SOLICITOR GENERAL ASKS SUPREME COURT TO ACQUIT MARIA RESSA IN CYBER LIBEL CASE, CITING PRESCRIPTION

The government's own lawyer is now asking for Ressa's acquittal.

In a manifestation and motion dated March 6 and released on Tuesday, March 10, Solicitor General Darlene Berberabe recommended that the Supreme Court overturn the cyber libel conviction of Rappler CEO and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Maria Ressa and former Rappler researcher Reynaldo Santos Jr.

The filing's language was unambiguous.

"Only lawful disposition is acquittal," the OSG stated.

THE LEGAL ARGUMENT

The case against Ressa and Santos stems from an investigative article published on Rappler in May 2012. The piece cited intelligence reports linking businessman Wilfredo Keng to alleged criminal activity, including drug trafficking and human trafficking. The same article noted Keng's loan of an SUV to the late Chief Justice Renato Corona.

In February 2014, Rappler updated the article to correct a typographical error. That correction was later treated by the trial court as a "republication," which prosecutors used to argue the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, enacted months after the original publication, could apply retroactively.

Keng filed a complaint with the National Bureau of Investigation in 2017. The NBI forwarded the complaint to the Department of Justice, which filed the cyber libel case in a Manila Regional Trial Court in 2019.

In June 2020, Judge Rainelda Estacio-Montesa convicted Ressa and Santos of cyber libel, sentencing them to imprisonment ranging from six months and one day to six years, and ordering them to pay Keng P400,000 in damages. Rappler as a company was acquitted.

The Court of Appeals upheld the conviction on July 7, 2022. The case was then elevated to the Supreme Court.

WHAT CHANGED: THE CAUSING RULING

The pivot point in the OSG's filing is a Supreme Court decision from October 11, 2023: Causing v. People (G.R. No. 258524).

In that case, the Court ruled that cyber libel under Section 4(c)(4) of the Cybercrime Prevention Act is not a new crime. It is the same offense of libel under the Revised Penal Code, committed through a computer system. The penalty is different. The crime is the same.

Because the crime is the same, the prescriptive period for libel under Article 90 of the Revised Penal Code applies. That period is one year.

The trial court and the Court of Appeals had applied Act No. 3326, a 1926 statute governing prescription for special laws, and concluded the prescriptive period for cyber libel was 12 years. The Causing ruling overturned that interpretation.

Berberabe's manifestation accepted the Causing decision and applied it to the Ressa case. The criminal charges were filed in 2019 for an article that, even by the prosecution's own timeline, was last published in 2014. That is five years. One year was the limit.

"Prescription establishes the legal timeframe within which criminal charges must be initiated," the OSG stated. "Once this period expires, the State loses the right to prosecute."

THE OSG'S ROLE AND WHAT IT SAID

The Office of the Solicitor General is the government's legal representative in the Supreme Court. In criminal cases, it acts as the "People's Tribune," a role the OSG described in its filing as extending beyond just seeking convictions.

"In the faithful discharge of her duties as an officer of the court and as the People's Tribune, the Solicitor General most respectfully recommends the acquittal of petitioners on the basis of prescription," Berberabe's filing read.

The OSG emphasized that it was not picking sides on the underlying facts of the libel charge. It was acknowledging a legal reality: the Supreme Court's own ruling made prosecution of the case time-barred.

"Upon a considered rethinking of the demand to balance the protection of reputation, privacy, and dignity with the constitutionally guaranteed rights and liberties, the OSG now accepts the Court's judgment in Causing and its consequent application to the instant case."

CONTEXT: RESSA AND THE DUTERTE-ERA CASES

The cyber libel conviction was one of 23 legal cases filed against Ressa, Santos, and Rappler since 2018, during the administration of former President Rodrigo Duterte, according to the Hold the Line Coalition. Rappler had published extensive critical coverage of Duterte's drug war and governance.

The tax evasion cases are done. In January 2023, the Court of Tax Appeals acquitted Ressa and Rappler Holdings Corp. in four tax cases. In September 2023, a Regional Trial Court dismissed the fifth and final tax charge. In June 2025, a Filipino court acquitted Ressa and five Rappler directors of violating the Anti-Dummy Law, a charge filed in 2018 alleging foreign ownership violations.

The cyber libel conviction is the last active criminal case against Ressa. If the Supreme Court applies the Causing ruling, she walks free. If it does not, she faces up to six years in prison.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT

The Supreme Court is not bound by the OSG's recommendation. But the government's own legal arm is now telling the Court that its client, the People of the Philippines, has no right to pursue this case.

The International Bar Association's Human Rights Institute was accepted as amicus curiae in the case in April 2024. Three independent expert reports commissioned by the IBAHRI concluded the Cybercrime Prevention Act had been misapplied against Ressa, according to the organization.

The timeline for the Court's decision has not been announced.