VAWC CASES (DIGEST)

1. ECONOMIC ABUSE

A. G.R. No. 223477, February 14, 2018

CELSO M.F.L. MELGAR, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

FACTS:
That on or about the month of August, 2001 and subsequent thereto, in the City of
Cebu, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused,
having the means and capacity to give financial support, with deliberate intent, did then
and there commit acts of economic abuse against one [AAA,6] and her minor son, [BBB]
(12 years old), by depriving them of financial support, which caused mental or emotional
anguish, public ridicule or humiliation, to AAA and her son.

After arraignment wherein Melgar pleaded not guilty to the charge against him, he
and AAA entered into a compromise agreement8 on the civil aspect of the case. After the
RTC's approval of the compromise agreement on June 24, 2010, the criminal aspect of the
case was provisionally dismissed with Melgar's conformity. However, one (1) year later,
or on June 24, 2011, the prosecution moved to set aside the compromise agreement and to
revive the criminal action, on the ground that Melgar sold the property, which was
supposed to, among others, answer for the support-in-arrears of his son, BBB, from 2001
to 2010 pursuant to their compromise agreement. Consequently, the RTC revived the
criminal aspect of the case and allowed the prosecution to present its evidence.

ISSUE:
WHETHER OR NOT THE CA CORRECTLY UPHELD MELGAR'S
CONVICTION FOR VIOLATION OF SECTION 5 (E) OF RA 9262.

HELD:

YES.

The said law defines economic abuse as follows:

Section 3. Definition of Terms. - x x x.

D. "Economic abuse" refers to acts that make or attempt to make a woman financially
dependent which includes, but is not limited to the following:

1. withdrawal of financial support or preventing the victim from engaging in any legitimate
profession, occupation, business or activity, except in cases wherein the other
spouse/partner objects on valid, serious and moral grounds as defined in Article 73 of the
Family Code;

2. deprivation or threat of deprivation of financial resources and the right to the use and
enjoyment of the conjugal, community or property owned in common;

3. destroying household property;

4. controlling the victim's own money or properties or solely controlling the conjugal
money or properties.
xxxx
As may be gathered from the foregoing, "economic abuse" may include the deprivation of
support of a common child of the man-accused and the woman-victim, whether such
common child is legitimate or not.26 This specific act is penalized by Section 5 (e) of RA
9262, pertinent portions of which read:
Section 5. Acts of Violence Against Women and Their Children. - The crime of violence
against women and their children is committed through any of the following acts:
xxxx

(e) Attempting to compel or compelling the woman or her child to engage

in conduct which the woman or her child has the right to desist from or
to desist from conduct which the woman or her child has the right to
engage in, or attempting to restrict or restricting the woman's or her
child's freedom of movement or conduct by force or threat of force,
physical or other harm or threat of physical or other hann, or intimidation
directed against the woman or child. This shall include, but not limited
to, the following acts committed with the purpose or effect of controlling
or restricting the woman's or her child's movement or conduct:

xxxx

(2) 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;

(3) Depriving or threatening to deprive the woman or her child

of a legal right;

xxxx

Under this provision, the deprivation or denial of financial support to the child is considered
an act of violence against women and children.27 Notably, case law instructs that the act of
denying support to a child is a continuing offense.28

In this case, the courts a quo correctly found that all the elements of violation of Section 5
(e) of RA 9262 are present, as it was established that: (a) Melgar and AAA had a romantic
relationship, resulting in BBB's birth; (b) Melgar freely acknowledged his paternity over
BBB; (c) Melgar had failed to provide BBB support ever since the latter was just a year
old; and (d) his intent of not supporting BBB was made more apparent when he sold to a
third party his property which was supposed to answer for, among others, his support-in-
arrears to BBB. Thus, the Court finds no reason to deviate from the factual findings of the
trial court, as affirmed by the CA, as there is no indication that it overlooked,
misunderstood or misapplied the surrounding facts and circumstances of the case. In fact,
the trial court was in the best position to assess and detennine the credibility of the
witnesses presented by both parties and, hence, due deference should be accorded to the
same.29
B. G.R. No. 229762, November 28, 2018
AAA, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

FACTS:

That on or about February 17, 2010 in the City of [XXX],5 Philippines, and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused, did then and there willfully,
unlawfully and feloniously commit acts of violence against his wife [BBB], 6 as follows:
by taking their conjugal properties and bring[ing] them to the house of his mother without
regard to her feelings and against her will which caused mental, emotional anguish to his
legal wife [BBB].

Contrary to and in violation of Section 5(i) of Republic Act No. 9262 otherwise known as
the Anti-Violence against women and their Children Act of 2004.

Private complainant testified that she and petitioner are husband and wife, then being
married for 19 years. They have two children, one of whom was witness CCC. Petitioner
worked abroad while private complainant was a full-time housewife. Petitioner sent money
to private complainant and the children. From this money, private complainant was able to
buy household items: television set, refrigerator, karaoke, washing machine, dining table,
and "sleeprite" bed. The family lived in a house owned by petitioner's mother, while
petitioner's parents lived in a separate house in the same city.

On February 17, 2010, petitioner and private complainant had a heated argument regarding
private complainant's supposed indebtedness, to which the family's television set and
refrigerator were used as collateral. Private complainant said she incurred the debt to pay
her siblings the money she borrowed in relation to petitioner's applications for work.
Petitioner hauled the family's television set, refrigerator, divider, " sleeprite" bed, and
dining table to his parents' house. Private complainant tried to stop him but petitioner "
mauled" her.
ISSUE:
WHETHER THE ACT OF THE PETITIONER CONSTITUTES
EMOTIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL ABUSE.
HELD:
The information charges petitioner of violating Sec. 5(i) of R.A. No. 9262, which states:

SECTION 5. Acts of Violence Against Women and Their Children. – The crime of
violence against women and their children is committed through any of the following
acts:
xxxx

(i) 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 or denial of access to the woman's
child/children.

In Dinamling v. People of the Philippines,11 the Court enumerated the elements that must
be present for the conviction of an accused, viz:
 (1) The offended party is a woman and/or her child or children;

(2) The woman is either the wife or former wife of the offender, or is a woman with whom the
offender has or had a sexual or dating relationship, or is a woman with whom such
offender has a common child. As for the woman's child or children, they may be legitimate
or illegitimate, or living within or without the family abode;

(3) The offender causes on the woman and/or child mental or emotional anguish; and

(4) The anguish is caused through acts of public ridicule or humiliation, repeated verbal and
emotional abuse, denial of financial support or custody of minor children or access to the
children or similar such acts or omissions.12 (Citations omitted)

The Court will address the final two elements as the first two are undoubtedly present in
this case. The cited section has been ruled to penalize certain forms of psychological
violence. As defined in law, psychological violence refers to acts or omissions causing or
likely to cause mental or emotional suffering to the victim.13 Psychological violence is the
means employed by the perpetrator, while mental or emotional anguish is the effect caused
upon or the damage sustained by the offended party. To establish this as an element, it is
necessary to show proof of commission of any of the acts enumerated in Section 5(i). To
establish mental or emotional anguish, the testimony of the victim must be presented, as
these experiences are personal to the party.
The trial court observed that private complainant was "so hurt and humiliated."
Augmenting the pain brought about by the situation was that petitioner "abandoned her and
their children."16 The CA, for its part, remarked that petitioner admitted to pushing private
complainant. CCC also testified that the incident was not isolated, as similar arguments
and even physical abuse had already happened between them.17 Evidently, the above
portions of private complainant's testimony, as well as the other statements made by private
complainant mentioned in the CA and RTC decisions, all prove petitioner had caused
mental and emotional anguish upon private complainant.

Finally, private complainant's anguish was clearly caused by acts of petitioner parallel to
those provided by the law. Private complainant's suffering was due to petitioner's denying
the use of the appliances and furniture commonly owned by the family. Anguish causes
distress to someone, or makes someone suffer intense pain or sorrow.18 It is doubtless that
private complainant, by her own recount of the situation, was thoroughly distressed by
petitioner's acts, contrary to petitioner's averments.
2. PSYCHOLOGICAL/ MENTAL ABUSE
A. G.R. No. 212448 January 11, 2018
AAA, Petitioner vs BBB, Respondent
FACTS:
Petitioner AAA and BBB were married on August 1, 2006 in Quezon City. Their union
produced two children: CCC was born on March 4, 2007 and DDD on October 1, 2009.6
In May of 2007, BBB started working in Singapore as a chef, where he acquired permanent
resident status in September of 2008. This petition nonetheless indicates his address to be in
Quezon City where his parents reside and where AAA also resided from the time they were married
until March of 2010, when AAA and their children moved back to her parents' house in Pasig
City.7
AAA claimed, albeit not reflected in the Information, that BBB sent little to no financial
support, and only sporadically. This allegedly compelled her to fly extra hours and take on
additional jobs to augment her income as a flight attendant. There were also allegations of virtual
abandonment, mistreatment of her and their son CCC, and physical and sexual violence. To make
matters worse, BBB supposedly started having an affair with a Singaporean woman named Lisel
Mok with whom he allegedly has been living in Singapore. Things came to a head on April 19,
2011 when AAA and BBB had a violent altercation at a hotel room in Singapore during her visit
with their kids.8 As can be gathered from the earlier cited Information, despite the claims of varied
forms of abuses, the investigating prosecutor found sufficient basis to charge BBB with causing
AAA mental and emotional anguish through his alleged marital infidelity.
ISSUE:
Whether or not this Court should entertain the petition. How R.A. No. 9262 should be applied in
a question of territorial jurisdiction over a case of psychological abuse brought against the husband
when such is allegedly caused by marital infidelity carried on abroad.

HELD:
There is merit in the petition.
"Physical violence is only the most visible form of abuse. Psychological abuse, particularly
forced social and economic isolation of women, is also common."30 In this regard, Section 3 of
R.A. No. 9262 made it a point to encompass in a non-limiting manner the various forms of violence
that may be committed against women and their children:
Sec. 3. Definition of Terms. - As used in this Act, (a) "Violence against women and their
children" refers to any act or a 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 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. It includes, but is not limited to,
the following acts:
A. "Physical Violence" refers to acts that include bodily or physical harm;
B. "Sexual violence" refers to an act which is sexual in nature, committed against a woman or her
child. It includes, but is not limited to:
xxxx
C. "Psychological violence" refers to acts or omissions causing or likely to cause mental or
emotional suffering of the victim such as but not limited to intimidation, harassment, stalking,
damage to property, public ridicule or humiliation, repeated verbal abuse and marital infidelity. It
includes causing or allowing the victim to witness the physical, sexual or psychological abuse of
a member of the family to which the victim belongs, or to witness pornography in any form or to
witness abusive injury to pets or to unlawful or .unwanted deprivation of the right to custody and/or
visitation of common children.
D. "Economic abuse" refers to acts that make or attempt to make a woman financially dependent
which includes, but is not limited to the following:
xxxx
As jurisdiction of a court over the criminal case is determined by the allegations in the complaint
or information, threshing out the essential elements of psychological abuse under R.A. No. 9262
is crucial. In Dinamling v. People,31 this Court already had occasion to enumerate the elements of
psychological violence under Section 5(i) of R.A. No. 9262, as follows:
Section 5. Acts of Violence Against Women and Their Children. - The crime of violence against
women and their children is committed through any of the following acts:
xxxx
(i) 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 or access to the woman's child/children.
From the aforequoted Section 5(i), in relation to other sections of R[.]A[.] No. 9262, the elements
of the crime are derived as follows:
(1) The offended paiiy is a woma.J.1 and/or her child or children;
(2) The woman is either the wife or former wife of the offender, or is a woman with whom the
offender has or had a sexual or dating relationship, or is a woman with whom such offender has a
common child. As for the woman's child or children, they may be legitimate or illegitimate, or
living within or without the family abode;
(3) The offender causes on the woman and/or child mental or emotional anguish; and
(4) The anguish is caused through acts of public ridicule or humiliation, repeated verbal and
emotional abuse, denial of financial support or custody of minor children or access to the children
or similar· such acts or omissions.
xxxx
It bears emphasis that Section 5(i) penalizes some forms of psychological violence that are
inflicted on victims who are women and children. Other forms of psychological violence, as well
as physical, sexual and economic violence, are addressed and penalized in other subparts of Section
5.
xxxx
Psychological violence is an. element of violation of Section 5(i) just like the mental or emotional
anguish caused on the victim. Psychological violence is the means employed by the perpetrator,
while mental or emotional anguish is the effect caused to or the damage sustained by the offended
party. To establish psychological violence as an element of the crime, it is necessary to show proof
of commission of any of the acts enumerated in Section 5(i) or similar such acts. And to establish
mental or emotional anguish, it is necessary to present the testimony of the victim as such
experiences are personal to this party. x x x.32 (Citations omitted and emphasis ours)
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.
Otherwise stated, it is the violence inflicted under the said circumstances that the law seeks to
outlaw. Marital infidelity as cited in the law is only one of the various acts by which psychological
violence may be committed. Moreover, depending on the circumstances of the spouses and for a
myriad of reasons, the illicit relationship may or may not even be causing mental or emotional
anguish on the wife. Thus, the mental or emotional suffering of the victim is an essential and
distinct element in the commission of the offense.
In criminal cases, venue is jurisdictional. In Section 7 of R.A. No. 9262, venue
undoubtedly pertains to jurisdiction. As correctly pointed out by AAA, Section 7 provides that the
case may be filed where the crime or any of its elements was committed at the option of the
complainant. Which the psychological violence as the means employed by the perpetrator is
certainly an indispensable element of the offense, equally essential also is the element of mental
or emotional anguish which is personal to the complainant. The resulting mental or emotional
anguish is analogous to the indispensable element of damage in a prosecution for estafa,
What may be gleaned from Section 7 of R.A. No. 9262 is that the law contemplates that
acts of violence against women and their children may manifest as transitory or continuing crimes;
meaning that some acts material and essential thereto and requisite in their consummation occur
in one municipality or territory, while some occur in another. In such cases, the court wherein any
of the crime's essential and material acts have been committed maintains jurisdiction to try the
case; it being understood that the first court taking cognizance of the same excludes the other.
Thus, a person charged with a continuing or transitory crime may be validly tried in any
municipality or territory where the offense was in part committed.36
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.
Certainly, the act causing psychological violence which under the information relates to
BBB's marital infidelity must be proven by probable cause for the purpose of formally charging
the husband, and to establish the same beyond reasonable doubt for purposes of conviction. It
likewise remains imperative to acquire jurisdiction over the husband. What this case concerns itself
is simply whether or not a complaint for psychological abuse under R.A. No. 9262 may even be
filed within the Philippines if the illicit relationship is conducted abroad. We say 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.
 B. G.R. No. 199522 June 22, 2015
RICKY DINAMLING, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
FACTS:
Criminal Case No. 1701:
That on or about the evening of March 14, 2007, at XXX, Ifugao, the above-named accused did
then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously inflict psychological violence upon AAA, a
woman with whom he has two common children, resulting to mental and emotional anguish and
public ridicule or humiliation by repeated verbal and emotional abuse consisting of several bad
and insulting utterances directed against the victim and a feeding bottle being thrown against the
latter in anger.
CONTRARY TO LAW, with the offense being attended by the special qualifying aggravating
circumstance of the victim being pregnant at the time.
Criminal Case No. 1702:
That on or about the evening of March 20, 2007 at XXX, Ifugao, the above-named accused did
then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously inflict psychological violence upon AAA, a
woman with whom he has two common children, resulting to mental and emotional anguish and
public ridicule or humiliation by boxing the victim on the head, kicking her at the back and
removing her pant(sic) and panty (sic).
CONTRARY TO LAW, with the offense being attended by the special qualifying aggravating
circumstance of the victim being pregnant at the time.
Upon arraignment, Dinamling pleaded Not Guilty to both charges. Thereafter, the cases were tried
jointly.
ISSUE:
Whether or not there is a violation of Section 5(i) of RA No. 9262
HELD:
Section 5. Acts of Violence Against Women and Their Children. The crime of violence against
women and their children is committed through any of the following acts:
xxxx
(i) 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 or access to the woman's child/children.
From the aforequoted Section 5(i), in relation to other sections of RA No. 9262, the elements of
the crime are derived as follows:
(1) The offended party is a woman and/or her child or children;
(2) The woman is either the wife or former wife of the offender, or is a woman with whom the
offender has or had a sexual or dating relationship, or is a woman with whom such offender has a
common child. As for the woman's child or children, they may be legitimate or illegitimate, or
living within or without the family abode;
(3) The offender causes on the woman and/or child mental or emotional anguish; and
(4) The anguish is caused through acts of public ridicule or humiliation, repeated verbal and
emotional abuse, denial of financial support or custody of minor children or access to the children
or similar such acts or omissions.
As for the first case, Criminal Case No. 1701, filed against petitioner Dinamling, the
elements have been proven and duly established. It is undisputed that AAA, as the victim, is a
woman who was then in a five-year ongoing relationship with petitioner Dinamling. At that time,
AAA and Dinamling had two common children. AAA was often in fear of petitioner due to the
latter's physical and verbal abuse. In the evening of March 14, 2007, an incident occurred in which
she and her children were actually evicted by Dinamling from a boarding house. Dinamling, in the
presence of his own friend and the children, accused AAA of using the boarding house as a "whore-
house" and alleged that AAA brought sexual partners in that place. Dinamling further humiliated
AAA by telling her to pack her clothes in a trash bag and in a carton box used to pack ducklings.
He then threw a baby bottle outside and broke it. This forced AAA to hastily leave even without
her children. Dinamling also left and took with him the elder child and left the baby behind. AAA
had to ask for her friends to fetch the children but the latter found only the baby. According to
AAA and her mother DDD, that incident was not an isolated one, as similar incidents had happened
previously.

As for the second case, Criminal Case No. 1702, the crime's elements were likewise
proven. In addition to the first two elements of the victim being a woman and in a relationship with
the offender, the prosecution was able to prove another incident of mental or emotional anguish
through public ridicule or humiliation when it showed Dinamling acting in the following manner:
a) by calling and counting down on AAA for the latter to come out of the house where she was
staying;
b) by punching AAA at the left ear upon seeing her;
c) by shouting AAA's family name and calling her "good-for-nothing;"
d) by saying that AAA could sue him but he would just pay her;
e) by kicking AAA to the ground and then pulling off her pants and underwear (panty) and calling
her worthless;
f) by throwing the pants and panty back at AAA while shouting AAA's family name as he left.
All such acts were committed while in full view and hearing of the public, highlighting the
public ridicule and humiliation done on AAA and causing her mental and emotional pain. AAA's
suffering is so much that even the sound of petitioner's motorcycle would put fear in her.
All the above, as established during trial, lead to no other conclusion than the commission
of the crime as prescribed in the law.
It bears emphasis that Section 5(i) penalizes some forms of psychological violence that are
inflicted on victims who are women and children. Other forms of psychological violence, as well
as physical, sexual and economic violence, are addressed and penalized in other sub-parts of
Section 5.
The law defines psychological violence as follows:
Section 3(a)
xxxx
 C. "Psychological violence" refers to acts or omissions causing or likely to cause mental
or emotional suffering of the victim such as but not limited to intimidation, harassment, stalking,
damage to property, public ridicule or humiliation, repeated verbal abuse and mental infidelity. It
includes causing or allowing the victim to witness the physical, sexual or psychological abuse of
a member of the family to which the victim belongs, or to witness pornography in any form or to
witness abusive injury to pets or to unlawful or unwanted deprivation of the right to custody and/or
visitation of common children.
Psychological violence is an element of violation of Section 5(i) just like the mental or
emotional anguish caused on the victim. Psychological violence is the means employed by the
perpetrator, while mental or emotional anguish is the effect caused to or the damage sustained by
the offended party. To establish psychological violence as an element of the crime, it is necessary
to show proof of commission of any of the acts enumerated in Section 5(i) or similar such acts.
And to establish mental or emotional anguish, it is necessary to present the testimony of the victim
as such experiences are personal to this party.30 All of this was complied with in the case at bar.