person.

What If the Drink Causes Injury?

The proper charge may change if the act causes physical injury. Article 359 applies only when the act is not included and punished under another crime against honor or another applicable offense.

In People of the Philippines v. Lasala, G.R. No. L-12141, 31 May 1962, the Supreme Court held that when less serious physical injuries are inflicted with manifest intent to insult or offend, or under circumstances adding ignominy, the specific provision on less serious physical injuries applies instead of creating a complex crime of slander by deed and physical injuries under Article 48.

Thus, if a glass, bottle, or other container causes a cut, swelling, eye injury, or other bodily harm, the prosecutor must examine the medical findings and the specific provisions on physical injuries. Slander by deed should not be charged in a manner that disregards a more specific penal provision.

What Evidence Is Important?

A complaint should be supported by evidence showing both the physical act and its insulting public character. Useful evidence may include:

• Statements or affidavits from persons who attended the meeting.
• Boardroom security footage, videoconference recordings, or photographs.
• Meeting minutes and corporate incident reports.
• Photographs of stained clothing, damaged property, or visible injuries.
• Medical certificates and treatment records, when applicable.
• Messages or statements made by the accused before or after the incident.

The complainant should preserve the original recordings and identify who had custody of them. Witnesses should separately record what they personally saw and heard rather than merely repeat conclusions that the accused “committed slander.”

Can a Separate Civil Action Be Filed?

Yes. Article 33 of the Civil Code permits a civil action for damages in cases of defamation, fraud, and physical injuries. The civil action is entirely separate and distinct from the criminal action, proceeds independently of the criminal prosecution, and requires only proof by preponderance of evidence.

Depending on the evidence, the offended party may seek compensation for actual damages and other damages recognized by civil law, subject to proof and the applicable rules. The alleged public humiliation, emotional suffering, medical expenses, and damage to professional reputation should be documented.

What Should Corporate Officers Do?

Executives and board members should immediately avoid further confrontation, preserve relevant evidence, and ensure that the meeting record accurately reflects what occurred. The company should not alter minutes, suppress recordings, or pressure witnesses to adopt a preferred version of events.

The offended person should obtain medical attention when necessary, preserve clothing or objects involved in the incident, identify all witnesses, and consult counsel regarding the proper criminal and civil remedies. The accused should likewise obtain independent legal advice before giving a sworn statement or making public admissions.

Conclusion

Throwing a drink at a colleague during a board meeting may constitute slander by deed when it is a public act that casts dishonor, discredit, or contempt and is not more specifically punished under another provision of law. The seriousness of the offense depends on the surrounding circumstances, including the audience, the parties’ positions, the manner of the act, the presence of provocation, and any resulting injury.

Each incident should therefore be assessed through the complete factual record. Prompt preservation of recordings, meeting documents, witness accounts, photographs, and medical evidence is essential to determining the correct charge and supporting any related civil action.

About Nicolas and De Vega Law Offices

 Nicolas and de Vega Law Offices is a full-service law firm in the Philippines.  You may visit us at the 16th Flr., Suite 1607 AIC Burgundy Empire Tower, ADB Ave., Ortigas Center, 1605 Pasig City, Metro Manila, Philippines.  You may also call us at +632 84706126, +632 84706130, +632 84016392 or e-mail us at [email protected]. Visit our website https://ndvlaw.com.