SC convicts man of VAWC after abandoning spouse

MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court (SC) has convicted a man of violating the Anti-Violence Against Women and Children (VAWC) law after abandoning his spouse.

In a 14-page decision dated Nov. 13, 2023, the SC’s second division has affirmed the Court of Appeal’s (CA) decision to convict the petitioner with “modifications” after it committed psychological violence on his spouse which is a violation under Anti-VAWC law.

The petitioner, which the SC named as XXX, is to suffer the indeterminate penalty of imprisonment of two years, four months and one day of prision correccional to eight years and one day of prision mayor.

He is also ordered to pay a fine of P100,000.

In convicting XXX, the SC said that he caused psychological violence as he abandoned his spouse, AAA.

The case stemmed when XXX left AAA in October 2007 after a heated argument because AAA caught XXX kissing their house helper. 

AAA then said that the infidelity and the abandonment of AAA caused her to have emotional distress and anxiety as they contracted multiple loans to finance their business but were left to pay alone.

In his defense, XXX denied the affair but admitted that he and BBB are living together with a daughter.

The Regional Trial Court found XXX guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of violation of the Anti-VAWC law.

This prompted XXX to file a petition on the case before the CA. The appellate court, however, denied his petition as it found strong evidence of abandonment and marital infidelity which are forms of psychological violence.

The CA also found XXX’s defense weak compared to the weight of the testimonies of AAA.

XXX then filed a petition before the high court after the CA’s decision.

The SC said that the lower courts are right in finding XXX guilty of the Anti-VAWC law.

However, the high court pointed out that there is insufficient evidence that marital infidelity is the reason for the emotional distress of AAA, but rather more on the abandonment as evidence clearly showed it.

“Undoubtedly, a husband's abandonment of his wife falls under psychological violence and emotional abuse are penalized under Republic Act No. 9262, as such an action would naturally cause mental and emotional suffering to the wife, a person whom the husband is obliged to cohabit with, love, respect, and give support to,” the SC’s decision read.

However, in a dissenting opinion of Senior Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, he said that there is no deliberate intent of XXX to inflict emotional anguish on the accused’s wife or child which is a requirement to convict someone of Anti-VAWC law. 

“Apart from the act of abandonment, there must be proof of the accused's intent to inflict mental or emotional anguish on the abandoned spouse. Hurt feelings are not enough for conviction,” Leonen’s dissenting opinion read. 

“Without discounting the pain and emotional anguish AAA may have experienced when XXX left her, I disagree that XXX violated Section 5(i). A review of Republic Act No. 9262 reveals that a conviction for Section 5(i) violations requires deliberate intent to inflict emotional anguish on the accused's wife or their child. This deliberate intent is the element that the prosecution failed to establish in this case,” he added.