26/12/2025
https://www.facebook.com/share/19tuZcugdH/
The has laid down guideposts for proving who owns or controls a social media account in criminal cases.
In a Decision written by Associate Justice Ramon Paul L. Hernando, the SCโs First Division affirmed the conviction of an individual (###) for committing psychological violence under Section 5 (i) of the ๐๐ฏ๐ต๐ช-๐๐ช๐ฐ๐ญ๐ฆ๐ฏ๐ค๐ฆ ๐๐จ๐ข๐ช๐ฏ๐ด๐ต ๐๐ฐ๐ฎ๐ฆ๐ฏ ๐ข๐ฏ๐ฅ ๐๐ฉ๐ฆ๐ช๐ณ ๐๐ฉ๐ช๐ญ๐ฅ๐ณ๐ฆ๐ฏ (๐๐ฏ๐ต๐ช-๐๐๐๐) ๐๐ค๐ต against his ex-girlfriend (AAA) by posting derogatory statements about her on ๐๐ข๐ค๐ฆ๐ฃ๐ฐ๐ฐ๐ฌ.
The SC sentenced ### to up to eight years in prison, imposed a PHP 100,000 fine, and ordered ### to undergo psychological counseling or psychiatric treatment.
The SC stressed that in criminal cases, the prosecution must prove not only the elements of the crime but also the identity of the offender.
It explained that for crimes committed through social media, the basic features of the platform such as ๐๐ข๐ค๐ฆ๐ฃ๐ฐ๐ฐ๐ฌ, must be considered.
Noting that ๐๐ข๐ค๐ฆ๐ฃ๐ฐ๐ฐ๐ฌ is widely used in the Philippines, the SC held that a ๐๐ข๐ค๐ฆ๐ฃ๐ฐ๐ฐ๐ฌ account can easily be created by anyone claiming to be at least 13 years old with an email address or mobile number.
Once an account is created, the user can add friends, exchange private messages, and post statements, photos, or videos visible to others depending on the userโs privacy settings. Fake or dummy accounts can easily spread, enabling disinformation, identity theft, or crimes.
Given this, the SC ruled that guideposts are necessary to establish who owns or controls a social media account. It said the following must be shown to prove ownership or access:
1. Admission of ownership or authorship;
2. Being seen accessing the account or composing the post;
3. Containing information known only to the offender or a few people;
4. Language consistent with the offenderโs characteristics;
5. Records from the internet service provider, telecommunications company, or social media site, and results from device forensic analysis showing geolocation features, and other attributes linking the account to the offender;
6. Acts consistent with previous posts; or
7. Other instances showing ownership, access, or authorship.
Applying these, the SC found that several factors proved ### wrote the ๐๐ข๐ค๐ฆ๐ฃ๐ฐ๐ฐ๐ฌ post. The account name bore his full name, and the profile photo showed him with his child from his current live-in partner.
AAAโs sister had also received messages from the same account for years.
Read the full text of the Press Release at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=158535.
Read the full text of the Decision at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=158446.
Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIOโs Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/.
