Espuelas (Mendoza) v. People, G.R. L-2990, 17 Dec.

1951

Facts
Appellant Espuelas was convicted in the CFI of Bohol of a violation of Art. 142 (inciting to sedition). The
conviction was affirmed by the CA.
Between 9-24 of June 1947, Espuelas had his picture taken making it appear that he was hanging
lifeless at the end of a piece of rope suspended from the limb of a tree.
He sent copies of these pictures to several newspapers and weeklies of general circulation throughout the
Philippines and abroad for their publication with a suicide note made to appear to be written by an
Alberto Reveniera (but was actually written by the accused).
The letter contained several lines saying that the fictitious Reveniera committed suicide due to his
displeasure with the administration of then President Roxas.
The letter also contained the line: Teach our children to burn pictures of Roxas if and when they come across
one. And accused that our government was infested with Nazis and Fascists.

Issue
WON acts committed by Espuelas constituted the crime of inciting to sedition. Yes.

Held
Writings which tend to overthrow or undermine the security of the government or to weaken the
confidence of the people in the government are against the public peace, and are criminal not only
because they tend to incite to a breach of the peace but because they are conducive to the
destruction of the very government itself. writings that undermine the government and weaken the trust
of the people in the government because they incite a breach of the peace and favorable to the destruction of
the government itself.
Constitutional right to freedom of speech does not confer an absolute right to speak or publish without
responsibility whatever one may choose.
The privilege of any citizen to criticize his government and government officials is not to be restrained but such
criticisms should be constructive specifying particular objectionable actuations by the government, and not
a contemptuous condemnation of the entire government.
The article in questions contained no particular actuation of the government being criticized only hate and
malevolence towards the Roxas administration.
When the use of irritating language centers not on persuading the readers but on creating disturbance,
the rationale of free speech can not apply and the speaker or writer' is removed from the protection of the
constitutional guaranty.
 The essence of seditious libel may be said to be its immediate tendency to stir up general discontent
to the pitch of illegal courses; that is to say to induce people to resort to illegal methods other than those
provided by the Constitution, in order to repress the evils [that] press upon their minds.
The letter by the accused also clearly suggested violent methods to free the government from the
administration of Roxas and his men. (Conveyed by his line mentioning that one reason for his committing
suicide was because he had no power to put all the Roxas people in power under juez de cuchillo or the Law of
the Knife.)

Ruling: Accused is convicted of violation of Art. 142 of the RPC.

Tuason, J. dissent:
Accused in his letter did not advocate the violent overthrowing of the government, but instead evinces an
intense feeling of devotion to the welfare of the country and its institutions.
In his statement to the effect that he was going to kill himself because he could not kill President Roxas and
the men who surrounded the Executive, it is not a necessary deduction that he wished others to do it.