PROTECTING OUR WOMEN & CHILDREN

Salient features of the Anti-Violence Against

Women and their Children Act of 2004

By: Rowena V. Guanzon and Howard M. Calleja1

Introduction

Melissa Martel stands out among thousands of women who suffered abuse
because she is probably the first woman who got a Temporary Protection Order
against her husband, whom she sued for Frustrated Parricide. The Family Court
of Makati City issued a Temporary Protection Order on May 4, 2004, a day after
Melissa’s petition. Without Republic Act No. 9262, otherwise known as the Anti-
Violence Against Women and their Children Act of 2004 (Anti-VAWCA), abused
women would not have such an immediate relief.

The data on violence against women and children is alarming. A World Bank
1993 study states that among women aged 15-44 worldwide, gender-based
violence accounts for more death and ill-health than cancer, traffic injuries and
malaria put together. Country-level studies of UNICEF (2000a) estimates that
there are 20 to 50 percent of women who have experienced domestic violence,
making it the most prevalent form of gender-based violence. The same is true in
the Philippines, where battering is the most prevalent, and rape second.
Recognizing the seriousness of the problem, Congress passed R.A. No. 9262
which took effect on March 27, 2004

The Anti-VAWCA is a result of nine years of advocacy of victim-survivors,

women’s rights and human rights advocates, non-government organizations, and
government organizations led by the National Commission on the Role of Filipino
Women. This law is also in compliance with the obligations of the Government of
the Philippines under the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against
Women (CEDAW) which the Senate ratified in 1981.

Who are protected; who are liable

As defined in Section 3, violence against women and their children refers

to “any act or series of acts committed by any person against a woman who is his
wife, former wife, or against a woman with whom the person has or had a sexual
or dating relationship, or with whom he has a common child, or against her child
whether legitimate or illegitimate, within or without the family abode, which result
1
Rowena V. Guanzon is a graduate of the U.P. College of Law (’84) and has a Master’s degree in Public
Administration from Harvard University. As consultant to Senate President Franklin Drilon she helped
draft R.A. 9262. Howard M. Calleja is a graduate of Ateneo de Manila University College of Law (’94)
and has a Master of Laws from Duke University. The authors are counsel for Melissa Martel.

1
in or is likely to result in physical, sexual, psychological harm or suffering, or
economic abuse including threats of such acts, battery, assault, coercion,
harassment or arbitrary deprivation of liberty.”

The law protects women and their children only and does not include men. It
also protects women who are or were in lesbian relationships. The important
elements that must be present are a) any of the punishable acts under Section 5,
and b) the woman is or was married to the offender or has a common child with
him, or she has or had a sexual or dating relationship with the offender. Since
sexual relations refer to a single act, even prostituted women or those who bore
the child of their rapists can avail of the remedies under the law.

Children of battered women are protected under the law, which expands the
definition of “children” as those below eighteen (18) years of age or older but are
incapable of taking care of themselves as defined under Republic Act No. 7610
and includes not only the biological children of the victim but also other children
under her care.

Punishable acts

Among the punishable acts under Section 5 are: a) causing, attempting or

threatening physical harm to the woman or her child; b) placing the woman or her
child in fear of imminent physical harm, c) acts committed with the purpose or
effect of controlling or restricting the woman’s or her child’s movement or conduct
such as threatening to deprive or actually depriving the woman or her child of
custody to her/his family; or depriving or threatening to deprive the woman or her
children of financial support legally due her or her family, or deliberately providing
the woman’s children insufficient financial support; or preventing the woman in
engaging in any legitimate profession, occupation, business or activity; or
controlling the victim’s own money or properties, or solely controlling the conjugal
or common money, or properties; d) inflicting or threatening to inflict physical
harm on oneself for the purpose of controlling her actions or decisions; e)
causing or attempting to cause the woman or her child to engage in any sexual
activity which does not constitute rape, by force or threat of force, physical harm,
or through intimidation directed against the woman or her child or her/his
immediate family; f) stalking, g) causing mental or emotional anguish, public
ridicule or humiliation to the woman or her child, including, but not limited to,
repeated verbal and emotional abuse, and denial of financial support or custody
of minor children of access to the woman’s child/children.

The other salient features of this law are: a) physical injuries are punishable by
one degree higher than the penalties under the Revised Penal Code; b) marital
infidelity, as well as acts or omissions causing or likely to cause mental or
emotional suffering such as repeated verbal abuse or humiliation fall under
psychological violence; c) economic abuse is now a crime, or those acts that

2
make or attempt to make a woman financially dependent which includes,
withdrawal of financial support, preventing the victim from engaging in any
legitimate profession, occupation, business or activity, deprivation or threat of
deprivation of financial resources, destroying household property and controlling
the victim’s own money or property or the conjugal money or property; and d)
battered woman syndrome is a justifying circumstance. The latter is a major
improvement from the ruling in People vs. Genosa, where the Supreme Court
held that battered wife syndrome is a mitigating circumstance, which entitles the
accused to a reduction of the penalty.

Remedies

The remedies available to the victims are a) a Barangay Protection Order,

b) civil action or petition for Temporary and/or Permanent Protection Order and c)
criminal action for violation of R.A.9262.

A Barangay Protection Order (BPO) refers to order issued by the Punong

Barangay or when he or she is unavailable, by any kagawad, ordering the
perpetrator to desist from committing physical harm or threat of physical harm
against the victim. It is effective for fifteen (15) days and is not extendible.

A Protection Order is defined in Section 8, it is “an order issued under this Act for
the purpose of preventing further acts of violence against a woman or her child
and granting other necessary relief. The relief granted under a protection order
should serve the purpose of safeguarding the victim from further harm,
minimizing any disruption in the victim’s daily life, and facilitating the opportunity
and ability of the victim to independently regain control over her life.” The acts
referred to in Section 8 are all the punishable acts under Section 5 of the law,
unlike a BPO, which covers only physical harm or threat of physical harm. The
venue for Protection Orders is the Family Court where the woman resides, or if
there is no Family Court, in the Regional Trial Court, Metropolitan Trial Court,
Municipal Trial Court or Municipal Circuit Court. The venue for criminal actions is
The Regional Trial Court designated as a Family Court. In the absence of such
court in the place where the offense was committed, the case shall be filed in the
Regional Trial Court where the crime or any of its elements was committed at the
option of the compliant.
Thus, the victim can file a Petition for Temporary and Permanent Protection
Order and the court must issue a Temporary Protection Order (TPO) on the
same day that the petition was filed, after an ex parte determination, without
notice to the respondent. After the respondent is given time to answer,
adversarial hearings will be conducted without delay. The TPO is effective for 30
days, extendible until a decision is rendered on whether the Protection Order
should be made permanent or not.

3
 A TPO grants the woman or her child immediate or emergency relief and
includes an order for the respondent to: a) stay away from the petitioner and
designated places; b) leave the residence regardless of ownership; c) deliver to
the petitioner a vehicle, e) surrender firearms; and f) put up a bond to keep the
peace. In the case of Martel vs. Martel, the TPO ordered the respondent to put
up a cash2 bond of Ten Million Pesos and gave temporary custody and support
of minor children to the petitioner as well as support for her.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court is in the process of formulating the Rules of Court

specifically for actions involving acts of violence against women and their
children. In the meantime, among the issues that emerge or could emerge
include a) whether or not a Temporary Protection Order may be appealed by
Certiorari; b) whether or not a Temporary Protection Order may be issued
against a Temporary Restraining Order; and c) whether or not proof of unequal
power relations will be required by the courts in cases of abuse committed by a
woman against another woman in lesbian relationships. Unlike cases where a
man is a respondent, the law cannot assume that there exists an unequal power
relationship between two women.

Another important issue which emerged in Martel vs. Martel is whether or not the
Anti-VAWC is unconstitutional because it protects women only and excludes
men, and whether or not it is unconstitutional because a Temporary Protection
Order being ex parte deprives the respondent of his right to due process of law.

The Anti-VAWCA protects women from violence, which is mainly due to their
unequal power relationships with men. But even with these legal remedies,
women continue to suffer disadvantages in our judicial system due to lack of
resources and the lack of gender sensitivity of many judges and prosecutors.
Government and non-government organizations, judges and lawyers must
contribute to efforts to eliminate gender discrimination in our judicial system. All
government agencies concerned must not only give immediate relief and support
to victims but must also undertake sustainable programs to eliminate violence
against women and their children.

2
The Court of Appeals issued a Temporary Restraining Order and modified the cash bond to surety bond.