The Supreme Court sent a clear message on the importance of privacy and protection from voyeurism, affirming the conviction of a man who secretly took naked videos of his nieces in their bathroom.

In a decision penned by Associate Justice Mario V. Lopez uploaded on 12 September 2024, the Supreme Court’s Second Division denied the appeal of XXX and sentenced him to imprisonment and a fine of P900,000 for violating Section 4(a) of Republic Act 9995, or the Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of 2009.

Records showed XXX frequented the house of his nieces AAA, BBB and CCC to supervise its renovation.

While preparing to take a bath one day, AAA discovered that she was being filmed through a small hole in a soap box with a cellular phone owned by XXX. She browsed through the phone’s contents and saw several nude videos of herself, her sisters, and her cousin taking baths in the bathroom.

Records showed XXX frequented the house of his nieces AAA, BBB, and CCC to supervise its renovation.

Using her own phone, AAA captured snippets and stills of the malicious videos from XXX’s phone and reported the incident to the barangay.

The uncle was charged with violating the Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of 2009 and was convicted by the Regional Trial Court. The Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction, prompting the present appeal.

The SC, in denying his appeal, found that all the elements of photo or video voyeurism under Section 4(a) of the Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of 2009 were present: the accused took a photo or video of the private area of a person such as the naked or undergarment-clad genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or female breast; the photo or video was taken without the person’s consent; and the person had a reasonable expectation of privacy.