between me and my friend ...) This was supported by the extracts of the conversation via the WhatsApp, which is among the contents of the highlighted investigation file n /2 which shows the phrase mentioned by the appellant and referred to above, and it is in a private conversation via the WhatsApp with a girl named Majdoleen. By applying the rule of law to the above-mentioned incident, our court finds that the crime of slander has been defined by the legislator in Article 188/1 of the Penal Code No. 16 of 1960 as (1) slander is the assignment of a specific matter to a person, even in the context of doubt and questioning, that would undermine his honour and dignity, or Exposing him to people’s hatred and contempt, whether that article is a crime that requires punishment or not (while Article 189 of the same law clarified the forms in which the act of slander and slander takes place until the punishment for that act takes place, which is either in person in front of the victim or in a place where other people can That they hear it or in absentia during a meeting with many people collectively or individually, or that the slander takes place in writing and conditional on what is published and broadcast among people or distributed to a group of them, or what is sent to the victim of open offices, postcards, and the last image that it falls through publications by means of newspapers or any other type of publications and publishing media. The legislator has set out a special provision for the punishment of slander directed at the National Assembly, the official bodies of the state, the courts, public administrations, the military, or any employee, in Article 191 of the same Penal Code, meaning that this article is read together with Articles 188 and 189 of the Penal Code. Accordingly, since the phrases that the appellant sent through the WhatsApp to the girl are merely written messages during a private conversation, which has not been published and disseminated among people or distributed to them as required by Article 3/189 of the Penal Code, which negates the element of publicity with the offense to which these messages and conversations are not criminalized. The Penal Code does not extend to the appellant’s act referred to above by criminalizing the matter that necessitates declaring the appellant’s innocence of the charge of which he was convicted, contrary to what the Court of First Instance went to, which makes the aforementioned reasons of appeal affect the appealed judgment without the need to examine the rest grounds of appeal. So, Pursuant to the provisions of Article 336 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Court decided to accept the appeal as a subject matter, cancel the appealed judgment, and declare the appellant’s innocence from the charge of slander against the public authority, contrary to Article 191 of the Penal Code, in accordance with Article 45 of Decree-Law No. 10 of 2018 regarding crimes because the act does not constitute a crime and does not require punishment. A judgment in attendance was issued and read publicly in the name of the Palestinian Arab people, and understood in 10/5/2022.