Garcia vs. Drilon on the Constitutionality of RA 9262

Constitutionality of RA 9262 "Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004"

JESUS C. GARCIA vs.THE HONORABLE RAY ALAN T. DRILON

G.R. No. 179267, June 25, 2013

LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.:

FACTS:

Petitioner Jesus Garcia (husband) appears to have inflicted violence against private respondent (wife and daughter). Petitioner admitted having an affair with a bank manager. He callously boasted about their sexual relations to the household help. His infidelity emotionally wounded private respondent. Their quarrels left her with bruises and hematoma. Petitioner also unconscionably beat up their daughter, Jo-ann, whom he blamed for squealing on him.

All these drove respondent Rosalie Garcia(wife) to despair causing her to attempt suicide on December 17, 2005 by slitting her wrist. Instead of taking her to the hospital, petitioner left the house. He never visited her when she was confined for seven (7) days. He even told his mother-in-law that respondent should just accept his extramarital affair since he is not cohabiting with his paramour and has not sired a child with her.

The private respondent was determined to separate from petitioner. But she was afraid he would take away their children and deprive her of financial support. He warned her that if she pursued legal battle, she would not get a single centavo from him. After she confronted him of his affair, he forbade her to hold office. This deprived her of access to full information about their businesses.

Thus, the RTC found reasonable ground to believe there was imminent danger of violence against respondent and her children and issued a series of Temporary Protection Orders (TPO) ordering petitioner, among other things, to surrender all his firearms including a .9MM caliber firearm and a Walther PPK.

Petitioner challenges the constitutionality of RA 9262 for

1.      making a gender-based classification, thus, providing remedies only to wives/women and not to husbands/men.

2.      He claims that even the title of the law, "An Act Defining Violence Against Women and Their Children" is already sex-discriminatory because it means violence by men against women. 

3.      The law also does not include violence committed by women against children and other women.

4.      He adds that gender alone is not enough basis to deprive the husband/father of the remedies under it because its avowed purpose is to curb and punish spousal violence. The said remedies are discriminatory against the husband/male gender.

5.      There being no reasonable difference between an abused husband and an abused wife, the equal protection guarantee is violated.

Important and Essential Governmental Objectives:

1.    Safeguard Human Rights,

2.    Ensure Gender Equality and

3.    Empower Women

International Laws

By constitutional mandate, the Philippines is committed to ensure that human rights and fundamental freedoms are fully enjoyed by everyone.

1.      It was one of the countries that voted in favor of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). In addition, the Philippines is a signatory to many United Nations human rights treaties such as the

2.      Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination,

3.      the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the

4.      Convention Against Torture, and the

5.      Convention on the Rights of the Child, among others.

UDHR

As a signatory to the UDHR, the Philippines pledged itself to achieve the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms, keeping in mind the standards under the Declaration. Among the standards under the UDHR are the following:

Article 1. All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

x x x x

Article 7. All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Article 8. Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

Declaration of Policy in RA 9262

·         enunciates the purpose of the said law, which is to fulfill the government’s obligation to safeguard the dignity and human rights of women and children by providing effective remedies against domestic violence or physical, psychological, and other forms of abuse perpetuated by the husband, partner, or father of the victim.

·         The said law is also viewed within the context of the constitutional mandate to ensure gender equality, which is quoted as follows:

Section 14. The State recognizes the role of women in nation-building, and shall ensure the fundamental equality before the law of women and men.

ISSUE: WON R.A. NO. 9262 IS DISCRIMINATORY, UNJUST, AND VIOLATIVE OF THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE.

HELD:

RA 9262 is NOT UNCONSITUTIONAL.

1.      RA 9262 - compliance with the CEDAW

It has been acknowledged that "gender-based violence is a form of discrimination that seriously inhibits women's ability to enjoy rights and freedoms on a basis of equality with men." RA 9262 can be viewed therefore as the Philippines’ compliance with the CEDAW, which is committed to condemn discrimination against women and directs its members to undertake, without delay, all appropriate means to eliminate discrimination against women in all forms both in law and in practice. 

CEDAW

Known as the International Bill of Rights of Women, the CEDAW is the central and most comprehensive document for the advancement of the welfare of women. The CEDAW, in its preamble, explicitly acknowledges the existence of extensive discrimination against women, and emphasized that such is a violation of the principles of equality of rights and respect for human dignity.

2.      Philippine’s obligation as state-party to CEDAW

The Philippines is under legal obligation to ensure their development and advancement for the improvement of their position from one of de jure as well as de facto equality with men. The CEDAW, going beyond the concept of discrimination used in many legal standards and norms, focuses on discrimination against women, with the emphasis that women have suffered and are continuing to suffer from various forms of discrimination on account of their biological sex.

The governmental objectives of protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms, which includes promoting gender equality and empowering women, as mandated not only by our Constitution, but also by commitments we have made in the international sphere, are undeniably important and essential.

RA 9262 provides the widest range of reliefs for women and children who are victims of violence, which are often reported to have been committed not by strangers, but by a father or a husband or a person with whom the victim has or had a sexual or dating relationship.

3.      The Gender-Based Classification in RA 9262 is Substantially Related to the Achievement of Governmental Objectives

Historical Perspective:

·         A foreign history professor noted that: "from the earliest civilizations on, the subjugation of women, in the form of violence, were facts of life,

·         Judeo-Christian religious ideas; Greek philosophy; and the Common Law Legal Code: all "assumed patriarchy as natural; that is, male domination stemming from the view of male superiority."

·         18th century legal expert William Blackstone, reflected the theological assumption that: husband and wife were ‘one body’ before God; thus "they were ‘one person’ under the law, and that one person was the husband," a concept that evidently found its way in some of our Civil Code provisions prior to the enactment of the Family Code.

·         Society and tradition dictate that the culture of patriarchy continues. Men are expected to take on the dominant roles both in the community and in the family. This perception naturally leads to men gaining more power over women – power, which must necessarily be controlled and maintained. Violence against women is one of the ways men control women to retain such power.

·         In ancient western societies, women whether slave, concubine or wife, were under the authority of men. In law, they were treated as property.

·         The Roman concept of patria potestas allowed the husband to beat, or even kill, his wife if she endangered his property right over her.

·         Judaism, Christianity and other religions oriented towards the patriarchal family strengthened the male dominated structure of society.

·         English feudal law reinforced the tradition of male control over women.

·         However, in the late 1500s and through the entire 1600s, English common law began to limit the right of husbands to chastise their wives. Thus, common law developed the rule of thumb, which allowed husbands to beat their wives with a rod or stick no thicker than their thumb.

Statistics:

The enactment of RA 9262 was in response to the undeniable numerous cases involving violence committed against women in the Philippines.

·         In 2012, the Philippine National Police (PNP) reported that 65% or 11,531 out of 15,969 cases involving violence against women were filed under RA 9262.

·         From 2004 to 2012, violations of RA. 9262 ranked first among the different categories of violence committed against women. The number of reported cases showed an increasing trend from 2004 to 2012,

·         The law recognizes, with valid factual support based on statistics that women and children are the most vulnerable victims of violence, and therefore need legal intervention. On the other hand, there is a dearth of empirical basis to anchor a conclusion that men need legal protection from violence perpetuated by women.

4.      Different treatment of women and men based on biological, social, and cultural differences

The persistent and existing biological, social, and cultural differences between women and men prescribe that they be treated differently under particular conditions in order to achieve substantive equality for women. Thus, the disadvantaged position of a woman as compared to a man requires the special protection of the law, as gleaned from the following recommendations of the CEDAW Committee:

·         The Convention requires that women be given an equal start and that they be empowered by an enabling environment to achieve equality of results. It is not enough to guarantee women treatment that is identical to that of men. Rather, biological as well as socially and culturally constructed differences between women and men must be taken into account. Under certain circumstances, non-identical treatment of women and men will be required in order to address such differences. Pursuit of the goal of substantive equality also calls for an effective strategy aimed at overcoming under representation of women and a redistribution of resources and power between men and women.

·         Equality of results is the logical corollary of de facto or substantive equality. These results may be quantitative and/or qualitative in nature; that is, women enjoying their rights in various fields in fairly equal numbers with men, enjoying the same income levels, equality in decision-making and political influence, and women enjoying freedom from violence.

The government’s commitment to ensure that the status of a woman in all spheres of her life are parallel to that of a man, requires the adoption and implementation of ameliorative measures, such as RA 9262. Unless the woman is guaranteed that the violence that she endures in her private affairs will not be ignored by the government, which is committed to uplift her to her rightful place as a human being, then she can neither achieve substantive equality nor be empowered.

5.      RA 9262 justified under the Constitution

The Constitution abundantly authorize Congress or the government to actively undertake ameliorative action that would remedy existing inequalities and inequities experienced by women and children brought about by years of discrimination. The equal protection clause when juxtaposed to this provision provides a stronger mandate for the government to combat such discrimination. Indeed, these provisions order Congress to "give highest priority to the enactment of measures that protect and enhance the right of all the people to human dignity, reduce social, economic, and political inequalities and remove cultural inequities."

RA 9262 is “THE” ameliorative action

·         In enacting R.A. 9262, Congress has taken an ameliorative action that would address the evil effects of the social model of patriarchy, a pattern that is deeply embedded in the society’s subconscious, on Filipino women and children and elevate their status as human beings on the same level as the father or the husband.

·         R.A. 9262 aims to put a stop to the cycle of male abuses borne of discrimination against women. It is an ameliorative measure, not a form of "reverse discrimination" against. Ameliorative action "is not an exception to equality, but an expression and attainment of de facto equality, the genuine and substantive equality which the Filipino people themselves enshrined as a goal of the 1987 Constitution." Ameliorative measures are necessary as a redistributive mechanism in an unequal society to achieve substantive equality.

Ameliorative measures to achieve substantive equality

In the context of women’s rights, substantive equality has been defined by the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) as equality which requires that women be given an equal start and that they be empowered by an enabling environment to achieve equality of results. It is not enough to guarantee women treatment that is identical to that of men. Rather, biological as well as socially and culturally constructed differences between women and men must be taken into account. Under certain circumstances, non-identical treatment of women and men will be required in order to address such differences.

Women’s struggle for equality with men has evolved under three models:

1. Formal equality - women and men are to be regarded and treated as the same. But this model does not take into account biological and socially constructed differences between women and men. By failing to take into account these differences, a formal equality approach may in fact perpetuate discrimination and disadvantage.

2. Protectionist model – this recognizes differences between women and men but considers women’s weakness as the rationale for different treatment. This approach reinforces the inferior status of women and does not address the issue of discrimination of women on account of their gender.

3. Substantive equality model – this assumes that women are "not vulnerable by nature, but suffer from imposed disadvantage" and that "if these imposed disadvantages were eliminated, there was no further need for protection." Thus, the substantive equality model gives prime importance to women’s contexts, realities, and experiences, and the outcomes or results of acts and measures directed, at or affecting them, with a view to eliminating the disadvantages they experience as women.

6.      The gender-based classification of RA 9262 does not violate the Equal Protection Clause (application of the substantive equality model)

The equal protection clause in our Constitution does not guarantee an absolute prohibition against classification. The non-identical treatment of women and men under RA 9262 is justified to put them on equal footing and to give substance to the policy and aim of the state to ensure the equality of women and men in light of the biological, historical, social, and culturally endowed differences between men and women.

RA 9262, by affording special and exclusive protection to women and children, who are vulnerable victims of domestic violence, undoubtedly serves the important governmental objectives of protecting human rights, insuring gender equality, and empowering women. The gender-based classification and the special remedies prescribed by said law in favor of women and children are substantially related, in fact essentially necessary, to achieve such objectives. Hence, said Act survives the intermediate review or middle-tier judicial scrutiny. The gender-based classification therein is therefore not violative of the equal protection clause embodied in the 1987 Constitution.

Justice Brion: As traditionally viewed, the constitutional provision of equal protection simply requires that similarly situated persons be treated in the same way. It does not connote identity of rights among individuals, nor does it require that every person is treated identically in all circumstances. It acts as a safeguard to ensure that State-drawn distinctions among persons are based on reasonable classifications and made pursuant to a proper governmental purpose. In short, statutory classifications are not unconstitutional when shown to be reasonable and made pursuant to a legitimate government objective.

R.A. No. 9262 as a measure intended to strengthen the family. Congress found that domestic and other forms of violence against women and children contribute to the failure to unify and strengthen family ties, thereby impeding the State’s mandate to actively promote the family’s total development. Congress also found, as a reality, that women and children are more susceptible to domestic and other forms of violence due to, among others, the pervasive bias and prejudice against women and the stereotyping of roles within the family environment that traditionally exist in Philippine society. On this basis, Congress found it necessary to recognize the substantial distinction within the family between men, on the one hand, and women and children, on the other hand. This recognition, incidentally, is not the first to be made in the laws as our law on persons and family under the Civil Code also recognize, in various ways, the distinctions between men and women in the context of the family.

Justice Leonen: It may be said that violence in the context of intimate relationships should not be seen and encrusted as a gender issue; rather, it is a power issue. 

By concurring with these statements I express a hope: that the normative constitutional requirements of human dignity and fundamental equality can become descriptive reality. The socially constructed distinctions between women and men that have afflicted us and spawned discrimination and violence should be eradicated sooner. Power and intimacy should not co-exist.

The intimate spaces created by our human relationships are our safe havens from the helter skelter of this world. It is in that space where we grow in the safety of the special other who we hope will be there for our entire lifetime. If that is not possible, then for such time as will be sufficient to create cherished memories enough to last for eternity.

I concur in the ponencia. Against abominable acts, let this law take its full course.

Justice Abad: RA 9262 is a historic step in the Filipino women's long struggle to be freed from a long-held belief that men are entitled, when displeased or minded, to hit their wives or partners and their children. This law institutionalizes prompt community response to this violent behavior through barangay officials who can command the man to immediately desist from harming his home partner and their children. It also establishes domestic violence as a crime, not only against its victims but against society as well. No longer is domestic violence lightly dismissed as a case of marital dispute that law enforcers ought not to get into.

Chief Justice Puno on Expanded Equal protection and Substantive Equality

Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno espouses that the equal protection clause can no longer be interpreted as only a guarantee of formal equality but of substantive equality. "It ought to be construed in consonance with social justice as ‘the heart’ particularly of the 1987 Constitution—a transformative covenant in which the Filipino people agreed to enshrine asymmetrical equality to uplift disadvantaged groups and build a genuinely egalitarian democracy." This means that the weak, including women in relation to men, can be treated with a measure of bias that they may cease to be weak.

Chief Justice Puno goes on: "The Expanded Equal Protection Clause, anchored on the human rights rationale, is designed as a weapon against the indignity of discrimination so that in the patently unequal Philippine society, each person may be restored to his or her rightful position as a person with equal moral status."