4. Moreover, despite the passage of the MCW in 2009, the provision that “[a]ny female
commissioned officer or enlisted woman who contracts marriage […] while in the active
service shall be automatically separated unless she has, at that time of said marriage,
already completed at least three (3) years of continuous active military service in the Armed
Forces of the Philippines;”14 remains in place.
5. The Committee may wish to urge the State Party to strictly implement its obligation to
amend and, if necessary, repeal, all legislation that contravenes the MCW and the
Convention.
On strengthening of the national machinery for the advancement of women (para. 14) and
access to justice and legal complaints mechanisms (See CEDAW/C/PHL/7-8, para. 46)
6. The Magna Carta of Women designates the Philippine Commission on Women (“PCW”)
as “the primary policy-making and coordinating body of the women and gender equality
concerns” and “the overall monitoring body […] to ensure the implementation of [the
MCW].”15
7. The MCW also designates the CHRP as the country’s Gender Ombud and sharing the
monitoring function with the PCW.16 The Commission must work, through its Women’s
Human Rights Center,17 towards facilitating access to justice18 and assist in the filing of
cases.19
8. Since the passage of the Magna Carta of Women in 2009, the CHRP has rendered 2,394
instances of legal assistance and/or investigation in response to human rights violatio ns
against women. Specific to violations of the MCW, it has received 49 complaints and
requests for assistance and resolved 10 complaints for violation. In 2015, it developed
and published the gender ombud guidelines, including its protocols.
9. However, findings of the CHRP regarding MCW violations are merely
recommendatory on the Civil Service Commission and/or the Department of the Interior
and Local Government.20 Resolutions of the Commission recommending the filing of
administrative or criminal charges against erring individuals are referred to appropriate
agencies for action. It has been the Commission’s experience that these agencies fail to
take action on these resolutions or, worse, refer the case back to the Commission.
10. The Committee may wish to recommend that the State Party pass amendatory legisla tio n
that would make the findings of the CHRP binding on the government agency tasked with
meting out penalties for violations of the MCW.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
See Presidential Decree No. 1910 (March 22, 1984), sec. 1.
See MCW, Republic Act. No. 9710 (August 14, 2009), sec. 38.
Id., sec. 39(a).
See id., sec. 39(b).
Id., sec. 39(c).
Id., 39(d).
Id., sec. 41. See also MCW, Republic Act. No. 9710 (August 14, 2009), sec. 39(e).
Page 3 of 11