"One of man's most prized possessions is his integrity. There lies a thin line between [c]riticism and outright [d]efamation. When one makes commentaries about the other's performance of official duties, the criticism is considered [constructive], then aimed for the betterment of his or her service to the public.
It is thus, a continuing duty on the part of the public officer to make room for improvement on the basis of this [c]onstructive criticism in as much as it is [imperative] on the part of the general public to make the necessary commentaries should they see any lapses on the part of the public officer.
Note |
"It has been held that a public officer should not be too onion-skinned and should be tolerant of criticism. The doctrine, nevertheless, would [only apply if] the defamatory statement was uttered in connection with the public officer’s duty.(G.R. No. 212623 January 11, 2016)" (Emphasis ours)
In [t]his case, [however], the criticism was more (destructive) than [c]onstructive and, worse, it was directed towards the personal relations of the parties."
✍️⚖️JOSE CATRAL MENDOZA
Comments