Previous 6 / 6 Next

Sereno, C.J., (Chairperson), Leonardo-De Castro, Del Castillo, and Jardeleza, JJ., concur. [*] Section 44 of Republic Act No. 9262 (Anti Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004) requires the confidentiality of all records pertaining to cases of violence against women and their children. Per said section, all public officers and employees are prohibited from publishing or causing to be published in any format the name and other identifying information of a victim or an immediate family member. The penalty of one (1) year imprisonment and a fine of not more than Five Hundred Thousand pesos (P500,000.00) shall be imposed upon those who violate the provision. Pursuant thereto, in the courts' promulgation of decisions, final resolutions and/or final orders, the names of women and children victims shall be replaced by fictitious initials, and their personal circumstances or any information, which tend to identify them, shall likewise not be disclosed. [1] AN ACT DEFINING VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND THEIR CHILDREN, PROVIDING FOR PROTECTIVE MEASURES FOR VICTIMS, PRESCRIBING PENALTIES THEREFORE, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. Approved on March 8, 2004. [2] Rollo, pp. 19-45. [3] Rendered by Presiding Judge Maria Rowena Modesto-San Pedro; id. at 49-52. [4] Id. at 53. [5] Id. at 4 and 26. [6] Id. at 57. [7] Id. at 57-58. [8] Id. at 58-59. [9] Id. at 26. [10] Id. at 27. [11] Id. at 49. [12] Id. at 50-51. [13] Id. at 154-160. [14] Id. at 3-6. [15] Id. at 17-A. [16] Id. at 15-17. [17] 775 Phil. 192 (2015). [18] Id. at 215-216. [19] Morillo v. People, et al., supra. [20] Id. at 212, citing People v. Salico, 84 Phil. 722, 732-733 (1949). [21] Id. at 211. [22] Del Socorro v. Van Wilsem, 749 Phil. 823,832 (2014), citing Rep. of the Phils., et al. v. Sunvar Realty Development Corp., 688 Phil. 616, 630 (2012). [23] Id. at 832. [24] Morillo v. People, et al., supra. [25] Id. at 214. [26] Rollo, p. 50. [27] Id. at 51. [28] Id. at 52. [29] < https://psa.gov.ph/content/total-number-ofws-estimated-22-million-results-2016-surveyoverseas-filipinos > (visited October 30, 2017). [30] Garcia v. Judge Drilon, et al., 712 Phil. 44, 94 (2013). [31] 761 Phil. 356 (2015). [32] Id. at 372-376. [33] 680 Phil. 368 (2012). [34] Id. at 380, citing Isip v. People, 552 Phil. 786, 801-802 (2007). [35] Tuzon v. Judge Cruz, 160 Phil. 925, 929 (1975). [36] Morillo v. People, supra note 17, at 206.

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

AAA v. BBB

Jurisprudence

Case number: G.R. No. 212448

Division: PH Supreme Court First Division

Date of decision: Ene 11, 2018

Year of decision: 2018

GBV Case Type

Anti-Violence Against Women and their Children Act of 2004 (VAWC)

Nature of the case: The victim sought direct recourse to the Supreme Court via Rule 45 on a pure question of law. She posits that R.A. No. 9262 is in danger of becoming transmogrified into a weak, wobbly, and worthless law because with the RTC’s ruling, it is as if husbands of Filipino women have been given license to enter into extra-marital affairs without fear of any consequence, as long as they are carried out abroad. In the main, the victim argues that mental and emotional anguish is an essential element of the offense charged against BBB, which is experienced by her wherever she goes, and not only in Singapore where the extra-marital affair takes place; thus, the RTC of Pasig City where she resides can take cognizance of the case. The Court ruled that contrary to the interpretation of the RTC, what R.A. No. 9262 criminalizes is not the marital infidelity per se but the psychological violence causing mental or emotional suffering on the wife. The complaint for psychological abuse under R.A. No. 9262 may even be filed within the Philippines if the illicit relationship is conducted abroad. The Court further ruled that even if the alleged extra¬ marital affair causing the offended wife mental and emotional anguish is committed abroad, the same does not place a prosecution under R.A. No. 9262 absolutely beyond the reach of Philippine courts.

Summary of outcome: The complaint for psychological abuse under R.A. No. 9262 may even be filed within the Philippines if the illicit relationship is conducted abroad. The Court further ruled that even if the alleged extra¬ marital affair causing the offended wife mental and emotional anguish is committed abroad, the same does not place a prosecution under R.A. No. 9262 absolutely beyond the reach of Philippine courts. It is necessary, for Philippine courts to have jurisdiction when the abusive conduct or act of violence under Section 5(i) of R.A. No. 9262 in relation to Section 3(a), Paragraph (C) was committed outside Philippine territory, that the victim be a resident of the place where the complaint is filed in view of the anguish suffered being a material element of the offense. In the present scenario, the offended wife and children of respondent husband are residents of Pasig City since March of 2010. Hence, the RTC of Pasig City may exercise jurisdiction over the case.

Observatory: Gender-Based Violence

Affected Sector

Women

Ponente: TIJAM, J.

Long title: AAA,PETITIONER, V. BBB,RESPONDENT.

Geolocation 1

Latitude: 14.559777

Longitude: 121.081229

: Geolocation 1

Primary Documents

AAA V. BBB.pdf
English
Download View

Commission on Human Rights

Select target paragraph3

AAA v. BBB

Primary Documents

Notifications